The Conversation – Page 516 – MIL Submissions Engine

January 20, 2026

The way Earth’s surface moves has a bigger impact on shifting the climate than we knew

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Ben Mather, ARC Early Career Industry Fellow, School of Geography, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, The University of Melbourne

Our planet has experienced dramatic climate shifts throughout its history, oscillating between freezing “icehouse” periods and warm “greenhouse” states.

Scientists have long linked these climate changes to fluctuations in atmospheric carbon dioxide. However, new research reveals the source of this carbon – and the driving forces behind it – are far more complex than previously thought.

In fact, the way tectonic plates move about Earth’s surface plays a major, previously underappreciated role in climate. Carbon doesn’t just emerge where tectonic plates meet. The places where tectonic plates pull away from each other are significant too.

Our new study, published today in the journal Communications, Earth and Environment sheds light on how exactly Earth’s plate tectonics have helped to shape global climate over the past 540 million years.

Peering deep within the carbon cycle

At the boundaries where Earth’s tectonic plates converge, we get chains of volcanoes known as volcanic arcs. Melting associated with these volcanoes unlocks carbon that’s been trapped inside rocks for thousands of years, bringing it to Earth’s surface.

Historically, it’s been thought these volcanic arcs were the primary culprits of injecting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.

Our findings challenge that view. Instead, we suggest that mid-ocean ridges and continental rifts – locations where the tectonic plates spread apart – have played a much more significant role in driving Earth’s carbon cycles throughout geological time.

This is because the world’s oceans sequester vast quantities of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. They store most of it within carbon-rich rocks on the seafloor. Over thousands of years, this process can produce hundreds of metres of carbon-rich sediment at the bottom of the ocean.

As these rocks then move about the Earth driven by tectonic plates, they may eventually intersect subduction zones – places where tectonic plates converge. This releases their carbon dioxide cargo back into the atmosphere.

This is known as the “deep carbon cycle”. To track the flow of carbon between Earth’s molten interior, oceanic plates and the atmosphere, we can use computer models of how the tectonic plates have migrated through geological time.

What we discovered

Using computer models to reconstruct how Earth moves carbon stored on tectonic plates, we were able to predict major greenhouse and icehouse climates over the last 540 million years.

During greenhouse periods – when Earth was warmer – more carbon was released than trapped within carbon-carrying rocks. In contrast, during icehouse climates, the carbon sequestration into Earth’s oceans dominated, lowering atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and triggering cooling.

One of the key takeaways from our study is the critical role of the deep-sea sediments in regulating atmospheric carbon dioxide. As Earth’s tectonic plates slowly move, they carry carbon-rich sediments, which are eventually returned into Earth’s interior through a process known as subduction.

We show that this process is a major factor in determining whether Earth is in a greenhouse or icehouse state.

How much carbon is recycled into Earth’s mantle at subduction zones (blues) compared to how much is released through volcanic arcs and mid-ocean ridges (oranges) over the past 540 million years. Carbonate platforms – large accumulations of carbonate rocks – are indicated by green polygons, where light green indicates active platforms, and dark green indicates older, inactive platforms.

A shift in understanding the role of volcanic arcs

Historically, the carbon emitted from volcanic arcs has been considered one of the largest sources of atmospheric carbon dioxide.

However, this process only became dominant in the last 120 million years thanks to planktic calcifiers. These little ocean critters belong to a family of phytoplankton whose main talent lies in converting dissolved carbon into calcite. They are responsible for sequestering vast amounts of atmospheric carbon into carbon-rich sediment deposited on the seafloor.

Planktic calcifiers only evolved about 200 million years ago, and spread through the world’s oceans about 150 million years ago. So, the high proportion of carbon spewed into the atmosphere along volcanic arcs in the past 120 million years is mostly due to the carbon-rich sediments these creatures created.

Before this, we found that carbon emissions from mid-ocean ridges and continental rifts – regions where tectonic plates diverge – actually contributed more significantly to atmospheric carbon dioxide.

A new perspective for the future

Our findings offer a new perspective on how Earth’s tectonic processes have shaped, and will continue to shape, our climate.

These results suggest Earth’s climate is not just driven by atmospheric carbon. Instead, the climate is influenced by the intricate balance between carbon emissions from Earth’s surface and how they get trapped in sediments on the seafloor.

This study also provides crucial insights for future climate models, especially in the context of current concerns over rising carbon dioxide levels.

We now know that Earth’s natural carbon cycle, influenced by the shifting tectonic plates beneath our feet, plays a vital role in regulating the planet’s climate.

Understanding this deep time perspective can help us better predict future climate scenarios and the ongoing effects of human activity.

Ben Mather receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Adriana Dutkiewicz receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Dietmar Müller receives funding from the Australian Research Council.

Sabin Zahirovic has received funding from the Alfred Sloan Foundation’s Deep Carbon Observatory, the Australian Research Council, and BHP via the STELLAR industry collaborative project.

– ref. The way Earth’s surface moves has a bigger impact on shifting the climate than we knew – https://theconversation.com/the-way-earths-surface-moves-has-a-bigger-impact-on-shifting-the-climate-than-we-knew-272352

January 20, 2026

Congress’ power has been diminishing for years, leaving Trump to act with impunity

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Samuel Garrett, Research Associate, United States Studies Centre, University of Sydney

A year into US President Donald Trump’s second term, his record use of executive orders, impoundment of government spending, and military interventions in Venezuela and Iran have sparked criticisms from Democrats and even some Republicans. They say he is unconstitutionally sidelining Congress.

As Trump increasingly wields his power unilaterally, some have wondered what the point of Congress is now. Isn’t it supposed to act as a check on the president?

But the power of the modern presidency had already been growing for decades. Successive presidents from both parties have taken advantage of constitutional vagaries to increase the power of the executive branch. It’s a long-running institutional battle that has underwritten US political history.

The years-long erosion of Congress’ influence leaves the president with largely unchecked power. We’re now seeing the consequences.

A fraught relationship

Congress is made up of the House of Representatives and the Senate. Under the US Constitution, it’s the branch of the government tasked with making laws. It’s supposed to act as a check on the president and the courts.

