Search

By Ethan Wilson Villa Lithium is poised to be an essential component of the green transition. Often referred to as ‘white gold’, lithium plays a key role in technological development within the energy sector. Lithium is used in the production of rechargeable batteries for electric vehicles (EVs), solar panels, and energy storage systems, as well as consumer electronics like phones and laptops. As governments and investors increasingly gravitate towards renewables, the availability, production, and refinement of lithium will condition the execution of many green energy projects down the line. In fact, global demand for lithium is estimated to increase five-fold by 2030. Future demand projections underpin the tense geopolitical landscape facing lithium production and trade today. The X-Factor: Africa’s Role in the Global Lithium Trade More than 80% of lithium mining occurs in Australia and Latin America. Although China is home to under 7% of global lithium reserves, it has effectively monopolized the supply chain. China is the biggest force in the importation, refinement, and consumption of lithium – 70% of global production is supplied by China through the Belt and Road Initiative and other commercial agreements. Why, then, is Africa so important? Currently, Africa has roughly 5% of the world’s natural lithium ore reserves. These are distributed among a small selection of countries. Nonetheless, African mines – stimulated by Chinese financing – are expected to increase lithium production 30-fold from last year to 2027, when Africa will account for 12% of global supply versus its 1% share in 2022. Africa is also forecasted to provide a fifth of global demand by 2030. ‘White gold’ is a hot commodity. Considering demand already caused prices to surge last year, these projections illustrate how crucial the African continent will be in the development of the global lithium market. As stated earlier, China dominates the supply chain. The Chinese government prioritized owning the largest share of the critical minerals market in the 2000s and never looked back. In Africa, the strategy has been underpinned by public diplomacy and infrastructure investment. However, painting the picture of a full-fledged Chinese monopoly in Africa misses the mark on two dynamics. First, it overlooks the West’s efforts to challenge the status quo. Consensus rightly points to the West “waking up too late” to the Chinese strategy. Consequently, though, the U.S. is working towards reverting Chinese lithium hegemony. The leading initiative in this quest is the 2022 Minerals Security Partnership. Spearheaded by the Biden administration and composed essentially of the Global North, the agreement seeks to diversify supply chains. In Africa, the U.S. signed a memorandum of understanding at the U.S.-Africa Summit late last year with Zambia and the Democratic Republic of Congo to develop an EV battery supply chain. The U.S. and E.U. have also committed to the development of the Lobito Corridor, a railway that connects key mineral reserves in Zambia and the DRC to the Angolan port of Lobito. American refineries are negotiating with African mines to fund their projects whilst acquiring equal – not controlling, as is the case with China – shares. Second, the theory strips lithium-rich African states of their agency. Notwithstanding the barriers to establishing refinement plants in Africa (the need for a regular power supply, inadequate transport infrastructure, and corruption), the possession of lithium reserves grants these African states a degree of bargaining power. To illustrate these dynamics, the case of Zimbabwe is briefly discussed. Zimbabwe has Africa’s largest lithium reserves. With lingering U.S. economic sanctions from the Mugabe era, Zimbabwe turned to the Chinese for investment. The majority of its mines are run by Chinese-owned businesses, which have spent upwards of $1 billion on lithium projects. Zimbabwean lithium is a vertical the Chinese will increasingly pursue, having pledged an investment of $2.79 billion on mining operations in the country. The agency argument, for better or worse, comes into play as Zimbabwe imposed a ban on raw lithium exports in December of last year. As part of the prohibition, companies must set up refinement plants in Zimbabwe and process lithium ore before exporting it in order to create jobs and boost revenue nationally. This has prompted other mineral-rich African nations to follow suit. Political Debates on Lithium: Policy Going Forward The Zimbabwean case encapsulates the realities of the lithium trade in Africa. American sanctions limited Zimbabwe’s potential trade partners. China’s opportunistic grand strategy capitalized, as it has done with other African nations. One must bear in mind the nature of these sanctions: Zimbabwe is under the repressive dictatorship of Emmerson Mnangagwa. The issue of agency is, therefore, a pertinent one to grapple with. The sovereignty of African states and the ability to freely conduct their economic affairs is imperative. However, one is forced to adapt these moral dictums to the realities of our current world. Resource nationalism and noxious protectionism in Africa will only prop up inefficient industries shielded from global competitive pressures and further centralize power, thus serving to benefit the political elites at the expense of ordinary individuals. The desire to maximize economic growth in African exporters is evident. These nations, however, lack the means (production capacity, transport infrastructure, and capital) to sustainably and independently profit from lithium exports as of today. African economic growth, thus, should not be based on coercion or barriers to trade. Rather, governments should foster a competitive landscape in the trade of lithium and incentivize investors to go beyond ‘white gold’ and allocate resources to human capital. Domestic processing and refinement is how value is added and a means for investors to grow non-exploitative business partnerships with African governments. Other key areas of investment are international transportation logistics (e.g. the Lobito corridor) and joint research initiatives to educate and innovate in the presence of green energy in Africa. Ultimately, the pursuit of these policies in the context of lithium should be the objective as a competitive business environment, joint research and human capital growth may be the best pathway to sustained and sustainable economic growth.

By Stathis Poulantzas On 7 October this year, Israel suffered from a surprise assault by Gaza, resulting in around 1,200 deaths and the capture of more than 200 hostages. Israel, announcing that it entered a state of war with Hamas, began a series of air strikes targeted towards the Gaza strip, reportedly leading to over 11,000 deaths as of writing, destroying Palestinian military power and governing capabilities. Despite global calls for a ceasefire from entities like the UN, the war is only intensifying, transforming into a worsening humanitarian disaster daily. As one side refuses to release the reportedly 242 hostages, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) intensify their attacks, mainly targeting Gaza City, greatly damaging Gaza’s infrastructure and displacing and killing many civilians. Here’s a brief overview of Hamas, Gaza and Palestine to better understand the conflict. Hamas, ruling Gaza since 2007, considered a terrorist group by most Western nations and organisations, aims to replace Israel with an Islamic state, engaging in multiple conflicts with the country. Gaza, more formally known as the Gaza Strip, is a small but densely populated (around 2.2 million people) region located on the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea. According to BBC, “the West Bank and Gaza, which are referred to as Palestinian territories, as well as East Jerusalem and Israel all formed part of a land known as Palestine from Roman times until the mid-20th Century”, and since the declaration of Israel’s independence in 1948 are still considered as Palestinian territories. Setting aside the major humanitarian, political, as well as economic dimensions of the conflict, this article will focus on the war’s significant environmental repercussions. To commence, before the outbreak of the war, Israel and Palestine already suffered from substantial ecological problems. More precisely, the region has already experienced a 1.5°C rise in temperature, which stands much above the average, which has led to a decline in rainfall, already resulting in increasing droughts. In fact, in the absence of significant action, the mean temperature in the area is set to reach approximately 4.4°C by 2100, surpassing the overall global predictions, while a further decrease of rainfall by 1/5 by 2050 is expected to cause increasingly more droughts. Such a drastic turn of events would significantly hurt the Palestinian population, who would suffer from extreme heat, water and food shortages, among others, as a result of the Israeli occupation. Further, according to the Environmental Ministry of Israel, another consequence of this climate disaster will be an increase in sea levels, majorly impacting the infrastructure of the region’s coastal cities, especially in the Gaza Strip. Israeli and Palestinian leaders have acknowledged the situation’s urgency, committing to further environmental action, such as reducing greenhouse emissions. Nevertheless, the conflict between Hamas and Israel is putting the region’s climate at even further danger. To specify, some impacts of the dispute are Israel’s destruction of essential infrastructure in Gaza, leaving the strip of land without water and energy in several parts, damaging the sewage systems, and creating appalling hygiene conditions for the inhabitants, potentially escalating health issues in the region. Moreover, bombings and rocket attacks also contribute to the environmental threat. Ammunition generally contains heavy metals and other chemicals that can remain a health threat to humans, animals and ecosystems for decades after the end of each conflict. These chemicals will cause devastating effects on the quality of air and soil, as well as water quality. As the conflict progresses, if a ceasefire is not agreed upon soon, the damage to the environment and natural systems, such as fauna and tree vegetation, will be irreversible. Furthermore, the Israel-Palestine clash is also expected to strain the Middle East's present and future efforts to tackle climate change. Netanyahu's government has naturally prioritised political alliances over environmental issues. Meanwhile, Palestine is in no position or interest right now to make meaningful ecological progress. Any Palestinian commitments are contingent on whether the Israeli occupation continues. To put it more simply, “the average Palestinian wakes up in the morning worrying about how to get