Thailand Legalizes Same-Sex Marriage

Patipat Janthong, Reuters

On Thursday, January 23, 2025, Thailand became the first country in Southeast Asia to legalize same-sex marriage. Joining Taiwan and Nepal in becoming only the third country in all of Asia to do so, the legislation is no less impressive from a country with widespread conservative ideals. Nonetheless, Thai LGBTQ+ individuals have often expressed their experiences with blatant discrimination despite Thailand’s long-standing reputation as a queer safe haven, especially in comparison to other states in the region. Representation at the federal level has also long been dominated by conservative politicians. 

However, the legislation swept through both the House of Representatives and Senate last year with overwhelming support. Of the 415 members present at the voting ceremony in Thailand’s lower chamber, 400 voted for the measure; similarly, of the 152 members present to vote in the Senate, 130 approved. Furthermore, as a constitutional monarchy, the legislation was officially codified after King Maha Vajiralongkorn’s endorsement. Under the new law, same-sex couples receive all the same benefits of marriage that heterosexual couples do: full financial, medical, and legal rights and protections.

The Marriage Equality Act, as the legislation is known, amends Article 1448 of Thailand’s Civil and Commercial Code by changing the qualifications for marriage from “man and woman” to “individuals.” The country’s Prime Minister, Paetongtarn Shinawatra of the ruling Pheu Thai party, supported the legislation and celebrated its enactment in a video address to the country where she announced, “From now on, all love will be certified by law. All couples will live with honor and dignity in Thailand.”

According to the Department of Provincial Administration, at least 1,832 couples from across the country registered their marriages on Thursday. Though there is much work left to be done in Thailand regarding equal protection under the law, especially for LGBTQ+ individuals, Thursday nonetheless marks a significant milestone in a positive direction for the queer community in Southeast Asia. 

Trump’s Day One Executive Orders on Immigration

Trump signs a series of executive orders. Avery Lotz, Axios

Within hours of taking office, President Donald Trump has signed 26 executive orders into existence, the largest number to be signed on a president’s Inauguration Day ever. Not only have these orders rescinded 78 previously implemented orders by the Biden administration, but they also have far-ranging effects, impacting an assortment of areas including foreign policy, social programs, immigration, the environment and energy, and criminal justice. 

Of these executive orders, eight are focused on immigration rights, refugee laws, and the situation along the US-Mexico border. Chief among these was his move to declare the crisis at the border a national emergency, allowing Trump to swiftly and easily redirect funds and deploy military troops into the area. To give this additional support, he also passed a second order “clarifying the military’s role” in national security, referring specifically and repeatedly to the borders and the military’s role in guarding against an invasion. In doing so, he grants the Secretary of Defense the power to mobilize thousands of troops to send to the border. 

In addition to executive orders focused on the southern border, Trump also passed an order regarding “protection from foreign terrorists,” introducing new criteria for screening across agencies for those trying to enter the country. Some of these new criteria include being screened to the “maximum degree,” requiring immense background information and identification requirements that many immigrants can’t provide.

Of the other five orders, three speak specifically on guarding against invasions, with one stating that Homeland Security Task Forces will be deployed in all states, and another saying entry immigration into the US has been halted until further notice. The third suspends the United States Refugee Admission Program (USRAP), eliminating the pathway for refugees to enter the country. Finally, a fourth ends birthright citizenship, meaning that even though someone might be born in the United States, that does not automatically make them a US citizen.

Along with all these executive orders, Trump also promised numerous times throughout his campaign to begin a “mass deportation” campaign targeting 1.4 million illegal immigrants in the U.S.. Local police and departments across the country have pushed back on these orders, saying they will not engage in harsh deportation raids. Yet when comparing the number of ICE arrests made over the past couple of months (283 in September 2024 versus 500 within Trump’s first three days in office), it appears that Trump’s plan is already in full swing. 

Worries remain high across the country surrounding these immigration orders, especially within families with children in school after Trump overturned the 2011 policy banning immigration arrests at schools. In cities such as Chicago, previously busy areas have significantly dropped in foot traffic, and general sentiment throughout the streets has shifted remarkably. Despite Trump’s short time in office, the effects of his actions have reverberated throughout the country, and his administration has made one thing clear: this is only the beginning.