It can pass legislation, raise taxes, control government spending, review and approve presidential nominees, advise and consent on treaties, conduct investigations, declare war, impeach officials, and even choose the president in a disputed election.

But the Constitution leaves open many questions about where the powers of Congress end and the powers of the president begin.

In a 2019 ruling on Trump’s tax returns, the judge commented:

disputes between Congress and the President are a recurring plot in our national story. And that is precisely what the Framers intended.

Relative power between the different branches of the US government has changed since independence as constitutional interpretations shifted. This includes whether the president or Congress takes the lead on making laws.

Although Congress holds legislative power, intense negotiations between Congress and the executive branch (led by the president) are now a common feature of US lawmaking. Modern political parties work closely with the president to design and pass new laws.

Redefining the presidency

By contrast, presidents in the 19th and early 20th centuries generally left Congress to lead policymaking. Party “czars” in Congress dominated the national legislative agenda.

Future president Woodrow Wilson noted in 1885 that Congress:

has entered more and more into the details of administration, until it has virtually taken into its own hands all the substantial powers of government.

Wilson and Franklin Roosevelt after him would later help to redefine the president not only as the head of the executive branch, but as head of their party and of the government.

In the 1970s, in the wake of the Watergate scandal and secret bombing of Cambodia, Congress sought to expand its oversight over what commentators suggested was becoming an “imperial presidency”.

This included the passage of the 1973 War Powers Resolution, designed to wrest back Congressional control of unauthorised military deployments.

Nevertheless, the Clinton, George W. Bush and Obama administrations all argued that Congressional authorisation was not required for operations in Kosovo, Iraq and Libya (though Bush still sought authorisation to secure public support).

In turn, the Trump administration argued its actions in Venezuela were a law-enforcement operation, to which the resolution does not apply.

Why presidents bypass Congress

Historically, presidents have sought to bypass Congress for reasons of personality or politics. Controversial decisions that would struggle to pass through Congress are often made using executive orders.

Obama’s 2011 “We Can’t Wait” initiative used executive orders to enact policy priorities without needing to go through a gridlocked Congress. One such policy was the 2012 creation of the DACA program for undocumented immigrants.

Franklin Roosevelt’s use of executive orders dwarfed that of his predecessors. He issued eight times as many orders in his 12-year tenure than were signed in the first 100 years of the United States’ existence.

The question of what constitutes a genuine threat to the preservation of the nation is especially pertinent now. More than 50 “national emergencies” are currently in effect in the United States.

This was the controversial basis of Trump’s tariff policy under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. It bypassed Congressional approval and is now being considered by the Supreme Court.

Recent presidents have also increasingly claimed executive privilege to block Congress’ subpoena power.

Institutional wrestling

Institutional wrestling is a feature of Congressional relations with the president, even when the same party controls the White House and both chambers of the legislature, as the Republican party does now.

While Roosevelt dominated Congress, his “court-packing plan” to take control of the US Supreme Court in 1937 proved a bridge too far, even for his own sweeping Democratic majorities. The Democrats controlled three quarters of both the House and Senate and yet refused to back his plan.

More recently, former Democrat Speaker Nancy Pelosi delivered many of Barack Obama’s early legislative achievements, but still clashed with the president in 2010 over congressional oversight.

As House minority leader, she rallied many Democrats against Obama’s US$1.1 trillion (A$1.6 trillion) budget proposal in 2014. Obama was forced to rely on Republican votes in 2015 to secure approval for the Trans-Pacific Partnership, despite his heavy lobbying of congressional Democrats.

Even today’s Congress, which has taken Trump’s direction at almost every turn, demonstrated its influence perhaps most notably by forcing the president into a backflip on the release of the Epstein files after a revolt within Trump’s supporters in the Republican party.

Given the extremely slim Republican majority in Congress, the general unity of the Republican party behind Trump has been a key source of his political strength. That may be lost if public opinion continues to turn against him.

Is Trump breaking the rules?

Trump and his administration have taken an expansive view of presidential power by regularly bypassing Congress.

But he’s not the first president to have pushed the already blurry limits of executive power to redefine what is or is not within the president’s remit. The extent to which presidents are even bound by law at all is a matter of long running academic debate.

Deliberate vagaries in US law and the Constitution mean the Supreme Court is ultimately the arbiter of what is legal.

The court is currently the most conservative in modern history and has taken a sweeping view of presidential power. The 2024 Supreme Court ruling that presidents enjoy extensive immunity suggests the president is, in fact, legally able to do almost anything.

Regardless, public opinion and perceptions of illegality continue to be one of the most important constraints on presidential action. Constituents can take a dim view of presidential behaviour, even if it’s not technically illegal.

Even if Trump can legally act with complete authority, it’s public opinion — not the letter of the law — that may continue to shape when, and if, he does so.

Samuel Garrett 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. Congress’ power has been diminishing for years, leaving Trump to act with impunity – https://theconversation.com/congress-power-has-been-diminishing-for-years-leaving-trump-to-act-with-impunity-273099

January 19, 2026

Au Kazakhstan, le débat brûlant sur le mariage polygame

Source: The Conversation – in French – By Hélène Thibault, Professeure agrégée de science politique, Nazarbayev University

Au Kazakhstan, les propositions de légaliser la polygynie font régulièrement surface, y compris en novembre dernier, portées par des élus qui souhaitent donner un statut civil aux familles déjà engagées dans ces unions. Mais, chaque fois, elles rallument la controverse : pour leurs opposants, ce serait un glissement dangereux pour la laïcité de l’État et un net recul pour les droits des femmes.

On utilise souvent le mot polygamie pour parler de la polygynie, c’est-à-dire le mariage d’un homme avec plusieurs femmes. En réalité, polygamie est un terme général qui signifie simplement « mariage entre plusieurs personnes », sans préciser le sexe.

La polygynie (un homme avec plusieurs femmes) est de loin la forme la plus répandue, au point où elle a fini par devenir l’usage courant du mot « polygamie ». L’inverse – une femme mariée à plusieurs hommes, la polyandrie – est extrêmement rare. C’est pourquoi, dans la langue commune, les termes « polygamie » et « polygynie » sont souvent utilisés comme synonymes.