to work without crossing a checkpoint. Their priority is the [Israeli] occupation. For the Israelis, it’s security, the sense that there is a dangerous enemy on the other side that needs to be controlled.” Even if the war ends, if an actual two-state solution is not found,  the long-term feasibility of addressing climate issues in a region deeply divided by political conflict will be severely questioned. In addition, other nations’ political and economic concerns complicate their willingness to provide severe environmental help. For instance, according to the IMF, if the conflict were to be prolonged and expected, it could negatively affect the global economy, especially oil prices and growth. This may reduce the ability and willingness of wealthier countries to support climate-ravaged, less-endowed nations in the Middle East. Moreover, though the COP28 climate summit, hosted this year in Dubai, is crucial as potential solutions could be found from the climate problems arising from the war, it is likely to place too much emphasis on the political aspects of the conflict, ignoring the climate agenda. Finally, the United Arab Emirates, which is hosting the Summit and has been advancing normalisation with Israel, might be planning to use this platform to further this agenda. However, Israeli actions in Gaza and the resulting Arab public sentiment against normalisation may complicate this, especially regarding the participation of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. In conclusion, the Israel-Palestine conflict significantly impacts environmental sustainability in the region. It worsens rising temperatures, decreased rainfall, and sea levels, especially in densely populated areas such as Gaza. The war damages infrastructure and contaminates the environment, degrading air, soil, and water quality. To tackle these challenges, two approaches are vital: first, creating an independent environmental collaboration framework, possibly with international mediation, to prioritise environmental and climate issues despite the conflict. Second, using technology and innovation, such as Israel’s desalination and irrigation techniques, adapted for Palestinian use under international guidance, alongside investing in sustainable infrastructure in affected areas. However, without a long-term peace solution, these measures might have a limited long-term impact on the region's climate crisis.

By Syed Hussain The Israel-Palestine war has profound and wide-ranging implications for the global economy that extend far beyond its immediate geographic confines. The persistent state of unrest and bloodthirsty carnage unleashed on the Gaza strip not only weighs heavily on humanitarian concerns but also on the intricate web of international economic relations. The impact of the conflict has been examined in three distinct ways: a confined conflict, a proxy war involving regional actors like Lebanon and Syria, and a direct military confrontation between Iran and Israel. Each scenario poses a threat of rising oil prices, heightened inflation, and impeded global growth, with the most severe being a direct Iran-Israel war, which could lead to substantial economic downturns worldwide. These developments occur against the backdrop of a vulnerable global economy still reeling from the effects of recent conflicts and inflationary pressures in a post covid climate. At the core of the economic dimensions tied to the conflict are the energy markets. While Israel and Palestine are not major oil producers, their central location in the geopolitically sensitive Middle East means that any escalation in tensions can have a knock-on effect on regional stability, potentially impacting oil production and transport across the broader area. This in turn can lead to fluctuations in oil prices due to speculative trading and hedging activities by businesses concerned about supply disruptions. Such price swings are especially significant given the critical role of oil in the global economy, as highlighted by historical events such as the oil crises of the 1970s and the dramatic spike in oil prices in 2008, both of which had long-standing ripple effects on the world economic stage. The stock markets, naturally averse to the uncertainties brought about by geopolitical strife, often react negatively to the signs of escalation within the conflict. Risk aversion tends to set in, prompting a sell-off in equities, particularly within sectors and companies with exposure to the region. Conversely, this climate of uncertainty can boost investments in safe-haven assets like gold which has seen a hike of 9% surging above $2000 dollars per ounce day after the Hama’s attack on Israel, other things like U.S. dollar, and government bonds, which traditionally benefit from risk-off investor sentiment have all seen a surge in investment and interest. Another significant economic aspect influenced by the conflict is the tourism and aviation industries. The conflict has spelt trouble for the Israeli economy where 4% is dependent on tourism as well as neighbouring tourism sectors in gulf states feeling the after effects of the violence next door. The historical and political unrest in the region has tarnished the industry, deterring tourists and impacting a wide array of businesses from airlines to hotels and the service economy at large. This also has a domino effect on neighbouring countries whose economies are heavily reliant on tourism. Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in the region can also be adversely affected as potential investors often rethink channelling capital into areas marred by conflict, wary of the associated risks. Moreover, supply chain disruptions can ensue, posing a challenge to businesses that depend on goods and materials from the conflict zone, thereby increasing costs and causing delays in global trade. The humanitarian cost of the conflict necessitates considerable foreign aid and international assistance, which can reallocate resources that might otherwise be used for economic development in other regions. Furthermore, international relations and trade agreements may be reassessed based on the stance countries take regarding the conflict, potentially reshaping global trade dynamics. Israel, known as the "Start-up Nation," is a hub for technological innovation, and the persistent state of conflict can threaten to undermine international partnerships, venture capital investments, and collaborative projects in the tech sector. Lastly, currency markets may experience volatility due to the conflict, affecting the financial strategies and stability of nations closely linked to the Middle East. The World Bank has raised concerns that oil prices could potentially escalate to over $150 per barrel if the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, particularly between Israel and Hamas, intensifies, mirroring the oil shock experienced in the 1970s. Such a surge would be a response to supply cuts from significant producers like Saudi Arabia in the wake of the already unstable commodity markets due to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Currently, there's an expectation of a downturn in commodity prices by about 4.1% in the upcoming year, with oil projected to drop to an average of $81 a barrel. However, an exacerbated Middle Eastern conflict could severely disrupt this trend, potentially shrinking global oil supply by 6 to 8 million barrels a day and hiking prices up to $157 a barrel. Political and economic analysts fear that an intensified conflict that brings Israel into direct engagement with Iran, which provides weapons and funds to Hamas, could trigger a dramatic increase in oil prices up to $150 per barrel. In such an event, Bloomberg Economics predicts that global economic growth could plunge to 1.7%, effectively slicing around $1 trillion from the global economy and potentially pushing it into a recession. Despite the market's initial lacklustre response to the conflict, with Brent crude prices recently falling to around $87 a barrel, any significant involvement by key crude producers like Iran could have broader implications, particularly if the Middle East's turmoil spills over into the global oil export markets. The region, accounting for about 30% of the world's oil supply, has a less dominant but still significant role compared to its 37% share in the 1970s, suggesting that any disruption could still have considerable global economic repercussions. With the lingering effects of the Ukraine crisis, the threat of rising commodity prices could trigger another inflationary cycle, challenging policymakers and central banks. Beyond economics, a prolonged conflict poses a serious risk to global food security. High oil prices translate into steeper costs for shipping and fertilizers, driving up food prices at a time when nearly a tenth of the global population is already struggling with undernourishment, underscoring the urgent need for stability to prevent a deepening of the global food crisis. The projected economic outlook is being hit from two sides: a 10% hike in oil prices and an increase in market risk-aversion, similar to the sentiment during the Arab Spring. These elements are anticipated to shave off 0.3 percentage points from the global growth rate for the next year, amounting to a loss of roughly $300 billion in output, which would result in the most tepid growth in three decades, except for the downturns in 2020 due to Covid and in 2009. Furthermore, climbing oil prices are likely to contribute an additional 0.2 percentage points to worldwide inflation, potentially stabilizing it near 6%. This situation forces central banks around the world to persist with tight monetary policies in the face of weakened economic expansion. As for the central banks' response, the Bank of England, along with the Federal Reserve and European Central Bank, are holding interest rates steady for now but are wary of the approaching winter. They remain vigilant due to potential further hikes in inflation, fuelled by the volatile oil market amidst the ongoing conflict and the risk of escalation. These institutions are cautiously navigating these uncertain times, aware that the energy crisis could exacerbate inflationary pressures during the colder months when energy demand typically spikes. In conclusion, the economic repercussions of the Israel-Palestine war underscore the interconnected and globalist nature of the modern global economy. The conflict's ability to affect various economic sectors—from energy to finance, technology to tourism—demonstrates the extent to which regional instability can propagate, influencing global economic health and dictating a cautious approach for businesses and governments alike. The world sits nervously watching the massacre unfold on the Gaza strip , time will tell what mounting escalations evolve and the repercussions that arise from them.