The Tech Oligarchy: Cut a Check and Watch Trumpian Policy Bend to You

Photo taken by Julia Demaree Nikhinson | Credit: AP News

Following former President Biden’s warning of the rise of the tech billionaire oligarchy in his farewell speech, the second inauguration of President Trump confirmed the reality that the wealthy tech elite hold immense power over US politics. While the ultra-wealthy have long held significant influence in the political sphere, the blatant display of President Trump’s priorities was rather jarring. 

Traditionally, the seats closest to the president are held for guests of honor or family of the president. This year, the prestigious spots were taken by an impressive lineup of CEOs, including Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos, Google CEO Sundar Pichai, and of course, SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk. 

Trump’s administration is clearly operating under a “pay to win” ideology. Meta, Google, Microsoft, OpenAI and Amazon all donated $1 million each to the inauguration fund. Elon Musk spent $277 million backing the campaigns of Trump and other Republicans. As the world’s wealthiest man, and the newly announced head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Musk’s investment into the Trump administration lacks any subtlety. 

In the flurry of executive orders signed by Trump and other actions taken in his first few days back in office, a notable and unsurprising pattern has emerged across the various policy decisions: profit for corporations over the public interest. 

With a whole slew of actions taken since his inauguration as evidence of his willingness to cater to corporations, it’s clear that the entanglement of Trump and the tech industry is one of the most prominent relationships setting the tone for the next four years. The ordeal regarding the TikTok ban, which was upheld by the Supreme Court and later paused by Trump’s executive order, seems to be a political theatre-esque ploy to gain support from younger generations by painting Trump as the savior of TikTok. When users were kicked off during the app’s blackout, they were met with a message of hope in President Trump: “A law banning TikTok has been enacted in the U.S. Unfortunately, that means you can't use TikTok for now. We are fortunate that President Trump has indicated that he will work with us on a solution to reinstate TikTok once he takes office.” After TikTok was put back online for US servers, users were then greeted with another Trump-praising pop-up message, “As a result of President Trump's efforts, TikTok is back in the U.S.”

Post-blackout, some users suspect that TikTok’s algorithm has undergone changes in favor of pro-Trump content. While data privacy is problematic and serves as a valid source of scrutiny against TikTok, a digital platform independent of and decentralized from the US government presents the ability to share unsuppressed criticism of US politics and the dissemination of a vast variety of political perspectives outside the mainstream media. Without space to explore an assortment of viewpoints and interact with diverse creators, unregulated or intentionally structured algorithms can promote biased content, push political narratives and agendas, and garner massive support from unparalleled exposure. 

It seems TikTok has now conformed to the practice of flattering Trump in pursuit of its own self-interest, mirroring the rest of the social media and tech industry. With the fall of fact-checking and content moderation on Meta platforms, Twitter’s backslide into chaos under Musk, coupled with TikTok’s newfound affinity for President Trump, he has arguably monopolized influence over social media. While  there are alternative platforms emerging, such as Bluesky, Twitter’s biggest counterpart and competitor, they lack the seniority and social establishment that Meta platforms hold from years of user engagement. Exemplifying the networking effect, the value of Twitter currently still outweighs that of Bluesky, as the majority of users have yet to migrate from Twitter to competitors. However, Bluesky did recently hit 27 million users, and Twitter is indeed experiencing a mass exodus— so perhaps the tide will turn as word of the Twitter alternative spreads. 

The rich have pulled strings behind politics for decades, but the nature and unique power held by social media giants is cause for major concern. Controlling the narrative on political topics and suppressing opposing viewpoints can manipulate users to shift their opinions or prohibit them from discovering new ones. The power of the algorithm is the supreme influence over what content people are exposed to; by pushing individually specified content, the potential for creating echo chambers is quite high. 

In response to the immense power Big Tech holds over US political processes, tech reform advocacy organizations have called for concrete policy solutions, in particular updating “the law that created the internet”: Section 230. Enacted by Congress in 1996, it protects social media and tech companies from being held liable for user posts on their platforms, while simultaneously giving them free reign over their content moderation. Initially intended to protect platforms and websites from legal risk by allowing them to host user forums and discussions without fear of liability, Section 230 gives far too much unregulated power to platforms acting out of political interest and profit. A high standard of regulation, fact-checking, and transparency is necessary to mitigate rampant political corruption. The rise of Big Tech’s influence in US politics cannot be ignored, and must be addressed as soon as possible. 