En tant que spécialiste de l’Asie centrale, professeure de science politique à l’Université Nazarbayev au Kazakhstan et chercheure en résidence au CÉRIUM de l’Université de Montréal (UdeM), je m’intéresse depuis longtemps aux questions de genre et de religion en Asie centrale. Ayant grandi en milieu rural au Québec, j’ai développé une passion pour cette région lors de mes études de baccalauréat à l’UdeM. Mes recherches doctorales à l’Université d’Ottawa sur le renouveau religieux au Tadjikistan m’ont emmenée à être confrontée à des situations cocasses liées à mon genre et à mon statut marital. À la suite de cette expérience de terrain et à mon déménagement au Kazakhstan en 2016, je me suis davantage intéressée aux dynamiques de genre.

Autrefois pratiquée par les nomades

Au Kazakhstan, la polygynie, qui était pratiquée traditionnellement parmi les populations nomades, est devenue un crime à l’époque soviétique, mais a été décriminalisée en 1998. Cependant, elle n’a pas été légalisée. Dans l’état actuel des choses, un homme ne peut pas être légalement marié à plus d’une femme, mais rien dans la loi n’interdit la « bigamie » et « polygamie » comme c’est le cas dans de nombreux pays, dont le Canada.

Le tokalisme à nouveau à la mode ? Qui sont ceux qui prennent des secondes femmes, et comment procèdent-ils ? Photo tirée de la chaîne YouTube du Parti populaire du Kazakhstan ayant organisé une discussion entre experts sur le thème de la légalisation.
YouTube

Ceci fait en sorte que la polygynie tend à florir dans cet état laïc, mais majoritairement de culture musulmane : environ 6 % des hommes kazakhs seraient aujourd’hui engagés dans une relation polygyne, soit trois fois plus qu’il y a 10 ans. En l’absence de loi régulant ces mariages, les époux souhaitant se marier (incluant ceux qui sont peu pratiquants), se tournent vers la mosquée pour obtenir la bénédiction d’un imam. Leur union est alors reconnue devant Dieu, mais n’a aucune valeur aux yeux de la loi.

Cette situation, passée presque inaperçue au moment où les autorités entamaient de grandes réformes législatives visant à désoviétiser le système judiciaire, est loin de faire consensus. Pour les uns, elle signe une islamisation rampante de la société et pour d’autres, elle illustre la superficialité des liens matrimoniaux.

Je présente ici les grandes lignes de ce débat qui mêle religion, égalité des hommes et des femmes et dynamiques familiales.

Tentatives ratées de légalisation

À trois reprises, des politiciens kazakhs ont proposé, sans succès, de légaliser la polygynie en modifiant la loi sur la famille et le mariage ; en 2001, en 2008 et plus récemment en novembre au moment où Abzal Kuspan, un député de la chambre basse du Parlement, le Majilis, est revenu avec une proposition de légaliser « l’institution de la tokal » au pays, un terme utilisé au Kazakhstan pour désigner la deuxième femme.

L’un des arguments avancés pour justifier ce changement est, qu’on le veuille ou non, ce type d’union est très répandu et que les femmes au sein de ces unions ne bénéficient d’aucune protection légale en cas de divorce.

Signe de l’islamisation de la société ?

Comme elle est permise en Islam, l’idée que la polygynie est une manifestation de la croissance de la religiosité au pays est très répandue. Cependant, le phénomène est loin d’être limité aux communautés pratiquantes.

Dans le cadre de mes recherches, parmi les 16 individus en situation polygyne interrogés dans différentes régions du Kazakhstan, un seul se disait pratiquant alors que les autres s’identifiaient comme musulmans, mais ne respectaient pas plusieurs règles comme la prière quotidienne et l’abstinence d’alcool.

Les résultats d’un sondage que j’ai commandé en 2019 montrent aussi que le soutien à la polygynie reste très faible parmi les Kazakhs musulmans. Pour ses opposants, cette pratique constitue surtout une violation du caractère séculier de l’État.

Le Kazakhstan a hérité de l’Union soviétique un état séculier où la séparation de la religion et de l’État est très prononcée et la majorité de la population est de confession musulmane, mais où la pratique rigoureuse de l’Islam est marginale.

Déjà des milliers d’abonnés à l’infolettre de La Conversation. Et vous ? Abonnez-vous gratuitement à notre infolettre pour mieux comprendre les grands enjeux contemporains.

Une menace aux droits de femmes ?

D’autres s’opposent à la légalisation pour des raisons d’égalité des sexes. De façon générale, les études montrent que là où la polygynie est permise, les femmes se retrouvent dans des positions d’infériorité structurelle.

Au Kazakhstan, ce discours est aussi très présent. Chaque initiative de légalisation a provoqué de vives discussions au sein de la société. Des femmes d’influence, dont des parlementaires, se sont prononcées et ont proposé que ces mesures s’accompagnent également d’une légalisation de la polyandrie, invoquant le principe d’égalité entre les sexes. Au sein d’une société encore largement patriarcale, cette idée a cependant peu de chances de se concrétiser. Symptôme de ces inégalités, les « tokals » sont souvent perçues comme des femmes opportunistes cherchant un mariage fortuné pour échapper au travail. Cependant, mes recherches révèlent une réalité plus nuancée : il s’agit souvent de femmes divorcées cherchant une relation amoureuse qui leur procure une certaine autonomie, notamment en leur permettant de s’affranchir de l’influence, souvent très exigeante, de la belle-famille.

Bien que l’idée de légaliser la polygynie soit présentée comme une mesure visant à « protéger » les femmes, elle s’apparente plutôt à une pente glissante : une telle réforme s’inscrirait dans un contexte marqué par des inégalités économiques et sociales structurelles, et ne ferait que renforcer la dépendance des femmes envers les hommes. D’ailleurs, le taux de divorce est très élevé au Kazakhstan et les femmes divorcées peinent déjà à faire respecter le paiement des pensions alimentaires par leur ancien conjoint. Rien ne permet d’espérer qu’il en serait autrement pour les « tokals » et leurs enfants.

Hélène Thibault ne travaille pas, ne conseille pas, ne possède pas de parts, ne reçoit pas de fonds d’une organisation qui pourrait tirer profit de cet article, et n’a déclaré aucune autre affiliation que son organisme de recherche.