By Krishna Bellamkonda In June this year, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi embarked on a four-day state visit to the United States. This was marked by a grand state dinner and an address to the US Congress. Catching global attention, these events symbolise a mutual policy shift of the world’s largest democracies, which may define this century. This shift is often attributed to the concern related to China. However, I present some contrary evidence and argue that this relationship has a deeper undercurrent. Yet, before deeming this policy shift as a pivotal moment in world history, there are some fundamental questions we must first address. Firstly, does the current short-term geopolitical landscape necessitate such convergence of policies, and if so, are these policies constrained in their scope and extent to address these geopolitical demands? Secondly, how can India's long-standing policy of non-alignment harmonise with the U.S.'s need for a relationship based on deep trust and substantial cooperation? The India-US Relationship Through Different Lenses [--] Figure 1: Categorization of countries into different blocs (data from UN General Assembly) The map above (Figure 1) utilises data from the UN General Assembly and categorises countries into blocs through a machine learning algorithm. A brief examination of this seems to support the hypothesis that the mutual policy shift is simply a matter of convenience. For countries that have historically maintained strained relations, a brisk and significant positive shift seems far-fetched. However, labelling it serendipitous would not do justice to the ten years of dedicated efforts to bolster relations from both the Indian and American sides. Key moments include two high-level visits. The visits by Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the US in 2014, followed by President Barack Obama's visit to India in 2015, laid a robust foundation for the relationship. All recent developments have been built upon this decade-long confidence-building process. The shared status of being the two largest democracies in the world also contributes significantly to maintaining mutual trust. The scope of this partnership has broadened significantly to encompass various sectors, including defence, counterterrorism, internal security, trade, and space collaboration. The evidence supporting this expansion is substantial; bilateral trade between the two nations has reached a historic peak, totalling $191.8 billion and marking an impressive 113% increase over the past decade. Notably, the United States has now become India's largest trading partner, underscoring the clear and tangible benefits this partnership has yielded. [--] Figure 2: Compatibility Chart between the US and India in the United Nations General Assembly Despite maintaining a functional relationship, the question of aligning worldviews persists. The pie chart above illustrates the historical voting patterns of the United States and India in the United Nations General Assembly on various issues, which reveals their differing perspectives. It prompts consideration of whether these differences should be seen as a deal-breaker. In an increasingly multipolar world, the paradigm of issue-based cooperation has supplanted traditional notions of blocs and alliances, emphasising the importance of discovering common ground rather than adhering to entrenched and preconceived coalitions. I argue that this relationship has become a template for a global North-South partnership which allows for mutual prosperity. One distinguishing feature of this relationship is the level of maturity it exhibits. Remarkably, historical disparities, such as the US's alignment with Pakistan in the 1971 war of Bangladesh’s independence and India's strong ties with Russia, have not impeded the development of a comprehensive partnership. This evolution underscores the dynamic nature of current international relations, where nations adapt and re-evaluate their priorities in response to changing times and geopolitical landscapes. This stark contrast between American policies in the 1970s and the present can be seen as an explicit acknowledgment of the shifting global dynamics and a testament to the resilience and adaptability of both nations in fostering a robust and forward-looking strategic partnership. However, it is undeniable that China is a significant factor in the equation. India's strained relations with China, coupled with the escalating US-China rivalry, have injected a sense of urgency into the partnership. Addressing security concerns in the Indo-Pacific, the coalition of democracies known as QUAD takes on particular importance. Nonetheless, it's essential to note that the scope of this coalition extends beyond security matters, encompassing a coordinated action plan addressing climate change, green energy initiatives, and collaborative ventures in critical technology. The eastward shift in US foreign policy and India's reciprocal response have indeed propelled a safer Indo-Pacific and more. However, managing this relationship and navigating its critical differences comes with formidable challenges and demands close and vigilant attention from both nations.