No, Maduro Won’t Invade Puerto Rico

CNN en Español

At a closing speech made at the Global International Antifascist Festival, Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro made claims about liberating Puerto Rico with Brazilian troops. He invoked Simón Bolívar’s goal of liberation from Western oppression to argue for the necessity of Venezuelan intervention. This threat was met with backlash from the Puerto Rico governor, Jenniffer González-Colón, who called it an “open threat to the United States.”

Maduro’s words, while aggressive, are all bark and no bite.

Following Maduro’s internationally rebuked re-election in July, this divisive move could be interpreted as an attempt to restore legitimacy in the wake of electoral discontent. This strategy, known as diversionary foreign policy, has been used by leaders to restore unity and patriotism around the state. Under this theory, the possibility of war could create a rally ‘round the flag effect that would invoke nationalist sentiment and restore internal cohesion, skyrocketing Maduro’s approval rating. 

While the conditions may be ripe, and a conflict could generate positive effects for Maduro, waging a war with the U.S. would be a disastrous blunder. The U.S. is a nuclear-armed superpower whose military strength is unrivaled by any great power, let alone a smaller state like Venezuela. As such, any potential domestic political benefits would be largely outweighed by a decisive military loss at best, or at worst, a prolonged conflict with tens of thousands of military casualties. Furthermore, while Maduro’s re-election received the support of Russia, China, and Iran, it’s unlikely that any of them would support the state in a conflict, given Russia’s war with Ukraine, China’s domestic economic troubles, and Iran’s regional focus.

Ignoring the risk of a U.S. counterstrike, an amphibious invasion would be difficult to mount. Puerto Rico’s terrain is incredibly mountainous, with 60% of the country covered in mountains. Beyond that, it is unlikely that Maduro would be able to utilize Brazilian troops, as Brazil has no incentive to get involved in a war with the U.S. Given the increasing diplomatic estrangement between Brazil and Venezuela, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is unlikely to support such a move. While relations between the two states have historically been strong, Lula has pivoted recently, distancing himself from Maduro and openly critiquing the authoritarian regime and election outcome.

If Maduro were to wage a war, he wouldn’t go too far. Long-standing border disputes with Guyana over ownership of the Essequibo region have escalated in recent years, as Maduro has made similar references about liberating the oil-rich territory. In December 2023, Maduro unveiled a map of the country that included the Essequibo region, and has long announced his intention to take over the oil-rich region. While Maduro has made declarations domestically, Guyana has sought international recognition from bodies like the International Court of Justice to resolve these disputes. Given Venezuela’s oil-based economy, their comparative military dominance over Guyana, and Maduro’s reference to polls (albeit questionable ones) that show an overwhelming majority of Venezuelans would support incorporating the region into Venezuela, the Essequibo region seems primed for a Venezuelan invasion.

But once again, Brazil serves as the foil to Maduro’s plans. Lula has distanced himself from Maduro, improved relations with Guyana, and positioned himself as a mediator between the two states in their quarrel. While Maduro may scoff at the Guyanese army, he can’t ignore the Brazilian Army, who moved armored vehicles to their northern border to further deter Maduro from invasion. Lula’s military move comes after Maduro agreed to pursue diplomatic measures to acquire the region, indicating the growing mistrust between the leaders.

As such, the fate of Venezuela’s military decisions could end up being a question of Brazil’s positioning–specifically the degree to which Lula will seek to influence or restrain Maduro in his ambitions. Therefore, how Brazil navigates this thorny issue will play a decisive role in the region’s stability for the foreseeable future.

Canada’s Political Crisis: What Happened and What’s Next?

Trudeau in his resignation speech. Sean Kilpatrick, The Canadian Press

On January 6, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced his intention to resign, as both Prime Minister and leader of the country’s Liberal Party, after his party selects his successor. Trudeau, who had previously balked at calls for resignation, eventually succumbed to mounting pressure from Liberal Members of Parliament, tanking numbers in opinion polls, and resignations of high-level officials.