– ref. Au Kazakhstan, le débat brûlant sur le mariage polygame – https://theconversation.com/au-kazakhstan-le-debat-brulant-sur-le-mariage-polygame-270505

January 19, 2026

The flu is everywhere. So why aren’t Canadians getting vaccinated for viral illnesses?

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Andrea DeKeseredy, PhD student, Sociology, University of Alberta

The death of Prashant Sreekumar made headlines across Canada when the 43-year-old father of three died in the emergency room of Edmonton’s Grey Nuns hospital after waiting for eight hours with chest pains.

Recently, there have been other reports of preventable deaths in Alberta ERs. Alberta doctors have called the emergency room situation a disaster, citing a tsunami of seasonal respiratory illnesses that have overwhelmed hospitals and led to crowded emergency departments.

Widespread vaccination for common respiratory illnesses, including COVID-19 and the flu, would help to relieve the pressure on hospitals. Yet vaccination rates for seasonal illness are falling across Canada. Our research shows that conflicting messages across levels of government and skepticism about whether the vaccines work may be helping to fuel the emergency-room surge.

This winter is not the first bad virus season in Alberta, nor is it the first time we’ve seen patients die waiting for care. During the 2022-23 viral illness season, a “tripledemic” of viruses rolled across the country, as COVID-19, influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) circulated simultaneously.

Our research showed how this tripledemic also slammed working parents trying to maintain their jobs while they and their children were infected over and over again.

This year could prove even worse. The 2025-26 season marks a new height in influenza cases, rising above a three-season high. Hospitals across the country have been flooded with patients, and burnt-out health-care workers have been putting in extra shifts.

Despite all of this — and the overwhelming research that shows influenza vaccines keep people out of the hospital — fewer Canadians are getting vaccinated. With declining seasonal vaccination rates each year, Canada now falls far short of the vaccination coverage needed to protect at-risk groups such as seniors or people with chronic illness, which is 80 per cent.

Who do Canadians trust on health care?

Our research explored parental decision-making in Alberta during the tripledemic to understand why, or why not, people get themselves and their kids vaccinated for COVID-19 and influenza. Using Viewpoint Alberta survey data, we found that who parents trust and the messages governments provide around vaccination strongly influence whether they and their kids get shots.

During the pandemic, parents in Alberta faced conflicting messages from governments. Despite the promotion of vaccination by the federal government and public health agencies, the provincial United Conservative Party government took a strong stance against enforcing COVID-19 protective measures. For those who trusted the provincial government, this essentially negated any pro-vaccination messaging provided by other institutions.

Our study found that those who trusted the federal government as a source of health information were more likely to have vaccinated their children for COVID-19 than those who supported the Alberta government’s messaging. The same was true for those who trusted Alberta Health Services and the Chief Medical Officer of Health. Those who placed their trust in the elected UCP government had much lower vaccination rates.

Trust is important, but it’s not the only factor keeping seasonal vaccination rates low. The question of who is perceived to benefit from vaccination also shaped parents’ decisions.

Are seasonal vaccines worth the trouble?

In addition to looking at survey data, we also interviewed parents to better understand how they made their decisions regarding seasonal vaccination for themselves and their children.

We were surprised to learn that after repeated viral illness infections, parents were actually less likely to vaccinate their children. Persistent illness contributed to a sense that infection was both inevitable and mild, often not even worth preventing. Some parents were also skeptical of the novelty of the COVID-19 vaccine compared to more established vaccinations, despite assurances from health-care professionals.

These parents did not hold “anti-vaxxer” beliefs; instead they believed that viral illness season was inevitable, and of little risk to themselves and their children. On top of this, the struggle to balance work and child care already made it difficult for many families to get vaccinated. Because the vaccine didn’t prevent infections altogether, many parents believed it was not worth the added effort.

Canada needs a new approach

Canada does not have the resources to continue this yearly severe illness cycle. Without better uptake of seasonal vaccines, we are doomed to repeat the same mistakes year after year, resulting in more needless deaths and health system crises.

Clear and consistent messaging is key, and the messages of provincial leaders must match those of the federal government. Our research shows that all levels of government have a role to play in building public trust in seasonal vaccines, and in making sure those shots are accessible to everyone. Vaccines must be available freely, widely and early, without pre-booking and payment requirements.

The tragedy of patients dying while waiting for care in a busy emergency room illustrates the dangers of overcrowded facilities. Higher vaccination rates could help prevent respiratory illnesses from overwhelming hospitals. Our governments need to step up and step forward to build public trust and accessibility for seasonal vaccines.

Andrea DeKeseredy receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).

Michelle Maroto receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).

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

– ref. The flu is everywhere. So why aren’t Canadians getting vaccinated for viral illnesses? – https://theconversation.com/the-flu-is-everywhere-so-why-arent-canadians-getting-vaccinated-for-viral-illnesses-273354

January 19, 2026

What Canada can learn from Mexico’s approach to U.S. trade

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Wolfgang Alschner, Hyman Soloway Chair in Business and Trade Law, L’Université d’Ottawa/University of Ottawa

When United States President Trump imposed tariffs on Canada and Mexico in early 2025, the two countries reacted very differently. Canada led with an “elbows up” campaign involving counter-tariffs and boycotts of American alcohol.

Mexico, by contrast, struck a more conciliatory tone and cautiously started to align its trade policy with the U.S. As Canada prepares for a turbulent 2026, Mexico’s experience offers valuable lessons.

Both Mexico and Canada depend heavily on trade with the U.S: both send three-quarters of their exports there. The Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA) underpins tariff-free access to the U.S. for most North American goods. But the deal is in jeopardy.

The U.S. alleges Mexico and Canada are being used as trans-shipment hubs for Chinese goods. These tensions will come to a head in July 2026 when CUSMA is up for review.

Mexico’s calibrated response

To pre-empt American concerns, Mexico has begun cautiously aligning with U.S. trade policy. As early as 2023, it pledged to work with the U.S. on foreign investment screening to address security issues around rising Chinese investment.

In late December 2025, Mexico followed up by raising tariffs on 1,400 Chinese items to between 35 to 50 per cent, including in sectors like electric vehicles and steel.

