As the U.S. election looms, former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris are both working to mobilise their supporters, ensuring strong voter engagement by Election Day on November 5. While both campaigns employ similar tactics, the Harris campaign has followed recent Democratic strategy by leveraging celebrity endorsements to inspire younger voters, who historically have lower turnout rates but tend to lean Democratic. This challenge with young voters, contrasts with the Trump campaign’s stronger base among White Evangelicals, who, despite not making up a majority of the population, reliably vote in large numbers across the United States (U.S.). The Harris campaign’s reliance on Hollywood celebrities highlights the industry’s alignment with liberal causes and the need to mobilise young voters, compared to the consistent support Trump receives from conservative religious groups, who form a reliable voter base. The divide between Harris’s Hollywood and Trump’s Evangelicals is another representation of another dividing line in the U.S. and raises questions.

On August 14, the World Health Organisation (WHO) officially classified the rising cases of MPOX in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and neighbouring countries as a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). This decision highlights the serious threat posed by the current MPOX outbreak, with fears that the virus could potentially escalate into a global health crisis.   This marks the second time that MPOX has been designated as a PHEIC by the WHO, following the 2022 outbreak, which was the first time the virus had spread widely outside of its endemic regions in Central and West Africa. The occurrence of two significant outbreaks within just four years has raised concerns globally, especially in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, many are now wary of the potential for an MPOX outbreak to become a new pandemic.

Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of Hamas’s political bureau, was assassinated in Tehran, Iran on July 31, 2024, following his attendance of the inauguration of Iran’s new president. Iran and Hamas have accused Israel of the assassination but Israel has given no response, as is common practice when Israel is involved in an assassination. The assassination of Haniyeh followed the earlier killing of Fuad Shukr a senior Hezbollah commander in Beirut by Israel, as retaliation for an attack that left 12 dead in the Israeli-occupied Golan Heights.   Israel has stated previously that it would target Hamas officials wherever they are following October 7, and were successful in December when they assassinated Haniyeh’s deputy in Beirut, which brought ceasefire talks to a halt.   The targeting of Haniyeh who was leading negotiation efforts for a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas War is a serious escalation, and its occurrence in the heart of Iran directly following the inauguration of Iran’s president, not only has serious implications on the Israel-Hamas War, but for Iran and its proxies as well, who have been targeted recently by Israel.   So far, Iran has not provided information on how the assassination occurred, with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) stating that the attack is under investigation, it is likely that a precision guided missile was used to target the IRGC veteran’s mansion that he was staying in. Following the assassination, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has pledged that Israel will face "harsh punishment" for its action in Tehran.   This is not the first time that Israel has been able to penetrate Iran’s borders to conduct assassinations, Israel has routinely been able to target Iranian officials such as its yearslong assassination campaign against Iranian nuclear experts and others involved in the Iran’s nuclear program. Most recent was the 2020 assassination of, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, a leading Iranian military nuclear scientist, was killed by a remote-controlled machine pistol while driving outside Tehran.   Given Iran's direct and massive missile barrage against Israel in April, following the bombing of its embassy in Damascus, the world now faces significant questions: How will Tehran respond to the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh on its soil? Moreover, does Iran have the capability or incentive to contain the actions of Hezbollah and the Houthis, especially after Israel’s killing of Hezbollah’s Fuad Shukr in Beirut and its bombing of the Houthi’s Hodeidah Port?

It has been an extremely eventful month for the United States. In the span of just one month, we have seen a disastrous debate performance by President Joseph Biden, the attempted assassination of former President Donald Trump, a coup fomenting among Democrats against Biden, Biden contracting COVID-19, and finally, Biden dropping out only 107 days before Election Day and endorsing Vice President (VP) Kamala Harris as the Democratic Party candidate.   All accounts of Biden’s decision suggest that what finally convinced the 81-year-old was not pressure from fellow Democrats to drop out — despite Biden insisting he would stay in the race a day before his announcement — but rather polling conducted by his campaign in key battleground states, which essentially showed that he had no path to the Oval Office and would additionally have to spend significantly in Virginia and New Mexico, states that were considered safely Democratic.   This isn’t the first time an incumbent president has decided to bow out of a presidential election. In 1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ) did the same, leading to an open Democratic Convention that, coupled with the anti-war movement, resulted in rioting in the streets of Chicago. Similarly, following Biden’s decision, the Democratic Party will be having an open convention in August at a time of high political polarisation. When LBJ announced he would not seek reelection, he gave the Democratic Party 219 days to assemble and organise; they failed to do so and lost the election. Biden has only given the Democratic Party and their chosen candidate — almost certainly VP Kamala Harris — 107 days to run a campaign against Donald Trump, whom Biden has consistently described as the greatest threat to American democracy in the country’s history.   Biden’s decision raises significant questions, the most significant being does Kamala Harris have enough time to mount a serious campaign in less than four months?