The resignation of the PM’s former ally Chrystia Freeland, the deputy prime minister and head of finance, over concerns regarding U.S. President Donald Trump’s planned imposition of tariffs, signaled the growing internal resentment among the party. Beyond that, in response to the country’s cost of living crisis, Trudeau’s approval ratings have tanked and Liberal MPs have increasingly called upon him to step down, to best position the party for the elections scheduled later this year. Parliamentary members in the opposition parties have also indicated that they would move for a vote of no-confidence upon Parliament’s return in late January. A move which, if successful, could have triggered federal elections at a time when the Conservative Party, led by Pierre Poilievre, had a demanding lead in polls.

In his resignation speech, Trudeau cited struggles with internal cohesion among the Liberal party, noting that, to best position the party for the upcoming elections, he must step down. The PM said his “one regret” was that the country never instituted a system of ranked-choice voting, which could have alleviated political polarization. 

Trudeau also announced that Mary Simon, Canada’s governor general, accepted his request to prorogue Parliament, suspending all votes and proceedings until March 24. In recent days, however, the Federal Court of Canada expedited a suit challenging the constitutional validity of Trudeau’s prorogation, citing the urgency of a response to Trump’s foreign policy. The hearing to prorogue could be held as early as February 13 or 14th, and the result could bring Parliament back earlier than expected.

In the meantime, the Liberal Party will need to act decisively, because upon its return, the first item on the Parliament’s agenda will be a confidence motion put forward by the Conservative Party. If the Liberal Party loses the vote, the party’s leader will resign or dissolve Parliament, either of which would trigger a federal election. 

A number of individuals, including Freeland and Liberal House leader Karina Gould, have announced their intention to be Trudeau’s successor, and the final vote to pick a candidate will be on March 9th. Meanwhile, Poilievre has emerged as an early favorite among Conservatives, who want someone to push back against Trump.

Trudeau’s decision to step down mirrors President Biden’s move to drop out of the race for the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Together, they mark the end of the liberal trifecta of heads of state in North America. Trudeau’s resignation is another instance of the anti-incumbent trend–a global movement wherein the incumbent leader is punished electorally for the lasting impacts of COVID-era troubles. If other democracies are any indication, this could lay the foundation for the election of a right-wing populist with an economic focus–the exact characterization of Pierre Polievre. Regardless, Trudeau’s successor will have to navigate an economic crisis and frosty US-Canada relations amid increased tensions from Trump’s aggressive stance on tariffs and calls for Canada to be the 51st U.S. state. Their decisiveness and efficacy will be critical, as it will determine whether they serve the country for years or face a similar fate to Trudeau.

South Korea: President Yoon’s arrest, impeachment, and declaration of martial law

Photo Credit: Ahn Young-joon/AP

After an hours-long standoff, former South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol was arrested on January 15 on insurrection charges following his declaration of martial law on December 3. This arrest, which saw the deployment of 1,000 officers, came after a failed attempt twelve days earlier during which officials were blocked by his supporters and security team.  

Earlier, on December 14, 2024, the South Korean National Assembly voted to impeach President Yoon following his brief declaration of martial law on December 3. Yoon defended his decision, arguing that he had a legitimate use of military rule due to his belief that the opposition in control of Parliament consists of North Korean communist sympathisers. Since assuming office in 2022, Yoon has faced consistent opposition from Parliament and has had marginal success in getting his policies adopted.

The constitutional provision granting the president the right to declare martial law has a dark history in South Korea. The Constitution grants the executive the ability to impose military rule in the case of “wartime, war-like situations or other comparable national emergency states.” However, past presidents have misused this power, giving them the right to impose a de facto dictatorship over political opponents and civilians. To alleviate this risk, the National Assembly has the right to check this use of power and can lift martial law with a majority vote. Immediately after President Yoon’s declaration, lawmakers voted 190-0 to revoke the order. The National Assembly’s adherence to the rule of law through the use of democratic institutions shows a commitment to the balance of power between branches, and a dedication to political accountability for the executive. 

Following the failed insurrection attempt, the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials (CIO) launched an insurrection case against Yoon. In addition to his declaration of martial law, Yoon has been accused of failing to cooperate with the CIO. After ignoring court-sanctioned questioning and refusing to comply with investigative procedures, the court issued a warrant for his arrest, making him the first South Korean president arrested in office. If found guilty of insurrection, the penalty for offense is life in prison or the death penalty. 