It would be wrong to dismiss these measures as capitulations to American demands. Instead, Mexico has cleverly navigated trade tensions with the U.S. while protecting its own values and interests. Mexico’s latest duty increases aim to protect domestic industries and counteract trade imbalances with China.

By raising duties only in select sectors, Mexico avoided putting duties on everyday consumer goods, which have driven up prices in the U.S. In addition, while the U.S. is imposing tariffs on friends and foes alike, the Mexican tariffs explicitly exempt countries with which it has free-trade agreements, supporting its broader trade diversification agenda.

Unlike the U.S. tariffs, which violate international trade law, Mexico’s measures are also fully consistent with its international obligations. As a developing country, Mexico committed to higher tariff ceilings at the World Trade Organization (WTO) than the U.S. This allows it to unilaterally raise tariffs up to the maximum levels permitted under international trade law.

Although China has criticized the move, Mexico’s non-discriminatory application of tariffs to all non-FTA partners avoids singling out any specific country and is legal.

Alignment without subordination

Mexico’s strategy offers a template for aligning with the U.S. without sacrificing sovereignty or respect for the rule of law. It is a far cry from a full North American customs union that some hope to achieve as part of the upcoming CUSMA review, which would unduly tie Mexican and Canadian trade policy to the whims of Washington, D.C.

It also demonstrates Mexico’s ability to walk the tight rope of seeking common ground with the U.S. while diversifying its trade and protecting its industry.

It is also superior to alternative ways of aligning with the U.S. Deals struck by the U.S. with Malaysia and Cambodia committed these countries to aligning with American import restrictions and export controls whenever it is in the U.S. national interest, effectively forcing them to forgo an autonomous trade policy altogether.

Canada also learned its lesson when it copied an illegal 100 per cent U.S. tariff on Chinese electric vehicles in 2024, only to face both U.S. auto tariffs and Chinese retaliation the following year.

Smartly, Ottawa has now partially reversed course by agreeing to allow 49,000 Chinese electric vehicles into the Canadian market at a tariff rate of 6.1 per cent. In return, China is expected to lower tariffs on Canadian canola to 15 per cent by March.

What Canada should do differently

In 2026, Canada will feel growing pressure to align with some U.S. trade-restrictive measures and, like Mexico, should do so smartly. Unlike Mexico, Canada has lower tariff bindings and cannot raise import duties without violating its commitments. Canada needs a bespoke approach, similar to Mexico’s, but implemented differently.

First, Canada should renegotiate its tariff bindings at the WTO in sectors critical to its industrial base. The European Union, for example, is preparing to increase its tariffs on imported steel by renegotiating its bindings at the WTO. This would provide a long-term solution offering predictability for both the affected Canadian sectors and trading partners and would be fully lawful.

In the steel sector, this route is preferable to the current Canadian tariff-rate quota regime, which is both WTO-illegal and hitting Canada’s closest free-trade agreement partners hard.

Second, Canada should actively pursue safeguard measures in sectors affected by trade diversion. U.S. tariffs have closed off the American market and diverted goods to Canada.

Safeguards are WTO-compliant trade defence instruments explicitly designed to counteract an unexpected surge of imports threatening serious injury to a domestic industry. That scenario has already played out in the Canadian lumber and downstream industry and will likely affect other sectors subject to U.S. tariffs.

Third, using the recent rapprochement with China as a blueprint, Canada should strive for similarly nuanced solutions in future partnerships. Rather than dropping electric vehicle tariffs altogether, Canada has negotiated a compromise that let some Chinese vehicles in, but not enough to endanger either its domestic auto-sector or relations with the U.S.

As U.S. trade representative Jamieson Greer recently stated, the U.S. is not asking its trading partners to mirror its trade policy. Rather, it’s looking for “similar trade actions” with “equivalent restrictive effect.”

This pragmatic formulation allowed Mexico to have its cake and eat it too: selectively align with the U.S. in key sectors to preserve its market access, protect domestic industries from trade diversion and avoid upsetting key trading partners elsewhere through WTO-illegal actions. Canada would be wise to follow Mexico’s lead. The recent China deal is a step in the right direction.

Wolfgang Alschner has received research grants from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

– ref. What Canada can learn from Mexico’s approach to U.S. trade – https://theconversation.com/what-canada-can-learn-from-mexicos-approach-to-u-s-trade-273101

January 19, 2026

Spain high-speed train crash: signalling vulnerabilities could be key to understanding the accident

Source: The Conversation – Global Perspectives – By Carlos Gutiérrez Hita, Profesor titular de Universidad. Economía industrial (transporte, energía, telecomunicaciones), Universidad Miguel Hernández

A tragic accident on the high-speed train line between Andalusia and Madrid has exposed the urgent need to upgrade Spain’s railway system.

At 19:45 on Sunday January 18, a modern Iryo high-speed train collided with a Renfe train at the switch (turnout) leading into Adamuz station in Córdoba province, Andalusia. The Iryo 6189 service, travelling from Málaga to Madrid, had registered for the track change, but the current information is that the last three carriages literally jumped over the diverted switch that gives access to the track adjacent to the platform, leaving the main track clear.

This caused the last three carriages to derail and collide with the Renfe Alvia 2384 service, which was travelling in the opposite direction from Madrid to Huelva. The collision was violent, though the combined speed of the two trains is still unknown.

Rail liberalisation in Spain

The Spanish passenger rail market was opened up to new competitors in May 2021, but until early 2023 the only trains permitted to run on the Andalusia-Madrid corridor were those operated by the state-owned company Renfe. The reason was that the blocking and safety system on these tracks had not been updated.

Following pressure from new operators OUIGO (owned by French state-owned company SNCF) and Iryo (owned by Trenitalia and its Spanish partners AirNostrum and Globalia), which were already active on the Madrid-Barcelona and Madrid-Levante routes, the Andalusian route was opened up to competitors. This increased the frequency of services and expanded the choice available to users.

The high-speed line from Madrid to Andalusia was inaugurated in 1992, making it the oldest in Spain. Although it has been improved and upgraded in several areas, its safety systems are in urgent need of renovation.

