21st

Famine in Gaza from Israel’s deliberate starvation policy has pushed more than half a million people into immediate danger.

Yet Israel is intensifying its war, backed by the United States and other Western allies.

How can an engineered famine be allowed happen in the 21st century?

Presenter:

Adrian Finighan

Guests:

Dr Tarek Loubani – Emergency physician and medical director at the Glia Project

Tess Ingram – Spokesperson for the UN children’s agency, UNICEF

Michael Fakhri – UN special rapporteur on the right to food

The Clippers went from “strongly, strongly considering” bringing Chris Paul back to the franchise to actually agreeing to a deal with the point guard on Monday, according to people familiar with the situation but not authorized to speak publicly.

Lawrence Frank, the Clippers’ president of basketball operations, told the media Saturday in a Zoom that Paul “obviously possesses some of the qualities we just referenced” and that led to the two sides agreeing to a veteran’s minimum deal of about $3.6 million.

Paul played joined the Clippers for the 2011-12 season and was with the team until 2017 as he teamed up with Blake Griffin and DeAndre Jordan to form the core of the “Lob City” teams.

“What I’d say about Chris is he’s a great player,” Frank said during that Zoom meeting. “He’s a great Clipper.”

In what is likely his final season in the NBA, Paul will be entering his 21st campaign and will do so in Los Angeles, where his family lives.

Paul, 40, played in all 82 games last season with the San Antonio Spurs. He averaged 28.0 minutes per game, 8.8 points, 3.6 rebounds, 7.4 assists and shot 42.7% from the field.

Over the course of his career, Paul averaged 17.0 points, 9.2 assists and shot 47% from the field and 37% from three-point range.

Paul, a 12-time NBA All-Star, was a teammate with James Harden during the 2017-18 season with the Houston Rockets.

With the addition of Paul, the Clippers now have five veteran guards. They signed Bradley Beal to a two-year, $11-million deal and they also have Harden, Kris Dunn and Bogdan Bogdanonic.

If the world is asked in a random exercise to name leaders who have weaponized nationalism, crises, and emotional triggers in world history, the textbook examples will always consist of three defining figures in international politics: Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, and Benito Mussolini. Nonetheless, there are other highly famous political characters as well that mastered the art of political manipulation, realpolitik, and conflict engineering. One of them, like the previous crisis constructors, was not only an ideologue or a demagogue but also a strategic architect of German unification and realpolitik, Otto Von Bismarck.From orchestrating wars to rallying political crises, applying ruthless pragmatism to tapping the public’s pulse for unification, and operating narratives to politically alienating adversaries, the pattern of urgency, manipulation, and crisis manufacturing for peace in Europe continues to synchronize with the coursebook that conflict agitators follow in the 21st century.

From Trump to Modi, using conflicts as a unifier in domestic politics and a reinforcer for global overlordship, or regional dominion, has been the coursebook that has set a solid ground for performative crisis politics to take center stage. The national or global urgency engineered around military operations, internal threats, and the adventures of geopolitical adversaries gives a cogent justification model for crisis exaggeration. The use of national security as a justified political tool to wage war has been a mainstay for regional security and strategic stability to thrive in a world of permacrisis. The adventures from perilous military maneuvers, Operation Midnight Hammer to Operation Sindoor, both act as textbook examples of how populist leaders weaponize crises and geopolitical tensions to gauge the international reaction. The political maneuvering that encircles the psychological urgency, which is constructed around a tense war climate, helps to update the scorecards for the states losing their diplomatic traction. Even if Trump continues to use tariffs and geopolitical crises to flex America’s Goliath-like posture in international politics, the looming reactive outbursts that will emanate from the staggering public debt of America might become its political doomsday. Therefore, as long as the self-proclamation of Nobel Prize seeking continues, crisis termination dynamics will remain complex, transitory, and inflamed as Bismarckian practices continue to juggle regional adversaries. Public debt, economic protectionism, coercive diplomacy, and realpolitik continue to redirect conflict agitators and Trump’s diplomatic canvas in global politics, but fracturing de-dollarization adventures frequently maim America’s global dominion.