By Saarah Rahman Refugees flee their home country due to violence, crossing international borders for safety. However, they are met with discrimination and mistreatment, violating their human rights. This article attempts to discuss government leaders' refusal to accept refugees based on discriminatory political narratives and bias from international communities and social organisations towards refugees, specifically in European countries. The article then proposes policy recommendations to address institutional racism at global, national, and societal levels for increased migration without discrimination. The central argument of this article focuses on Europe, which has been dealing with an ‘immigration crisis’ since 2015. Nonetheless, this argument can also be extended to other parts of the world. Overall, this article claims refugees face political and social discrimination across international borders due to prejudices that stem from institutional racism, which infringes on their human rights. Discriminatory Government Narratives and Their Impact on Refugee Rights Government discourse towards refugees heightens discriminatory sentiments, which leads to human rights abuses of refugees. This is exemplified by the United Kingdom, which has plans to deport and process asylum seekers in Rwanda. The Conservative Party’s Rwadan Plan goes against article 9 of the UNICEF declaration of human rights that “no one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile”. Robert Nozick argues that “the state is obliged to protect the rights of citizens and noncitizens equally”. However, the European Commission has reduced the number of refugees distributed amongst EU countries from “160,000 refugees in 2015 to 33,000 places in 2017”. The UK and EU highlight negative global attitudes against refugees seeking asylum. The reason behind dehumanising international policymaking towards refugees is government narratives highlighting prejudices against refugees. A prominent example of a racist government narrative is UKIP’s campaign during Brexit. UKIP leader Nigel Farage's social influence incited “racial fears and anxieties, also implicated ordinary Britons who were infected/affected by the propaganda”. Therefore, governments can pass bills discriminating against refugees’ human rights because of a lack of individuals protesting against government decisions. This consequently comes from the negative labels certain political parties have attached to refugees. The representation of Arabs as terrorists or extreme Muslims, mentioned by Edward Said in his work Orientalism, reinforces Western perceptions of refugees, particularly those of Arab descent who make up the majority of European refugees. By attaching labels, politicians attempt to justify policies as safeguarding our borders. This strategy is employed to gain public support, as demonstrated by UKIP. Thus, refugees face human rights abuses from governments because of racist political rhetoric within democratic institutions in international policymaking. Secondly, refugees face prejudices within the global community, which leads to experiences of hate crime and social exclusion that infringes on human rights. For example, two Muslim women were murdered at an Islamic Centre in Portugal and Swedish far-right groups are shown burning the Quran. Both examples illustrate growing prejudices towards refugees. This is because the majority of European refugees originate from Islamic Countries, with “32 per cent of refugees in Sweden coming from Middle Eastern countries” and others from Syria and Afghanistan. Religious discrimination goes against Article 18, which states individuals can “freely practice their faith in communities”. Institutional racism in the context of this article is the prejudices refugees face, leading to social exclusion. According to Klas Borell, “prejudice about a minority group may lead to hate crimes being excused or even defended”. The Restorative Justice Council report indicates that refugees face difficulties seeking justice due to “language barriers present in courts”. This provides an advantage for assailants because they are fluent in English, undermining Article 6, which states that individuals have the right to “a free and fair trial”. This results from racism present in Western society reinforced by institutionalised racism within social institutions like the education system. Barry Troyna and Jenny Williams alleged that the “British system is institutionally racist, and they denounce the predominance of European languages over Asian languages”. Refugees encounter social exclusion and are hindered by racial barriers that prevent them from achieving justice, indicating the interconnectedness of various social bodies. Thus, refugees have their human rights neglected by social institutions because of prejudice caused by institutional racism. Policy Recommendations for Combating Institutional Racism and Fostering Inclusivity The core issue my article addresses is institutional racism, creating prejudices as this negatively labels refugees, undermining their human rights. Due to Europe's extensive history of colonialism, it is challenging to eliminate institutional racism as a result. My proposed strategies come from various perspectives, including the intergovernmental, national government, and societal outlooks aimed at tackling institutional racism through regulatory measures. The EU Parliament should offer assistance programs to refugees, with oversight from international groups like the UN, to prevent any misappropriation of funds, such as constructing inhumane detention facilities for refugees. Algorithms on social media should monitor far-right groups and individuals to avoid misinformation and to minimise harm as a way of addressing racist political narratives. Furthermore, education must improve to accommodate non-European topics and ensure tolerance and acceptance through primary and secondary education. Finally, it is essential to establish offices dedicated to minorities within all intergovernmental and domestic government and social institutions. Specialised offices should guarantee that legislation does not discriminate against refugees’ fundamental rights and help to eliminate prejudices. Thus, my policies specifically target the regulation of political and social bodies to ensure biases do not interfere with policy and social decision-making. Institutional racism fosters prejudices towards refugees, which undermine their fundamental human rights. The issue of discrimination and mistreatment towards refugees is a global concern that needs immediate attention. The refusal to accept refugees based on discriminatory political narratives and bias from international communities and social organisations violates their human rights. Policymakers at all levels need to create policies that promote inclusivity. The situation in Europe highlights a need for change in attitudes but is not limited to a singular region. We must work together as a global community to create a world where everyone is welcome, regardless of their origins.

By India Southcott On September 15, 2023, the UK government rejected calls to officially define ‘honour’ based violence (HBV), indicative of an ongoing failure to recognise one of the most severely underreported forms of domestic violence in the country. Official data from the Home Office reveals that, in the year ending March 2023, there were 2,905 recorded HBV-related offences in England and Wales. Whilst this is already a troubling rate, many experts suggest that most official statistics vastly underestimate and underreport the true extent of HBV. For instance, the Iranian and Kurdish Women’s Rights Organisation (IKROW) has raised alarming concerns about the reporting mechanisms for HBV incidents. In a 2014 report, they found that 1 in 5 police forces fail to report HBV cases appropriately. HBV helpline Karma Nirvana has contacted 120,000 since its inception in 2008, showing the extent to which police fail to report and support those experiencing HBV. What Makes HBV a Pressing Issue? As the government rejected calls to define ‘honour’ based violence, legally, there is no official basis for what constitutes HBV in the UK. IKROW described HBV as ‘Murders within the framework of collective family structures, in which predominantly women are mutilated, imprisoned, forced to commit suicide and killed for actual or perceived immoral behaviour’. The circumstances triggering HBV are not culturally specific, evident across countries, cultures, and religions. What is consistent is that despite the label, there is nothing close to ‘honour’ in abuse. This type of violence is most likely to start early in the lives of young people (most often women) in their family homes, situating HBV in the broader picture of violence against women and girls. SafeLives insight data has found that HBV victims are 13% more likely to be at risk of serious harm or homicide, and they are far more likely to be abused by multiple people, with 54% experiencing this. Alongside this, victims can be very hard to access as they are more likely to have recently immigrated to the UK, often relying on an abuser for their visa status or facing a language barrier in accessing support— over 26% of HBV victims required an interpreter. Safelives also notes that despite the disproportionate effect on women (which this policy report focuses on) HBV is experienced by both men and women, with factors such as sexuality and disability putting some men at greater risk. Inaccurate Data & Lack of Governmental Responsibility This failure to define HBV officially informs other issues as it creates difficulty in data collection, which is especially concerning as proper identification and recording of HBV is vital for effectively safeguarding victims. In the absence of adequate measures to tackle underreporting, the true scale of the problem remains veiled, impeding the ability of policy to provide assistance where it is most needed. Additionally, Honour Based Abuse is not widely recognised as a form of domestic abuse. Until 2020, it was not a requirement for police to report HBV, and despite its recent inclusion, a culture of ignorance remains. Experts argue that the government has also adopted a ‘siloed’ approach to tackling HBV, Karma Nirvana note that the government mostly only acknowledge the dangers of Forced marriage and female genital mutilation. This has repercussions on how HBV is recognised and understood on the national level. No Dedicated Agency Unlike other forms of abuse, which have dedicated agencies and straightforward legislative prevention, HBV is tackled by a cross-agency approach, requiring the collaboration of the Forced Marriage Unit and various social and law enforcement services, as well as non-governmental agencies. Law enforcement and social services often misreport potential HBV cases, therefore establishing a single agency with a profound understanding of HBV could dispel misconceptions. Cultural Stigma Much legislation has a distorted cultural sense of race, culture or religion, artificially removing associations with broader violence against women and girls and the structural gender inequality by which it is informed. In the case of law enforcement and social services, cultural sensitivity and competence gaps among officers can result in mishandling cases, as officers may not fully grasp the cultural and societal nuances at play in HBV situations. Overemphasis on cultural sensitivity can inadvertently enable the perpetuation of violence, while a heavy-handed approach can alienate communities and deter reporting. Prioritising Effective Data Collection and Analysis Practical training can allow for effective data collection as greater clarity and less misinformation ensure those dealing with HBV can promptly identify the nuances of HBV and correctly report it. Effective reporting means that a robust data collection system for tracking HBV can be established, which could include comprehensive information on victims, perpetrators, and outcomes. This data should play a pivotal role in shaping policy making. Furthermore, the introduction of mandatory reporting requirements for professionals who encounter HBV is vital. Failure to comply with reporting obligations should carry consequences. Specialised training and Awareness campaigns Individuals dealing with cases of honour-based violence should undergo specialised training to ensure their ability to identify HBV-related incidents promptly. This training should emphasise the unique challenges faced by individuals affected by HBV, enabling professionals to approach cases with sensitivity and understanding. Local authorities should mandate awareness as part of the curriculum and PSHE. Community Outreach Programs can engage with local organisations, religious institutions, and community leaders to raise awareness and encourage dialogue about HBV. Encouraging open discussions within communities can help break down stigmas, promote early intervention, and empower individuals to seek help when needed. Accessible aid at a local and national level On a local level, policy solutions should include enhancing hotlines and support services, ensuring that they are well-publicised and targeting individuals who are especially marginalised. This could, for example, involve ensuring those with language barriers can access a support worker who can properly communicate with them, alongside employing former victims of HBV who can offer lived insight. In the context of nationwide legislation, individuals facing visa dependency and immigration status complications should receive compassionate consideration to ensure they are not forced to depend on those who may exploit their vulnerable situation. Overall, Honour Based Abuse is a pervasive yet under-acknowledged issue, artificially dissociated from wider violence against women and girls. This is the result of a nuanced interplay of factors, but critically, it is perpetuated by government legislation in the UK. If the government were to dispel culturally biased narratives, for example, by introducing a standard definition and more effective and targeted training, this is likely to facilitate greater awareness of HBV. Therefore, this should be considered an essential first step in de-stigmatising HBV, as targeting the misconceptions which plague governmental agencies and highlighting HBV as a legislative issue recognised in parliament is likely to incite a change in public viewpoints.