The assassination attempt on Former President Donald Trump is the closest a president or presidential candidate has come to being assassinated since the shooting of President Ronald Regan by John Hinckley Jr. in 1981. President Jospeh Biden was quick to condemn the attempt saying “There is no place in America for this kind of violence — for any violence. Ever. Period. No exception. We can’t allow this violence to be normalized.”   Despite his call for unity and a cooling of tempers, Biden's assertion that this particular violence has no place in the U.S. overlooks a significant historical context. Political violence has been central to the formation of the U.S., with guns being one of the many instruments used to shape the nation and its trajectory.   Every U.S. president that has been assassinated or targeted was through the use of a gun. Presidents Abraham Lincoln, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, and John F. Kennedy were all shot and killed. This violence was not restricted to presidents alone; civil rights leaders such as Medgar Evers, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King Jr., and Fred Hampton were all shot and killed in less than a decade.   The attempt on Trump’s life is a stark reminder of the polarization and political violence that has always been at the heart of the U.S., and which has increased in recent years, largely due to the politics of Trump himself. He now finds himself a victim of the very forces that he has been inflaming, and this attempt on his life will have significant implications for the upcoming presidential election and beyond.

On May 19, while returning from the inauguration of the Giz Galasi Dam, Iranian President Ebrahim Raisi’s helicopter crashed near Varzaqan, Iran. Initially described as a “hard landing” it became apparent by the end of the day that there were no survivors. The crash killed all on board, including President Raisi and Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian.

OpenAI released its AI chatbot in November 2022. ChatGPT is able to generate text, answer questions, summarise information, and write code, the eerily human chatbot has taken the world by storm, setting the record for fastest growing application in history. It took Instagram 2.5 years to reach 100 million monthly active users and TikTok nine months. ChatGPT attracted 100 million monthly active users in less than three months.   ChatGPT becoming an internet sensation has created fascinating use cases from writing high school essays to passing business and medical schools’ exams. Its usage has also brought about a slew of ethical concerns related to data privacy, content ownership, and its potential to disrupt nearly every job market. I sat down with ChatGPT to see what it had to say for itself.

Humanity’s ability to create permanent structures has been an essential part of civilization for thousands of years and was crucial for our transition from hunter-gatherers to settled peoples. As groups of people settled down in a single place, we have had to advance construction techniques and technologies to further the development of our societies, our ability to advance construction techniques has led to the creation of structures that inspire humanity and continue to push the boundaries of what we think is possible.   Recently however, the construction industry has been slow in adopting new innovations that have helped revolutionize other industries, at a time where it is expected that 300 million new homes are needed by 2030 and construction related activities contributed to 37% of global CO2 emissions in 2021, the need to adopt new technologies that will increase efficiency and reduce emissions is of paramount importance and 3D printing has been touted as the solution to the construction industry’s woes.

Rare earth elements (REEs) are a group of 17 elements that are crucial for the production of a wide range of high-tech products. Ironically, REEs are not “rare” and are found abundantly throughout the world, however, when found they are in such low concentrations that extraction is not feasible. Furthermore, when found in higher concentrations they must be separated from other elements, a process that is both environmentally and financially costly.   REEs are vital for several industries and are used in electronics, military technology, and most importantly, renewable energy. Although substitutes exist for REEs with producers attempting to replace them, REEs continue to be more effective, therefore, given their importance in the production of renewable technologies such as wind turbines and electric vehicles, demand is expected to increase, with the European Union (EU) alone expecting REEs needs to increase fivefold as it and the rest of the world transitions to net-zero.   Currently, China dominates the global REEs market, accounting for over 35% of the world’s REEs reserves and 70% of production. China's domination of the REEs market has raised concerns over supply chain security, dependence on China, and China’s use of REEs as a political bargaining piece; such as when it cut exports to Japan following the arrest of a Chinese sailor by Japan. Recently, discoveries of REE deposits in Norway and Sweden have made headlines. The discoveries could have the potential to disrupt the market and have far-reaching implications.  

On November 30th, the San Diego police department received approval from supervisors to deploy robots with lethal capabilities in emergency situations, making it the second California city to publicly discuss the use of remote lethal force after Oakland in October 2022. The decision generated immediate backlash which pushed supervisors to put the program on hold following a vote on December 6th.   San Diego and Oakland may have halted the use of “killer robots” for now, but they have been used previously in the United States after Dallas police used a robot to kill a mass shooter in 2016. The mass shooter had already killed five police officers and injured dozens more. The robot was equipped with an explosive, then moved to a wall behind the shooter, then the bombs exploded killing the mass shooter and slightly damaging the robots arm, marking the first usage of a “killer robot” by U.S. law enforcement.   Robots in domestic law enforcement are not unusual in U.S. police departments, and many have operated robots for close to a decade but they have been used to inspect suspicious packages or deliver items during hostage negotiations without risking police officers and until 2016 not for lethal purposes.