During this time of political turmoil, South Korea had Finance Minister and Deputy Prime Minister Choi Sang-mok fill in as acting president since December 27. Han Duck-soo, the previous successor, was impeached by the legislature for refusal to fill vacancies on the Constitutional Court.  

Despite the fact that many South Koreans disapprove of his actions, the political disorder around Yoon has brought a resurgence to his approval rating, and a consolidation around his political party, the People Power Party (PPP). According to recent polls, support for the PPP was at 40.8 percent versus the main opposition, the Democratic Party, whose support stood at 42.2 percent. This difference lies within the margin of error, indicating no clear winner in a future presidential election should Yoon be found guilty of impeachment and removed from office.  

In the coming days, authorities will question Yoon and decide on whether to charge and arrest him for attempting a rebellion. However, according to the CIO, Yoon has resisted questioning and refused to participate in the investigation. Additionally, on January 14, the Constitutional Court launched a parallel investigation regarding the Parliament’s decision to impeach Yoon. If endorsed by the courts, an election must be held within sixty days.  

Update January 19: 

On Sunday January 19, a South Korean court officially issued a warrant for Yoon’s arrest and extended his detention for up to 20 days. This announcement sparked a swarm of his supporters to storm the court building, smashing windows and doors to reach the entrance of the building. Once inside, they blasted a line of police guards with fire extinguishers, destroyed furniture, and physically assaulted the officers. Once peace was restored, forty-six of the rioters were arrested. 

Russia: How can Navalny’s death affect the Ukraine War

Written by: Luke Wagner and Ella Rutman; Edited by: Carmine Miklovis and Charlotte Freer

Imprisoned Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny died on Friday after collapsing and losing consciousness, Moscow state-media announced Friday. The Federal Penitentiary Service of the Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous District said Navalny, 47, "felt unwell" after he went on a walk and "almost immediately lost consciousness." 

The cause of his death is unclear to the public but many believe that it the culmination from years of abuse in prison. However, other Navalny supporters around the world are skeptical that his death is a result of health issues and are reminded of a failed assassination attempt in 2020.  

When President Biden last spoke face-to-face with Russian President Vladimir Putin in 2021, he said that he made clear that the consequences of Navalny’s death would be “devastating” for Russia. 

In 2022 before returning to Russia and being arrested, Navalny sat down for an interview with CNN and delivered a message in English to the Russian people: “My message for the situation when I am killed is very simple – [do] not give up.” Then switching to the Russian language, Navalny said, “If they decide to kill me, it means that we are incredibly strong. We need to utilize this power, to not give up.” He continued, “We don’t realize how strong we actually are. The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing. So don’t be inactive.” 

Although it is unclear what the direct effect of Navalny’s death will be on the Russia-Ukrainian war, there has been a global condemnation of Putin and an increased aid for Ukraine. After meeting with Navalny’s widow and daughter, Biden declared sanctions on Russia, who he claims is responsible for Navalny’s death. Additionally, next week France is hosting an international Ukrainian aid meeting after pledging 3 billion euros in aid. Although it is unclear what additional measures the international community can take to punish Moscow beyond sanctions, as Navalny said, inaction is not an option. 

China and South Korea: Foreign Ministers talk while Kim Jong Un threatens war

Written by: Luke Wagner; Edited by: Diya Jain 

During a Wednesday phone call with South Korea’s top diplomat Cho Tae-yul, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi vowed to uphold “stability and continuity” in its national policy. Yi said that he hoped South Korea would pursue a “positive, objective and friendly” policy towards Beijing.  

Chinese-South Korean relations have deteriorated in recent years as Seoul has grown closer to the United States in an apparent effort to counter China and North Korea’s (NK) longstanding security alliances.  

Wednesday’s call was the first time that the countries’ two top diplomats have personally spoken to each other. Foreign Minister Cho took this opportunity to request that Beijing play a “constructive role” in curbing NK’s recent aggressive behavior.  

This request may be tested sooner than either minister would have expected. A day after the call, NK Supreme People’s Assembly voted to scrap all economic and cooperative agreements with South Korea. On Friday, NK Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un declared that its southern neighbor remains “enemy No. 1” and that he would not hesitate to use every power at his disposal to wipe out all enemies that threaten NK. 