By Daniel Norman There are now more Special Education Needs and Disabilities — SEND — children in the British school system than ever. According to a July 2023 report from the Education Statistics Service, 17.3% of children across all key stages have been identified as having learning difficulties. Of these children, one in four is attached to an Education, Health and Care Plan (ECHP), a specialist pathway that sets more specific provisions. Since 2018, these numbers have only grown and pose a critical challenge for policymakers: how to provide a school experience for these pupils that is both safe and enriching. However, the government has failed to plug gaps in SEND funding and expand support for schools that need it. This has allowed grave issues to reach a critical mass that, without focusing on both short-term mitigation and long-term reform, could damage the already tough prospects of hundreds of thousands of children. Underfunding and Resource Challenges in Supporting SEND Students Currently, there is a monumental funding deficit across the country to support SEND students. A 2022 analysis by the County Councils Network and the Society of County Treasurers estimated that the existing £2.4b ‘funding gap’ would increase to £3.6b by the 24/25 academic year. This crippling deficit means that funds are used only to balance the books and prevent a debt spiral that would weaken the financial integrity of schools rather than to improve the experiences of SEND students. This reduces schools’ staffing access, leaving them unable to deliver on particular needs. Across mainstream education, there is a severe lack of specialist teaching assistants trained to work with high-needs pupils, meaning that support is often not explicitly targeted. This is exacerbated by a lack of funding for SEND training courses for existing teachers and support staff due to expensive up-front costs and salaries to hire replacements. Compounding this issue are the long waiting lists mainstream schools face to access support consultants such as speech therapists and educational psychologists. The impacts of this bottleneck are threefold. Many pupils cannot attain diagnoses, preventing them from accessing an ECHP. This drives parents into the private sector for care, which, according to a 2023 SchoolsWeek investigation, may cost up to £140 per hour of consultation and be less cohesive with school structures. Finally, the high costs may prevent families from effectively supporting their SEND children at home. Schools are thus faced with low funding, high costs, and an increasing number of SEND pupils. Fewer resources must be made to go further. This challenge is rarely made easier by children joining special schools due to years-long waiting lists. Many of these issues can be traced back to previous failures in government policy, mainly the austerity measures first instituted by the Cameron Ministry in 2010. According to the Institute of Fiscal Studies’ 2022 report, education funding per pupil fell by 9% in real terms from 2009/2010 to 2019/2020. Wages have similarly declined, with some teachers experiencing up to a 14% cut in real terms. This has led to chronic staff shortages. Due to the specialist staff needed, SEND pupils have been hit particularly hard. According to a June 2023 Department of Education report, school consultant authorities are experiencing significant recruitment and retention issues, leading to a critical lack of educational psychologists. This restricts access to diagnoses and support for SEND children, parents, and teachers. Attempts at reform began in March 2023 with the publication of the SEND and Alternate Provisions Improvement Plan. This brief outlined plans to amend the 2014 Children and Families Act and create a financial Safety Valve, a program to reduce council deficits and disperse targeted SEND spending to schools in need. However, these measures are only accessible by fifty-five councils and continue to be used to pay down debts rather than support schools. Despite committing to building new dedicated SEND schools, there is substantial evidence to suggest this will be an ineffective policy. Alongside the already existing shortage of support staff, there are more than double the vacancies for special needs teachers and teaching assistants compared to their mainstream counterparts. What is the point of building new schools if the existing ones are understaffed and underfunded? On balance, the current government SEND policy has failed to ameliorate immediate concerns and mitigate the longer-term consequence of underinvestment. However, volunteer charity organisations go some way to providing schools with the needed access and resources. ADD-Vance, for example, offers consultation and teacher training that is desperately needed. Ensuring Access and Building Skills Policy solutions must take both a short and long-term view to improve services for SEND children. The construction of specialist schools, while desperately needed, will not improve access to targeted help quickly enough. In the short term, there must be an emphasis on reforms to improve recruitment, retention, and training, especially for teaching assistants, One such policy solution is the introduction of special school access programs. Weekly support sessions for parents and children can build on existing infrastructure for children’s centres and be easily organised by the school district. This would provide critical access to educational psychologists and speech therapists for children while carers seek guidance from SEND professionals. It is also vital that pitfalls in staff shortage and training are overcome. To encourage SEND teacher training, government funding could be earmarked for courses transitioning teaching assistants to fully qualified teachers, each costing around £4,000/yr. This could be supplemented by increasing the hours spent on SEND learning for mainstream teacher training and mandating a SEND placement during the first year of teaching. In mainstream schools, whole-school INSET days could be highly effective for imparting basic training to the entire faculty, allowing them to better support the special needs children in their classes. However, these plans do not solve the deeper issue of stagnant special school places coupled with a rising number of SEND students. The government must act quickly and efficiently to build, expand, and staff schools before the system reaches a breaking point.