One of the most critical issues currently facing the Middle East is the changing composition of its demographic structure. A massive cohort of young people — known as a youth bulge — is challenging policymakers, with youth policies affecting security, education, the labour market, and welfare programs, among other areas. Given the relative stability and wealth of the Gulf states, this is an issue that is not often associated with the region. However, handling a growing young population is just as challenging in the Gulf.   The Gulf is one of the wealthiest regions worldwide; in terms of GDP per capita, it is distinctive due to its unique hydrocarbon reserves compared to a relatively small national population. Gulf states rely on oil revenue — to varying degrees — to attract private investors and provide extensive public services and subsidies to nationals. With not enough diversification in their economies, government spending in the Gulf states will continue to be a barrier to economic diversification. To sustain the high standard of living attained by Emirati and Saudi societies to the youth and the coming generations, the two countries must set strategies and plans to integrate youth while continuing to diversify their economies away from oil. This study explores the impact of the post-oil reforms and strategy on the youth, including education, employment, social contract, and identity.   The study applies Late Rentier State Theory to analyse the relationship between youth, the Emirati and Saudi states, the post-oil reforms, and their future trajectories. The analysis is guided by some of the characteristics identified by Late RST which focus on the impact of globalization, modernization policies, diversification, the state’s encouragement of entrepreneurship, and the sustainability of their strategies with regards to the extent to which they accommodate youth’s needs and account for changing societal structures and expectations.   While the study does not refute the youth bulge hypothesis, which contends that states where young adults constitute a large proportion of the population are expected to face an elevated risk of political violence and interstate conflict, widely used in the literature; it adds to it by proposing that while those risks exist, they can be alleviated under certain circumstances. Those circumstances include policies and strategies to be taken by governments that are relevant to youth needs and the surrounding environment. Namely, taking into consideration both agency and structure.   The study finds that, for the United Arab Emirates, the results of education and Emiratisation policies are likely to shape the shifting social contract between young Emiratis and the government, and could lead to a range of outcomes, from the promising- a population of empowered, educated, and skilled Emirati youth- to the stagnant- disappointed and apathetic youth persistent in their preference of the public sector- to the more worrisome- yet unlikely- active opposition by dissatisfied youth.   With regards to the Kingdom Saudi Arabia, the study finds that while the government is investing massively in educational and employment reforms, young Saudis need to adopt entrepreneurial values and work ethic to ensure the success of “Neo-Saudism". This in turn requires a certain level of responsiveness from the government and possibly more opportunities for youth to participate in decision making in the near future. The speed of change and the extent to which youth’s values and perspectives may clash with those of older generations is yet to be determined. The real challenge for Saudi decision makers and strategists will be in maintaining balance and stable relations between different societal groups.

The United States and Russia have a long and complicated history. The USSR and the United States of America were allies during the Second World War and quickly turned rivals during the Cold War (1947 – 1991). It was throughout this period that the ideological differences between the two superpowers reached its height, with the formation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) by the United States, and the USSR responding by creating the Warsaw Pact effectively splitting the world between East and West. Despite there being no direct conflict between the United States and USSR, each state would actively participate in proxy wars; where agents supplied by them would engage in hostilities such as in the Chinese Civil War (1944 – 1949), the Korean War (1950 – 1953), the Vietnam War (1955 – 1975), and the Soviet-Afghan War (1979 – 1989).   Furthermore, the United States and USSR would attempt to place weapons within each other’s spheres of influence with the United States doing so in Italy and Turkey in 1961 and the USSR responding by supplying Cuba which ultimately led to the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, and nearly brought both superpowers to nuclear war. Following the fall of the USSR, the United States was the only remaining superpower and relations between the United States and the newly formed Russian Federation began to improve, however by 1999 that came to an end as NATO further expanded in Eastern Europe with Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic joining, in 2004 Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania joined as well, all had been former members of the USSR and were viewed by Russia as part of its sphere of influence.   Since then, United States-Russia relations have been consistently deteriorating with recent significant events being the invasion and annexation of Crimea in 2014 and accusations by the United States that Russia manipulated the 2016 Presidential Election. It is within this context of United States led encroachment into territory that Russia believes culturally and historically should be its own that the Russo-Ukrainian War resumed flowing the invasion of Crimea, below is where we will analyse what the United States has to gain and the legacy the Cold War casts on the Russia-United States relationship.