The persistence of the world to engage in perpetual low-level conflicts with diplomatic stalemates, all while trying to avoid full-scale wars but also achieve strategic complacency, has caused an overlap of concepts in international security. From deterrence theories to compellence tactics and securitization to preventive or preemptive strikes, the world has engaged in a cyclical discourse where compellence has emerged as a dominating force to calculate the adversary’s response and outmaneuver them in psychological scorecards. The constantly pushed incremental pressure and false dilemma create a risk-prone environment for regional rivals to engage in a miscalculated scenario of multiple escalation dynamics, which Bismarck did in the Franco-Prussian War. These manipulative practices to provoke adversaries while creating urgency and using prestige politics to ignite a chain reaction of desperate political moves across the border have constructed new political strategies, marked with political aggression, to cogently engage in warmongering exercises. With Modi following similar models to consistently push Pakistan towards strategic miscalculations by incrementing national pressure, the illusion of choice offered by him to follow a predetermined pathway of peace approaches has become an outdated doctrine for South Asia, especially for Pakistan. The political overspill of Bismarckian diagrams drawn by Modi and the international reluctance to grant a ‘win’ to India both display that urgency and crisis politics, with victimhood populism and political desperation to delegitimize opponents, have lost substantial ground. Following the same model, Trump seems to be lingering at his electoral promises of terminating conflicts around the globe and reviving the abstract idea of Pax Americana for international politics, portraying America’s influence as an urgent necessity for global regulation and recalibration. The ashes of dysfunctionalities after settling conflicts through coercive diplomatic and military endeavors are a grim feature of Trump’s diplomatic and ideological doctrinal moves. From transactional diplomacy for the Gulf to a reverse Kissingerian model for the Russia-China alliance, Trump’s diplomatic model seems to be more instinctive than consistent with ideological lexicons.

The Bismarck model of using political timing, psychology, and provocation—all three strategies—designed a cogent and adept method of foreign policy of weaponizing crisis and creating urgency to shroud political cognition, which Modi seems to be institutionalizing as an accepted practice against Pakistan on domestic grounds. The political instrumentalization of regular clashes and crises in South Asia to create a justification model for counteroffensive maneuvers and warmongering narratives revolves around important political events. From electoral needs to domestic diversions, or regional dominations to international tabbing of adversaries as regional disturbances, Modi appears to desperately wrap Pakistan in a diplomatic cloak of isolation. With the Bismarckian pointer of manipulative outlines, Modi would perilously engineer another crisis to conceal national failures post-Balakot-Sindoor. If Modi follows a similar pattern of crisis construction, just like Bismarck did, the launchpad for such military and political maneuvers would be the northern areas of Pakistan, particularly Gilgit-Baltistan. Despite the previous retaliation patterns of Pakistan, creating a risk-prone conflict with reactive outcomes, Modi will invite a berserk amount of regional pressure and escalation. Theoretically and practically, igniting a conflict with new external and domestic spectacles, Modi appears to be in a desperate cycle of reviving electoral domination and regional prestige. The retaliatory approach from Islamabad and Beijing would trap the conflict from two opposite sides, with Beijing’s militaristic adventures in the northern disputed territories. Even if proxies or informants engineer something like Pulwama or Pahalgam, India would still be in a high-risk gambit that could meet unimaginable results if the Bismarckian urgency and crisis weaponizing playbook gets mishandled and cloaks foreign policy objectives with electoral overlordship gambles.

The movie widely regarded as one of the best sci-fi films ever made and is an absolute must-watch for any fans of the dystopian genre

This year has seen a significant rise in dystopian thrillers, with series like The Last of Us gripping telly viewers and films such as 28 Years Later set to grace the big screen this June. With an abundance of options, it’s easy to feel swamped, but if you’re on the hunt for a true classic of the dystopian genre, I wholeheartedly suggest Alfonso Cuarón’s Children of Men.

I only recently had the pleasure of viewing Children of Men and was riveted from the opening scene. It swiftly climbed the ranks to become one of my all-time favourite films, and I was particularly taken by its peculiar optimism amidst the bleak post-apocalyptic setting.

What Children of Men is about

The world has descended into utter chaos as humanity grapples with impending extinction. The United Kingdom stands as one of the few remaining countries still operational, albeit under an authoritarian regime.

Theo Faron (Clive Owen), a disenchanted former activist, has ceased his resistance and now meanders through life as a civil servant. He’s so disconnected from the world that he barely registers the bombings, caged refugees, and public executions he encounters on his commute.

One day, Theo is abducted by his ex-wife Julian, who heads a rebel faction known as The Fishes, battling against the government for refugee rights. Julian implores Theo to safeguard Kee, a young African refugee, and assist her in escaping the country safely.