By Nimrit Jodha Over the past decade, there has been an increased emphasis on healthcare becoming a profit-maximising industry. However, healthcare is based on a factual science where patients must trust diagnoses regardless of price. In theory, having a division between public and private is useless because consumer sovereignty does not apply in healthcare, as the patient is not the best judge of their welfare. This article evaluates a comparison of healthcare quality and whether there is a clear distinction between the two. Efficiency vs. Accountability The private sector receives significantly more funding than the public sector due to the patients paying for the faculties and infrastructure. In addition to direct payments, there is also funding from private insurance and employer-sponsored plans. Meanwhile, in comparison, there are continuous reductions in budgets and staff in the public sector, leading to apparent differences in available resources. Absorptive capacity occurs in the private sector, where it recognises new patients’ value due to their financial position, attracting more funding from the government, shifting budgets away from the public sector, where they already struggle to maintain a human and physical infrastructure. Many gravitate towards the private sector because it is ‘more efficient, accountable and medically effective’. However, it should be noted that studies have found the public sector to lack timeliness and hospitality towards patients. To make an informed judgement of the effectiveness and quality of both systems, a study was conducted on eight databases systematically on their performance. This was assessed against the World Health Organisation’s six essential themes of health- ‘accessibility and responsibility, quality, outcomes, accountability and transparency, regulation, efficiency, fairness and equity. A narrative review was conducted for each theme. The studies reinforced the idea that in the private sector, there is better hospitality but also found that the industry violates the accepted medical standards more frequently, where they have been reported to have lower efficiency. The systematic review also did not support the view that the private sector’s healthcare delivery is more accountable and effective. It showed that both sectors have strengths and weaknesses, but the main issues were the financial barriers to care, poor accountability and a lack of transparency. The Advocates' Duel Advocates for the private sector have advocated that it is the ‘main provider’ as impoverished patients would prefer care at private clinics where there is the belief that they would be more responsive to patient’s needs due to the market competition, which should, in theory, overcome government corruption and inefficiency. In comparison, advocates for the public sector have highlighted inequalities in accessioning healthcare as low-income patients cannot pay for private services. However, the private sector has been criticised for failing to deliver public health goods and preventative services as it lacks communication and coordination with the public sector. It should be noted that there is also a bias when discussing the sectors as big private international contractors, insurance firms, and non-governmental organisations would benefit from expanding the private sector, whilst academics would be in favour of the public sector as they greatly rely on state-funded grants to gain more resources for their research. The Path to Unity The main issue is not the extent to which the sectors differ because they both have advantages and disadvantages. In theory, the public sector should be of higher quality. However, studies have shown that they lack accountability and are more likely to violate medical standards. Policies must reduce the divide between the two sectors to make a more integrated system. This could be done by creating one significant healthcare sector where all the funding and resources are pooled and contribute to one place rather than separating it into two separate distinctions. Patients who previously funded their private treatment should be encouraged and motivated by the fact that the services they will receive will also be improved from their current healthcare. There needs to be a greater emphasis on enhancing and integrating healthcare into one unitary service rather than the main focus being on the difference and quality of the two sectors. Integration could involve sharing resources so there is greater innovation of ideas and breakthroughs regarding medicine. This would also reduce the issues the public sector sees with staffing as they would have additional support from the private sector. The most impactful way to reduce the disparities and inequalities between the sectors is by having all doctors and nurses work together towards the same goal rather than splitting resources and funding.

By Mehul Chopra The Iranian revolution of 1979: a brief history Iran, known for its rich history and ancient civilization, has had its fair share of uprisings, invasions, and revolutions. The 1979 Iranian revolution stands out as a pivotal moment in the nation’s history which fundamentally altered its societal fabric. The toppling of the Pahlavi dynasty was a sea change in Iran which gave way to an Islamic republic under the leadership of Ayatollah Khomeini. While the revolution aimed to free Iran from perceived Westernization, it also introduced a new set of challenges. Iran transformed into a totalitarian regime which was accompanied by repercussions for individuals’ rights and liberties. A series of changes were implemented. This included women being compelled to wear the hijab, the banning of Western music and cinema, and outright suppression of political dissent. The regime change marked a drastic shift in Iran’s social paradigm. The death of Mahsa Amini: a catalyst for resistance On the 16th of September 2022, a young woman named Mahsa Amini died in a hospital in Tehran. A few days prior to her death, Mahsa Amini had been arrested by Iran’s morality police for refusing to wear her hijab in a public place. Iranian authorities deny having any involvement in her death. However, the general consensus is that Mahsa Amini was severely beaten whilst in police custody which subsequently led to her death. The death of Mahsa Amini became a symbol of state brutality, and her martyrdom ignited widespread protests in all 31 provinces in Iran. Protests had not been uncommon in Iran, yet these protests were different as they marked a direct opposition to the human rights violations committed by the regime instead of being a demonstration about economic grievances. Furthermore, Amini was part of the Kurdish and Sunni minority, groups typically marginalized and discriminated against. Nevertheless, the Iranian public stood united in solidarity. The youth has been the driving force of this resistance, with demonstrations taking place in schools and universities as well as the streets of Iran. Students have walked out of their classrooms in protest and any segregation between boys and girls imposed by Iranian authorities has been abandoned. It is important to note that people of all age demographics have taken part in forms of resistance that undermine the regime. As anger brews all over the country, university professors and teachers stand alongside their students, journalists publish dissent against the regime, and riots ensue in prisons. Furthermore, women have played a crucial role in fuelling the protests. Opposing Iran’s forced hijab policy, women removed their headscarves and burned them in protest. Many women have also been seen to appear in public without headscarves, putting their own lives at risk in support of their cause. The use of excessive force to crush the spirit of resistance In response to the protests, the Iranian leadership did not make any concessions to the protesters, rather it sought to double down on repressive tactics in order to destroy the spirit of the resistance. In merely a month after the protests unfolded, Iran’s security forces have reportedly killed at least 215 people, including 27 children. Iran’s revolutionary guard was instructed to use any and all force necessary to quell the protests and as a result, many protesters have been shot dead in the streets. In addition, the Iranian government have simultaneously implemented non-violent measures to disrupt the protests. Net blockers have been introduced to disrupt internet services, preventing the organization and planning of protests. International social media platforms such as Instagram and WhatsApp were banned, and internet disruptions became a common feature of life in Iran. Furthermore, thousands have been arrested for their involvement in protests, with multiple reports of individuals having suspiciously died under police custody. The most shocking part of Iran’s crackdown on protesters is that it has not even spared school children, as evidenced by various young girls being arrested. Asra Panahi, a 16-year-old schoolgirl, was beaten to death by Iran’s security forces for refusing to sing a song praising the regime. Additionally, Sarina Esmailzadeh, a 16-year-old YouTube personality, was beaten to death while attending a protest. The use of the death penalty also signals a fundamental violation of justice and human rights as protesters have undergone false trials sentencing them to death. Executions have been carried out publicly to make a spectacle designed to intimidate and deter any future protesters. Nevertheless, the people of Iran have persevered, a testament to their resilience and unwavering determination in the face of brutal repression. The current situation and the role of the international community A year after the death of Mahsa Amini, the situation in Iran remains bleak and the people continue to suffer. The regime has stood firm and refused to implement any significant reforms to its repressive policies. The issue of the forced hijab which was at the epicenter of the initial protests remains in place. Iranian authorities are using smart cameras to catch violators, the morality police have been redeployed in the streets, and internet access continues to be heavily restricted. It is the duty of the international community to support the people in Iran in their fight for justice. The US, Canada, and the UK have taken collective action to impose sanctions on high-ranking Iranian officials by freezing individuals’ assets in the West and restricting their access to financial institutions. However, a recent agreement between the US and Iran has meant that the US will allow Iran access to $6bn in frozen assets in exchange for 5 US citizens being released from Iranian prisons. While this exchange is a step back for the Iranian people, it is pertinent that the international community continues to stand by them. The Western world must continue to pressure Iranian leadership to stop their human rights abuses through financial sanctions on high-ranking Iranian officials and other means.