Signalling systems

Across the EU’s nearly 227,000km of railway tracks, there more than 25 different, non-interoperable train protection and signalling systems. These systems (the German LZB, the French Crocodile, the Italian BACC, the Spanish Asra, and so on) control and enable the safe movement of trains.

The German LZB (Linienzugbeeinflussung) signalling system remains in operation on the Andalusia-Madrid railway corridor, installed for the high-speed line. Although efficient, this system is surpassed by the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS), which is already installed on the newest lines.

The ERTMS specifications come from European Union Council Directive 96/48/EC. The aim is for this trans-European system to completely replace national systems and be fully deployed throughout the EU by 2050. The intermediate target is for it to be in use by 2030 on the 51,000km of train lines that make up the nine main corridors of Europe’s core rail network.

In Spain, the new ERTMS system currently exists alongside the old LZB system, which modern trains “read” with a technical workaround known as Specific Transmission Modules (STMs).

Possible causes of the accident

The causes of the accident are still unclear, but it is unlikely to be a fault with the train for several reasons: the trains involved are modern and new, with little wear and tear, and the last technical inspection of the Iryo 6189 train had been carried out four days earlier. Inspections cover many things, including the condition of the wheel flanges, possible stress fractures, the different types of brakes, and so on.

As far as we know, the infrastructure at the point of the accident is also new, meaning the track geometry (curves, straight sections, slopes, ramps) should be in perfect condition. This leaves the possibility that the switch point may not have functioned properly.

At all intermediate stations that are not high-capacity, there are passing tracks or sidings where trains can park and let other trains pass that may be coming behind them and not stopping at that station.

The Iryo train unit was changing tracks to park. One possible hypothesis is that the switch mechanism initially worked correctly due to the signal sent by the LZB reading STM system, but that, for some reason, the switch point moved to the “straight” position prematurely. This would have caused the right wheel of the Iryo unit to collide, jumping over to the adjacent track due to centrifugal force and speed, in the opposite direction to the switch, towards the Renfe unit, which was travelling in the opposite direction. The Renfe train was dragged from the cab down to a currently unknown number of carriages, as can be seen in the images released.

Another possibility is that there was an object on the track, but this would have caused the train to derail from the front.

A deteriorating network

Spain’s high-speed railways, once an emblem of reliability, modernity and vision for the future, have gradually deteriorated. Delays have gone from being rare and brief to lengthy, which has led Renfe to withdraw its commitment to punctuality and ticket refunds. Ongoing incidents affecting the infrastructure managed by the state-owned company ADIF – involving overhead lines, brakes and couplings (such as in the tunnel connecting Madrid’s Atocha and Chamartín stations) – have also undermined user confidence.

Additionally, political ups and downs have prevented the development of a single, agreed-upon plan for the viability, modernisation and structure of the network, which would provide a safe means of transport to meet the growing demand for rail services instead of air travel for distances of up to 800-1,000 kilometres.

The reality is that at this moment there are at least 39 dead, dozens injured and a starkly poor impression of the Spanish railway system. Political and technical leaders must take responsibility, regardless of their ideologies and survival strategies. At stake is a transport system used by a growing number of people in the business and tourism sectors alike, and a major component of the country’s infrastructure.

A weekly e-mail in English featuring expertise from scholars and researchers. It provides an introduction to the diversity of research coming out of the continent and considers some of the key issues facing European countries. Get the newsletter!

Carlos Gutiérrez Hita receives funding from the Spanish Ministry of Science, Innovation and Universities, and from the Valencian regional Ministry of Education, Culture, Universities and Employment.

– ref. Spain high-speed train crash: signalling vulnerabilities could be key to understanding the accident – https://theconversation.com/spain-high-speed-train-crash-signalling-vulnerabilities-could-be-key-to-understanding-the-accident-273865

January 19, 2026

The flu is everywhere. So why aren’t Canadians getting vaccinated for viral illness?

Source: The Conversation – Canada – By Andrea DeKeseredy, PhD student, Sociology, University of Alberta

Our research showed how this tripledemic also slammed working parents trying to maintain their jobs while they and their children were infected over and over again.

Who do Canadians trust on health care?

Trust is important, but it’s not the only factor keeping seasonal vaccination rates low. The question of who is perceived to benefit from vaccination also shaped parents’ decisions.

Are seasonal vaccines worth the trouble?

In addition to looking at survey data, we also interviewed parents to better understand how they made their decisions regarding seasonal vaccination for themselves and their children.

Canada needs a new approach

Andrea DeKeseredy receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).

Michelle Maroto receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC).

– ref. The flu is everywhere. So why aren’t Canadians getting vaccinated for viral illness? – https://theconversation.com/the-flu-is-everywhere-so-why-arent-canadians-getting-vaccinated-for-viral-illness-273354

January 19, 2026

Why Keir Starmer had to speak out against Trump over Greenland after staying quiet on Venezuela

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Jason Ralph, Professor of International Relations, University of Leeds

The Labour government came into office promising to “use realist means to pursue progressive ends”. US president Donald Trump’s recent actions over Venezuela and Greenland have tested Keir Starmer’s ability to deliver on that promise.

When the prime minister said he had been “a lifelong advocate of international law” there was a reasonable expectation that he would condemn the US action in Venezuela. Some feared that his ambiguity on that issue was a betrayal of progressive values.

However, US action in Venezuela came at a sensitive moment in the UK’s efforts to achieve a progressive end to the war in Ukraine. US cooperation is vital if Russia is to be forced to negotiate a peace that respects the Ukrainian right to self-determination. That means persuading the US to put pressure on Russia – something that would be impossible if Starmer had alienated Trump by condemning his illegal action in Venezuela.

Starmer has shown that he is able to handle Trump’s unpredictable personality. His ambiguity on Venezuela immediately prior to the Paris meeting that agreed security guarantees for Ukraine can be interpreted in these terms. He knew that the progressive strategy on Ukraine was reliant on a delicate alignment of US power.