These recent tensions reflect what regional expert Scott Snyder from the Council on Foreign Relations has called “an escalatory dynamic between the two Koreas following North Korea’s successful satellite launch last November.”  

If China heeds Cho’s request and works at de-escalation, it will likely be away from the public eye. However, South Korea and its partner Japan may have the chance to bring this issue up with China again soon; during the call, Beijing and Seoul agreed to accelerate preparations for a China-Japan-South Korea summit. Although China hopes South Korea would adopt a positive policy towards Beijing, that will remain complicated while NK’s Kim Jong Un is left unchecked. 

El Salvador: President Bukele’s landslide reelection raises concern for one party-state

Written by: Diego Carney; Edited by: Luke Wagner

Nayib Bukele, who is known for his strict anti-gang and tough on crime standpoint in the Latin American Country has won re-election with 85% of the vote. His New Ideas party also won 58 out of the 60 assembly seats in the unicameral legislature. This has brought concerns of a possible one-party state that is not shy to violate human rights. 

This steep victory has raised possible election fraud concerns from a president who proclaimed himself to “the world's coolest dictator” although there has been no reports of electoral irregularities. 

Bukele has been the legitimate president of El Salvador since 2019, but it hasn’t come without its controversies. When the president sent the Salvadoran Army to the Legislative Assembly in order to coerce the government into approving a multi-million dollar loan, many organizations denounced this action as resembling a coup. Additionally, Bukele’s has tough-on-crime policy has amounted to mass-mistreatment of prisoners who had already lived in poor conditions. For instance, Bukele’s main crime policy – an anti-gang state of emergency – has already led to the imprisonment of 1% of the population.

His re-election raises interest on unequal separation of powers in El Salvador which threaten the country’s democracy. El Salvador has a unicameral legislature which is the main check on the executive branch. However, the legislative branch is often incapable of limiting Bukele, because his New Ideas holds a super-majority. 

Judicial accountability is likewise unreliable. In 2020, Bukele dismissed the entire Supreme Court and appointed his own Justices. Bukele rationalized this action as a necessary evil in order to clean up the corruption of the Judicial branch, but neighboring countries have been deeply concerned by this rash action.
Bukele’s tough-on-crime posturing and uninterest in democracy seems to have others in the region interested. Honduras and Guatemala have expressed interest in following a similar model to El Salvador. If Bukele’s next term can deliver on his anti-gang promises, perhaps his model may become adopted by others.

European Union: New restrictions on Artificial Intelligence passed

Written by: Carmine Miklovis; Edited by: Helen Lallos-Harrell

On Friday, February 2nd, The European Union (EU) moved to impose regulations on the usage of artificial intelligence (AI) in a move that may set a precedent for future responses to other developments in emerging technology. 

This agreement, which creates limitations on the use of certain types of AI, including the gradual implementation of law to criminalize deepfakes, comes after the cumulation of tense negotiations between European states. 

France and Germany, two economic powerhouses in the bloc who have taken advantage of recent technological developments to establish robust AI programs, pushed back against the bill’s restrictions, expressing concerns about the bill’s potential to hamstring innovation in the field. To remedy this, negotiators added a slew of measures intended to promote innovation, which ultimately proved sufficient to get the bill across the finish line. Amongst these measures was the promise that Berlin and Paris’ concerns would be addressed, in addition to the creation of the Artificial Intelligence Office, which is responsible for enforcing the act. 

As AI technology evolves rapidly, future debates on the extent to which technologies should be regulated are inevitable, and it’s only a matter of time before other AI frontrunners, such as the U.S. and China, respond to the EU’s action.

Saudi Arabia: Biden considers recognizing Palestinian state for Saudi normalization

Written by: Ella Rutman; Edited by: Aliyah Jaikaran  

On Wednesday, Saudia Arabia’s Foreign Ministry issued a statement to the United States saying that it will not continue the ongoing normalization talks with Israel unless an independent Palestinian state is recognized with the 1967 borders and East Jerusalem as its capital. They added that Israeli forces must stop its “aggression” on the Gaza Strip and withdraw from the region in the ongoing Israel-Hamas war.   

The U.S. has spearheaded diplomacy between Saudi Arabia and Israel for months in the Saudi Deal. In exchange for normalized relations with Israel, Saudi Arabia would receive a U.S. defense pact and assistance in generating its own civilian nuclear program. Progress on the Saudi Deal has ceased as per Saudi Arabia’s demand for an independent Palestinian state.   