By Pawel Plonka The upcoming year, 2024, will see a number of important national elections worldwide, from the United States and the United Kingdom to India, Taiwan, and South Korea. In preparation for these contests, the new role of generative artificial intelligence emerges. This groundbreaking technology has the potential to transform the nature of political campaigns - from voters’ perception of actors and events to backroom financial management and politicians’ understanding of societal expectations. How can politicians leverage their odds with such an innovative apparatus? What threats does it pose for democracies across the world? To what extent can AI-generated content influence public opinion, and how does this affect democratic engagement in the digital age? PROLIFERATION OF DISINFORMATION & POLITICAL ADVERTISING Disinformation has been a part of electoral processes for years. Influence operations remain an effective means to cause confusion as well as panic and sway voters while doing everything from comfortable proximity. Increased accessibility to generative artificial intelligence enables all actors - unaffiliated individuals, vying campaign headquarters, and external powers - to generate fictitious news quickly. There are already many examples of disseminating disinformation in such a manner. In 2020, two political operatives in the ‘battleground states’ in the US leveraged robocalls to spread false claims that voting by email would result in collecting outstanding debt by credit card companies and being tracked by law enforcement. Ben Winters, a senior counsel at Electronic Privacy Information Center, in relation to these events pointed out that with generative AI, new groups can adopt similar strategies with a lower risk of detection. On a level of campaign offices, generative artificial intelligence thrives as well. Ron DeSantis, in order to slander his party rival, used AI-generated deepfakes of Donald Trump embracing a despised in right-wing circles former White House chief medical advisor, Anthony Fauci. However, this is not the sole instance of such an endeavour in American politics; over the past months, there has been a noticeable trend toward the normalization of using deepfakes for campaign purposes. In response to Biden’s announcement of a re-election bid, the Republican National Committee launched a video packed with generated content depicting, e.g. Chinese invasion of Taiwan and distress on the American streets. FINANCING CAMPAIGNS Generative artificial intelligence also may optimize campaigns’ costs simultaneously enhancing their efficiency. Creating human-like content by automated accounts before and during campaigns can be extremely valuable when conveying certain messages or manufacturing a mirage of wide social interest. Most importantly, even badly constructed machine-generated content which is still different every time is great for overcoming supervisory mechanisms. Targeting certain groups has already been accelerated by social media - now generative artificial intelligence can lead to ‘micro-micro targeting’. More advanced technology could enable campaign staff to create an affordable hyper-individualized communication customized to each voter as well as a donor - creating a personalized experience, especially concerning ‘calls to action’ and relevant opportunities, is excellent for improving engagement with supporters. The use of AI to empower electoral campaigns is on the rise. Although mainstream generative artificial intelligence is at its early stage of development, its smart implementation might bring tangible results. Quiller AI is one of the examples of companies that specialize in leveraging artificial intelligence for campaigning purposes on behalf of the US Democratic Party. Their services include creating draft emails and automation repetitive tasks regarding engagement with the donors. Mike Nellis, the founder of the company, describes its purpose: ‘Quiller will not only accelerate the writing and coding process, but also enhance creativity and efficiency, leading to higher open rates, fewer unsubscribes, and more campaign funds.’ PUBLIC OPINION Campaign staff and politicians often base their narratives upon the reactions and stances of their electorate. Public opinion is quintessential in the democratic process, especially in creating a candidate's program and giving them cues on how to approach certain social issues. However, recently there has occurred a phenomenon of ‘astroturfing’, which is an artificially manufactured political movement created to simulate the impression of genuine grassroots activism. Actors involved in such activities aim to form a perception of a broad social consensus on specific issues. The danger coming from astroturfing is big already, yet it is exacerbated by the potential of generative artificial intelligence. A great verification of these themes is an experiment conducted by Sarah Kreps and Douglas L. Kriner from Cornell University. They send more than 32,000 emails both human-made and generated by OpenAI’s GPT-3 to roughly 7,200 state legislators in 6 policy issue areas. Their analysis suggested that lawmakers perceived the AI-generated messages almost as credible as the ones constructed by humans. Although large language models oftentimes produce bland and even inaccurate content, it is important to acknowledge that they constantly improve, e.g. through reinforcement learning from human feedback. As feedback from the people remains a vital source of information for policymakers and politicians, AI-powered astroturfing might greatly influence their behaviour. A malicious design of bogus public opinion blends the frontier between what is real and what is not. CONCLUSION Generative AI presents both opportunities and significant challenges for the future of political campaigns. This new technology can highly empower campaign staff and optimize a lot of processes. However, it also has the potential to create a lot of chaos. Candidates can use it to distort reality and create a false representation of the truth. They had been doing it before as well, albeit now generative AI enables it to happen at a much larger scale and a much faster pace. 2024 is likely to bring more of the aforementioned strategies and operations to the spotlight in the campaign circles. We can expect more disinformation, more artificially generated content, and perhaps more engagement with the voters, without knowing if there is anyone on the candidate’s side. The implications of these innovations are profound and as they continue to advance, politicians and democracies worldwide must navigate its impact with vigilance.

By Ethan Wilson The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) is an ambitious and divisive law conceived to push the USA towards its climate goals and bolster energy security, among other objectives. The choice of adjectives here is deliberate: the IRA constitutes the most significant investment into fighting climate change in the history of the USA, allocating an estimated $370 billion over ten years to energy and climate. In a textbook display of American political polarisation, the IRA was voted on along party lines – Democrats in support and Republicans in opposition. Let us break down the specifics of the law. Roughly two-thirds of the $370 billion consists of federal tax credits that incentivise clean electricity production and investment in renewable energy manufacturing, renewable fuel production, carbon sequestration, and other clean technologies like hydrogen or direct air capture. The remaining one-third comprises federal government appropriations (bills authorising government spending). These include grants to encourage energy efficiency in housing, funds to support conservation practices that limit forestry and agriculture emissions, and investment in reducing air pollution and supporting vulnerable communities. Predictions and Realities: The Reasoning behind the Inflation Reduction Act Climate resilience and innovation-driven energy security are two guiding principles behind the Inflation Reduction Act. A study by the Department of Energy published in August of 2023 – a year after the passing of the legislation – reports that, together with the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Inflation Reduction Act will reduce greenhouse emissions by 1 billion tons by 2030. The IRA is also estimated to have generated upwards of 170,000 jobs in renewable energy already, a figure that is predicted to increase to 912,000 average annual jobs through the next ten years. Third-party estimates report the IRA is set to reduce the deficit by more than $100 billion over the next decade. The suddenly available pool of subsidies has also spurred productivity and private investment in green energy manufacturing. The data points towards the Biden administration’s intention to prioritise climate change. The IRA should be understood as an aggressive spending policy focused on the environment and a signal of American ambition to lead global climate and energy efforts. The Democrats have clearly demonstrated their will to disassociate from Trump’s policy and rhetoric on climate change by rejoining the Paris Agreement; the IRA is yet another step in the same direction. Criticisms of the Inflation Reduction Act Why, then, is there such staunch opposition to this law from Republicans? In some cases, it stems from denial of or disinterest in climate change. In others, it may be a result of party politics. These issues, however, should not constitute the bulk of the discussion. There are criticisms of the IRA that hold substantial weight and should be explored accordingly. The biggest is that the Inflation Reduction Act does not reduce inflation. Admittedly, this sounds counterintuitive, considering inflation (measured by CPI) dropped from 8.3% to 3.2% in the first full year of the IRA. Nevertheless, the Penn Wharton Budget Model concluded the IRA’s impact on inflation is statistically insignificant. Zero, in practical terms. The consensus among economists seems to be that post-pandemic supply chain improvements and Federal Reserve interest rate hikes were responsible for slowing inflation. President Biden regrets naming the bill the Inflation Reduction Act, stating: “I wish I hadn’t called it that because it has less to do with inflation than it does with providing alternatives that generate economic growth”. Despite some of the optimistic predictions outlined in the previous section, one must note that Democrats passed the IRA amidst a period of recession where inflation was destroying the purchasing power of American families, who were already suffering from extortionate food and gas prices, by an average of $6,800 per two-income household. This came after another massive spending bill the year before, the American Rescue Plan worth $1.9 trillion, significantly contributing to the inflationary environment. The Inflation Reduction Act will be primarily funded by an increase in US debt, already at 121.6% of its GDP. Further, the bill is estimated to increase taxes for the average household by $4,500 over the next decade, though real costs for the American taxpayer could far exceed expected values. Subsidies will only expire once emissions targets are met; failure to do so will simply extend how long these taxes are paid. Conversely, if they are met, studies show the USA could lose out on up to $7.7 trillion in economic growth and an annual average of 1.2 million jobs. Reflections on the Inflation Reduction Act Economic policy on the environment must be underpinned by a robust understanding of the economic context within which it will be executed. Reducing the deficit is necessary, though the IRA seems to do so misguidedly. The peak inflation last year was due to demand outpacing supply, yet the decrease in deficit within the IRA comes from raising taxes (reducing supply) instead of lowering expenditure (reducing demand). Also, the bulk of new corporate taxes will be paid by manufacturers, which is conducive to less production or higher costs. Altogether, the Inflation Reduction Act seemed more about betting on green subsidies than reducing inflation. In a broader context, the IRA reflects the environmental policy challenges of today: striking a balance between environment and economy. Incentivising the production of cheap and clean energy and fighting to reduce greenhouse gas emissions should unequivocally be policy objectives. However, awareness of the economic landscape is imperative for the design of such policies. Perhaps the Biden administration could have slashed spending to lower the deficit while reducing red tape and other barriers to entry. A more gradual plan to prop up the competitiveness of renewables over time while decreasing dependency on fossil fuels could have been devised away from artificial price distortions. Once again, the point of equilibrium is nearly impossible to find. Policymakers find themselves between a rock and a hard place, challenged to account for the well-being of citizens today and that of the environment tomorrow – a truly strenuous balancing act.