However, Theo soon discovers that Kee is astonishingly pregnant, carrying the world’s sole known unborn child. Driven by the need to protect this miracle, he risks everything to keep Kee’s condition under wraps and get her safely to the enigmatic Human Project, scientists seeking a cure for the global fertility crisis.

So why should you watch Children of Men?

Despite its stark backdrop, the film’s protagonist embodies hopefulness in his unwavering dedication to the prospect of a rejuvenated world.

The outpouring of support for Kee amidst such turmoil underscores a compelling truth: even in the bleakest circumstances, human kindness endures, proving that we have not strayed from our compassionate nature.

One of the captivating aspects of Children of Men is how palpably real and weathered its universe feels, peppered with background information gleaned from transient news reports, advertisements, and leaflets—a testament to the environment’s rich storytelling texture.

Packed with nuances, Children of Men invites viewers to engage deeply, promising new discoveries upon every viewing.

What critics are saying about Children of Men

Boasting an impressive 92% Rotten Tomatoes rating from over 250 critic reviews, Children of Men was also in the Oscar race for three categories (Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Cinematography, and Best Editing) back in 2007.

Brian Tallerico of UGO hailed it as “feels more relevant than almost every film set in the present day and is better than almost every other film made this year.”

Kathi Maio from The Magazine of Fantasy & Science Fiction remarked: “This is one movie that will have a lasting impact even if you are forced to watch it on a ten-inch black and white Zenith.”

Peter Travers, writing for Rolling Stone at the time, placed it as the runner-up in his best films of the 2000s list, commenting: “No movie this decade was more redolent of sorrowful beauty and exhilarating action. You don’t just watch the car ambush scene (pure camera wizardry)-you live inside it. That’s Cuarón’s magic: He makes you believe.”

Where to watch Children of Men

The film can be streamed on Apple TV’s £8.99 monthly subscription or via Now TV’s £9.99 a month Cinema membership. You can also purchase Children of Men on Amazon Prime for £5.99.

SANTIAGO, Chile, May 25 (UPI) — Once viewed as peripheral players, Protestant churches have risen over the past two decades to become influential actors in the spiritual and political realms across Latin America.

According to data from the Pew Research Center, Protestants have increased from just 1% of the Latin American population at the start of the 20th century to nearly 20% by 2024. In contrast, the Catholic population has decreased to 69% from 94% over the same period.

The shift is especially pronounced in Honduras and Guatemala, where Protestants now outnumber Catholics, and in Brazil, where they account for 28% of the population.

This demographic growth has been accompanied by the increasing political involvement of religious leaders, many of whom have won public office or directly influenced state policies.

The power of Protestant churches stems from their close ties to local communities and their ability to offer concrete spiritual guidance. They also have shown political ability in shaping debates on conservative issues such as abortion, LGBTQ rights and sex education.

The rise of the far right in Latin America and the growth of Protestant churches are not separate trends, according to Israel Vilchez, director of Christian news outlet Cosmovision.cl.

“They have a close connection that is reshaping political agendas and challenging the traditional Catholic dominance,” Vilchez said.

In Brazil, the Evangelical Parliamentary Front is one of the most powerful blocs in Congress and backed the right-wing government of Jair Bolsonaro under the slogan “family, homeland and God.”

In Guatemala, Protestant actor Jimmy Morales won the presidency in 2016 and aligned his policies with conservative groups.

In Costa Rica, pastor Fabricio Alvarado reached the presidential runoff in 2018.

In Mexico, the protestant Social Encounter Party supported President Andrés Manuel López Obrador in that year’s election.

In Argentina, Presidential Javier Milei received support from the Christian Alliance of Evangelical Churches during his campaign, although some groups later raised concerns over policies they said could weaken social justice.

Protestant support for right-wing political parties is not based solely on ideological alignment, according to Chilean sociologist Felipe Cruz.

“It is primarily a strong opposition to so-called progressive public policies, such as same-sex marriage and gender identity laws,” Cruz said.

In Chile, Protestant churches represent 17% of the population, according to the Center for Public Studies. The Chilean Congress includes a Protestant caucus consisting of members from various right-wing parties and the Christian Social Party.

“Churches will identify more with right-wing parties as long as they support fundamental, non-negotiable values such as opposition to abortion, homosexuality and certain approaches to education,” said Bishop Emiliano Soto, president of the Expanded Board of Evangelical Churches of Chile.

With a growing social base and increasingly visible ties to political power, protestant churches are emerging as key players in Latin America’s future. Their influence is reshaping not only the region’s religious landscape but also its political map in a time of constant change.