When it emerged that British forces had helped the US seize a Russian-flagged oil tanker linked to Venezuela the stakes were raised. Trump’s actions were certainly a grab for Venezuela’s oil but the consequences could work toward progressive ends if Russian investments in Venezuela’s oil industry are written off and Russia’s ability to avoid sanctions by operating a “shadow fleet” are weakened. For the progressive realist then, Starmer’s ambiguity on Trump’s illegal action in Venezuela could be a worthwhile, if regrettable, trade-off.

The word “regret” shouldn’t be lightly passed over. Progressive realists need not be “theological” in the application of international law, and Starmer knows that good legal prosecutors exercise political judgment. But there is a danger.

The risk of not properly condemning Trump on Venezuela was that it could set the world on a slippery slope. It could simply encourage Trump’s imperialist ambitions. That seems to have happened very quickly and Starmer’s speech on Greenland was designed to stop the slide.

Starmer reminded us that “Britain is a pragmatic country”. It will, in other words, compromise with the US to find solutions to problems like Russia. But as Starmer said, “being pragmatic does not mean being passive. And partnership does not mean abandoning principle”.

The principle at stake in Greenland is the same as Venezuela: national self-determination. So why is he drawing the line now?

Starmer’s press conference.

As a realist, Starmer has shown his willingness to compromise on Venezuela. He has listened to Trump’s concerns on Ukraine and has made the case for greater defence spending across Europe. But as a progressive he has also shown there is a limit to how far he can compromise with the US, and he has drawn a line on Greenland.

This is because the argument that the US needs to annex Greenland to pressure Russia makes no sense. Greenland is already part of an anti-Russian alliance: Nato. No positive outcome can emerge from US pressure on Greenland.

European governments made that clear in Paris and Starmer’s speech reinforced the point. The pettiness of Trump’s statement linking the Greenland issue to Norway’s decision not to grant him the Nobel prize adds to the sense that US policy is now based on the personal ambitions of an imperial president. Against this backdrop, progressive realism means no longer compromising with the US.

A breach of trust

Another principle at stake in Greenland is multilateral cooperation based on respect. International relations academics have longed called the transatlantic region a “security community” because it goes beyond transactional deals. It is based on trust that comes from a sense of “we-ness”. Starmer is trying to maintain that community by speaking over Trump and appealing to the narrative of transatlantic solidarity that existed through the second world war, the cold war and the war on terror.

The question, though, is whether that narrative still has power in the US. Trump is intent on putting “America first” and is not concerned about niceties like respect, trust and gratitude. It might seem hard to imagine that the rest of his country will follow him, but recall that America’s founding father, Alexander Hamilton, famously dismissed Thomas Jefferson’s argument that the US owed France a debt of gratitude for its support during the revolutionary wars. When it came to matters of war and peace, Hamilton argued, former allies were on their own.

The UK has aligned itself with the US for decades because it shared values and could leverage US power in the service of its moral as well as material interests. If the Trump administration and the wider Maga movement in Congress continues to undermine the transatlantic security community, and international society more generally, then this relationship may no longer serve Britain’s interests. Progressive realism may have justified strategic ambiguity on Venezuela, but the opposite now appears to be true when it comes to US imperialism towards Greenland.

Jason Ralph has previously received funding from Research Councils UK and the European Union. He is a member of the UK Labour Party.

Jamie Gaskarth is affiliated with Associate Fellow, Chatham House.

– ref. Why Keir Starmer had to speak out against Trump over Greenland after staying quiet on Venezuela – https://theconversation.com/why-keir-starmer-had-to-speak-out-against-trump-over-greenland-after-staying-quiet-on-venezuela-273836

January 19, 2026

How to involve men and boys in tackling misogyny? Start by treating them not just as perpetrators

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Ellie Buxton, Doctoral researcher in Social Policy , Loughborough University

Almost half (45%) of teachers across primary and secondary schools in the UK describe misogynistic attitudes and behaviour among boys as being a problem, according to a YouGov survey in 2025. Additionally, 54% of secondary school teachers indicate that boys very or fairly often openly express misogynistic attitudes or behaviour in school.

This gives a sense of why the government is calling for a “whole of society” approach in its strategy to tackle violence against women and girls. The strategy, published in late December 2025, focuses largely on young people, and calls for a “generational shift” in awareness of violence against women.

In addition to strengthening law enforcement responses and increasing support for victims, the strategy introduces measures to support young people who exhibit harmful behaviour. For example, a helpline to support those who display abusive behaviours in their romantic or family relationships.

Another aspect is implementing the recently overhauled sex and relationships curriculum in schools. This includes topics such as misogyny, masculinity and harmful content and communities online.

The government’s strategy largely uses gender-neutral language, which avoids positioning boys as potential perpetrators. Importantly, it also includes support for boys who are themselves victims of harmful behaviour.

But some have interpreted the strategy to mean that men and boys are the targets of the changes. This is problematic because research suggests that approaches which frame boys and young men only as potential perpetrators risk triggering defensive responses, backlash and disengagement.

This was apparent in my own ongoing PhD research into men’s perspectives on misogyny and responses in the UK. I ran focus groups with 35 men over the age of 18 from across the whole of the UK.

I asked them what they thought about misogyny and how, or if, we should address it. At times, this question sparked a feeling of being “blamed” for the problem among some of the men I spoke to. In several of the focus groups, the men felt a sense of unease and unfairness towards prevention measures which are focused on men and boys.

How do we get men involved?

Experts in the field of violence prevention have long discussed the importance of involving men and boys in the prevention of violence against women and girls.

As Australian sociologist Michael Flood explains, this is based on the rationale that, while most men do not use violence, it is primarily men who are responsible for this violence when it does occur.

Violence is also shaped by cultural ideas around masculinity and what it means to be a man. For example, research has found that young men who conform to rigid ideals of masculinity – acting tough, not asking for help – are much more likely to experience and perpetuate different forms of violence. Therefore, we cannot expect to achieve a reduction in violence against women without the involvement of men.

So, how do we have these conversations effectively?

An encouraging finding from my focus groups was widespread support for education which addresses issues such as gender inequality, misogyny and violence against women in a way that doesn’t place blame on men and boys. Experts I spoke to as part of my research suggested that using positive and collaborative approaches, such as participant-led workshops and active bystander training, are more likely to lead to sustained and meaningful engagement.