By Tauseef Parkar After a 146-day standoff, the writers' strike finally came to an end. On September 24, the Writers Guild of America (WGA), the body representing Hollywood's writers, and the Alliance of Motion Picture and Television Producers (AMPTP), the association of the industry's leading studios and producers, announced their agreement. The strike officially concluded when the WGA ratified its contract with the AMPTP. The Writers Guild of America reported that 99% of the Writers Guild of America (WGA) members voted in favour of the contract, with 8,435 members saying "yes" and only 90 voting "no", according to the union's announcement on 9TH October 2023. This new contract will be effective from Sept. 25, 2023, to May 1, 2026. Art finds itself in uncharted waters in an era punctuated by technological innovations and shifting socio-economic terrains. The recent strikes by writers and actors unearth more profound questions about the space of art in this digital age. One pressing concern is the role of AI in the arts. As screenwriters grapple with the prospect of AI scripts and actors facing potential replacement by 3D mapping and CGI, it is clear that technology is not merely complementing art but is shaping its very nature. With platforms now showcasing AI-generated podcasts and eerily accurate imitations of public figures, the conundrum stands: Can AI truly replace human creativity? Erosion of Earnings in the Streaming Age On March 14, the Writers Guild of America (WGA) published a report titled "Writers Are Not Keeping Up." The central focus was on how the emergence and dominance of streaming platforms have adversely affected writers' earnings. The report highlights a concerning trend in writers' compensation. Despite a marked increase in series budgets in the past decade, the average pay of writers and producers has declined. Disturbingly, a vast majority of staff writers (98%) are now earning just the Minimum Basic Agreement (MBA) rate. The report also emphasised other disparities. For instance, comedy-variety writers on streaming platforms were not given the basic MBA protections like their episodic series counterparts despite working for the same streaming companies. On the film front, there has been a concerning 14% reduction in screenwriters' pay over the past five years when adjusted for inflation. A Triumph for the Writers In response to these glaring issues, The WGA effectively secured several of its stipulated goals, such as stricter rules on AI use, mandated minimum staffing, bonuses tied to streaming viewership, data transparency, increased contributions to health and pension plans, and a rise in streaming residuals, among other benefits. Additionally, they negotiated a 5% pay raise for this year, with subsequent increases of 4% in 2024 and 3.5% in 2025. The WGA's provisions on artificial intelligence (AI) are particularly noteworthy. The guidelines permit the application of generative AI tools by writers or producers but underscore that such AI must not compromise writers' roles or remuneration. According to the tentative agreement, a writer has the discretion to employ AI in their work, given they have the company's approval and adherence to relevant company policies. However, the company cannot force writers to use specific AI tools like ChatGPT in their writing process. The agreement also addresses concerns about using writers' works to train AI, especially after reports that companies like Meta were doing so. The WGA believes such practices might violate existing agreements or intellectual property laws. SAG-AFTRA's Struggle: An Ongoing Battle On the evening of October 11, the AMPTP announced a suspension in their ongoing negotiations with SAG-AFTRA, citing a considerable difference in their stands. In their statement, they commented, “It is clear that the gap between the AMPTP and SAG-AFTRA is too great, and conversations are no longer moving us in a productive direction.” A significant contention was SAG-AFTRA's proposal of a "viewership bonus." While rewarding performers of hit projects, this bonus would force studios to reveal streaming numbers - a disclosure they have consistently resisted. According to the studios, adopting this would mean an unsustainable additional expenditure of $800 million each year. But compensation is not the only bone of contention. SAG-AFTRA countered in the early hours of October 12, expressing dismay that AMPTP's offer was even less favourable than their pre-strike proposal. They also claimed that AMPTP had inflated the costs of their proposal to the media by a staggering 60%. Further intensifying matters, SAG-AFTRA underscored that while AMPTP's offer seemingly respects performers' consent, it mandates performers to grant permission to use their digital likeness across entire film projects from day one of their employment. This issue has been particularly contentious since the strike's inception in July. Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, the union's key executive, highlighted an alarming proposal from the AMPTP: to scan and perpetually own the likeness of background actors without any further consent or compensation. Considering many of SAG-AFTRA's members depend on earnings from background roles or minor parts, such a proposal would severely impact their livelihoods. Moreover, the lingering disagreement has broader economic implications. Hollywood strikes have already dealt a crippling $5 billion blow to California's economy, as reported by the Financial Times. If both parties don't hasten a mutually beneficial agreement, individual livelihoods will suffer, and the entertainment industry will continue haemorrhaging money, with the aftershocks felt across the state's economy. This dire situation underscores the urgency for reconciliation, with higher stakes than ever. Treading the Uncertain Path of Technological Progress As we delve deeper into the rapidly changing world of technology, the unpredictable intersection of AI and the arts becomes increasingly apparent. While tech advancements offer promises of innovation and streamlined processes, they cast doubts on the value of human creativity. Streaming platforms currently dominating the entertainment arena operate on a business model prioritising the continuous influx of new subscribers. Yet, as they grapple with fluctuating viewership, the long-term viability of such a model remains uncertain. A residual system based on viewership might seem like a progressive step, but in a digital ecosystem where viewer loyalty is fickle, its sustainability is questionable. Recent shifts in Hollywood underscore not just present-day pay parity problems but hint at a potentially turbulent future for the entertainment sector. In a landscape constantly reshaped by technology, the balance between artistry and algorithms will be a focal point of contention.