A number of UK organisations are already seeing success with this approach. For example, Beyond Equality, is a charity focused on the wellbeing of men and boys which aims to end gender-based violence. They facilitate discussion-based workshops in a variety of settings, including schools and workplaces. These workshops encourage boys to reflect on the meanings of masculinity, gender expectations, and sexist attitudes and behaviours.

In facilitating these sessions, Beyond Equality focuses on personal development. Their compassionate, participant-led approach encourages boys and young men to reflect on their role in contributing to positive social change. Their recent survey found that 84% of pupils stated that the workshops helped them to learn more about masculine stereotypes, healthy relationships and tackling gender-based violence.

Anonymous men sitting in a circle talking — A collaborative, problem-solving approach can help involve men in tackling misogyny.
Rawpixel.com/Shutterstock

Involving men and boys as part of the solution to misogyny and violence against women, rather than just treating them as the problem, is also important. A recent project, facilitated by researcher Sophie King-Hill, involved collaboratively working with young people to design a resource for relationship and sex education. Such approaches centre the voices of young people in the solutions to harmful types of behaviour which are relevant to their lives.

Bystander interventions are another strategy which may be effective. Through the bystander approach, boys and men are encouraged to intervene when they witness misogynistic behaviours.

Evaluations of bystander programmes focused on addressing gender-based harms have shown that people feel more confident about intervening following the training. This approach encourages joint responsibility for tackling the problem. And it provides a positive and constructive pathway through which men and boys can be involved.

In moving forward with their action plan, I am hopeful that the government will take onboard this growing research base. Only through positive and collaborative approaches – not blame and targeting – can we engage men as part of the solution to misogyny and violence against women.

Ellie Buxton 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 to involve men and boys in tackling misogyny? Start by treating them not just as perpetrators – https://theconversation.com/how-to-involve-men-and-boys-in-tackling-misogyny-start-by-treating-them-not-just-as-perpetrators-272927

January 19, 2026

Developmental language disorder can have life-long effects – and it’s easily missed in multilingual children

Source: The Conversation – UK – By Teresa Garrido-Tamayo, Visiting Researcher in Speech and Language Sciences, Newcastle University

Six-year-old Antoni, born in the UK to Polish parents, speaks only a few English words in class and often looks confused when the teacher gives instructions. He could simply be adjusting to English – or the problem could be developmental language disorder (DLD), a condition that severely impairs a child’s ability to learn, use and understand spoken language.

Such challenges are increasingly common for parents and teachers. In England, for example, around 21% of schoolchildren are growing up with a first language other than English. While most children’s language development – whether monolingual or multilingual – is typical, the average classroom includes two DLD-affected children. DLD’s prevalence, roughly 8%, is similar worldwide, from China to Mexico.

Even so, DLD remains under-recognised and under-served – especially compared to other developmental conditions, such as dyslexia, autism or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

Identifying DLD in multilingual children can be difficult. Each language a child learns develops at its own pace, depending on factors such as how often they hear and use it. For example, multilingual children may temporarily lag behind their monolingual peers in vocabulary in one language, but this should not be mistaken for DLD.

Children with DLD show problems across all their languages and need specialist help. In contrast, those with typically developing language only struggle in the language they need more exposure to, like English at school.

Learning two or more languages promotes linguistic, social and cognitive strengths in all children. Contrary to longstanding myths that multilingualism harms language development, learning multiple languages does not cause or exacerbate DLD. Support for DLD should sustain all of a child’s languages, as these are critical for wellbeing, identity and family relationships.

Happy children — DLD support should include all a child’s languages.
Tom Wang/Shutterstock

The impact of DLD is lifelong and extends far beyond language. It has consequences for mental health, socialisation, literacy, academic performance, and quality of life. Accurate, timely diagnosis and support are essential, not just for individual life chances, but also for society. Adults with DLD are more likely to have difficulty getting a job and have a criminal record.

Addressing DLD

These are key signs that a multilingual child may be at risk for DLD, suggesting an approach to a speech and language therapist. These if they:

are slower to say first words, or put words together, than siblings
struggle to understand what others say or follow instructions
have trouble expressing thoughts or telling stories
rely excessively on gestures (like pointing) to communicate instead of words
are slower to learn English in school than peers with similar age, cultural and linguistic backgrounds
struggle to interact with children who speak the same languages.

Following referral, speech and language therapists gather information from parents, teachers, tests and other sources, aiming to understand the child’s abilities in all their languages.

In linguistically diverse countries, there are still considerable obstacles, however. UK-based speech and language therapists, for example, still lack reliable tools to equally assess English and the children’s additional languages. With few speech and language therapists having multilingual proficiency, and a shortage of appropriately trained interpreters, DLD can be missed – or typical multilingual development mislabelled as disordered – thus delaying or misdirecting support.

Progress is being made, with promising new tools like the UK bilingual toddlers assessment tool and the language impairment testing in multilingual settings battery. The former uses two-year-olds’ vocabulary in British English and their other language, alongside their exposure to each language, to determine whether their language development may be at risk.

Similarly, the Litmus battery includes tools for assessing the language skills of multilingual children from a range of ages and language backgrounds, such as phonological memory and storytelling.

More recently, our team is developing a dynamic assessment resource at Newcastle University that uses enjoyable activities to detect DLD. It explores multilingual children’s learning potential – not just their existing skills – in language and communication areas affected by the condition, such as telling stories or recognising emotions in people’s voices.

Detecting DLD is the first step. Support from family, schools and speech and language therapists can then transform a multilingual child’s life outcomes, helping them grow up healthier and happier.

Teresa Garrido-Tamayo received PhD funding from the Economic and Social Research Council via the Northern Ireland and North East Doctoral Training Partnership from 1st October 2019 to 31st May 2023.

Laurence White received funding from the Economic and Social Research Council from 1st August 2013 to 31st July 2016 (ES/K010123/1 – “Lexical Development in Bilingual Toddlers” – Principal Investigator, Caroline Floccia, University of Plymouth).

Carolyn Letts 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. Developmental language disorder can have life-long effects – and it’s easily missed in multilingual children – https://theconversation.com/developmental-language-disorder-can-have-life-long-effects-and-its-easily-missed-in-multilingual-children-263059