According to a senior official, the Biden Administration has assigned policy staff to explore options of the U.S. recognizing a Palestinian state before solidifying a complete postwar deal with Israel. If Palestine obtains statehood, Biden has said that it should be governed by a “revitalized” Palestinian authority, which currently narrowly controls some of the West Bank. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has opposed Palestinian control over the West Bank, further stagnating the Saudi Deal.    

At Thursday’s news conference, President Biden delivered his most piercing criticism of Israel’s actions in Gaza, yet. The president declared Israel’s conduct in Gaza “over the top” and stated that innocent people dying and starving has “got to stop.” Biden emphasized his joint efforts with Qatar, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia to get “as much aid as we possibly can into Gaza.”  

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman reaffirmed Saudi Arabia’s “strong interest in pursuing” normalization with Israel to U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken contingent on an end to the war in Gaza and a Palestinian state. Netanyahu has stated he will not compromise on total Israeli security west of the Jordan River, which contradicts a Palestinian state. The U.S. has repeated its support for the two-state solution. Talks of the Saudi Deal remain idle until concrete movement towards a Palestinian state is made.  

West Africa: ECOWAS holds “extraordinary” security council session

Written by: Chloe Baldauf; Edited by: Luke Wagner

Yesterday, the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) held an “extraordinary ministerial session” to address the announced withdrawal of Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger from the long-standing regional bloc. President of the ECOWAS Commission H.E. Dr. Omar Alieu Touray, pleading for the group’s cohesion, asserted that “if there has ever been any time for ECOWAS to stay together, this is the time.”

During the meeting in Abuja, Nigeria, the Head of the United Nations Office for West Africa and the Sahel H.E. Leonardo Santos Simao emphasized the need for “a patient dialogue which is not obsessed to reach its end but to create space and enough time to continue to build a common future.” But Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger are not interested in waiting any longer.

On Sunday, the three states announced their immediate exit from the regional union through their national television channels. ECOWAS was formally notified of the three junta-led countries’ decision on Monday through written notices. The joint statement accused ECOWAS of being “under the influence of foreign powers” and “[moving] away from the ideals of its founding fathers and Pan-Africanism.”

This departure follows ECOWAS’s ongoing policy of trade and economic sanctions against the junta-led countries that had undergone significant regime change due to military coups. This past November, the three departing nations formed a new security alliance called the Alliance of the Sahel States that Niger’s junta leader General Abdourahmane Tchiani described as a “path for sovereignty” for the countries.

On Wednesday, Mali announced that it would not abide by the ECOWAS treaty’s one-year withdrawal notice. Mali’s foreign ministry wrote in an online statement that, because ECOWAS’s sanctions violated its own treaty, “Mali is no longer bound by the deadline constraints mentioned in Article 91 of the Revised Treaty.”

Amid an increasingly tense election crisis in Senegal and dwindling public trust in ECOWAS, the regional group of nearly fifty years faces an uncertain future. Concerns fester over how the split will affect Russia’s deepening military ties with Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger and the increased deployment of Russian Wagner Group troops in the region.

Spain: Why a Catalan separatist party voted against amnesty for its members

Written by: Helen Lallos-Harrell; Edited by: Carmine Miklovis

On January 30th, Spain's lower house rejected an amnesty bill proposed by the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party in a 179 to 171 vote.

Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez had championed the bill in exchange for parliamentary support of two Catalan separatist parties, Junts Party and Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya – both parties that had enabled Sánchez to form his minority leftist government last year. The bill would have granted amnesty to hundreds of Catalan separatists and set standards for granting amnesty for terrorism-related charges, for which several politicians of the Junts Party currently face investigation.

Despite supporting amnesty for Catalan separatists, Junts members voted against the bill in a last-minute reversal after disagreements over some of the bill’s details could not be reconciled. Justice Minister Félix Bolaños described it as "absolutely incomprehensible that Junts should vote against a law it had agreed on" while speaking with reporters.

The amnesty bill has faced heavy pushback from the Spanish public, approximately half of which support the conservative and far-right opposition parties. Anti-amnesty bill demonstrations across Spain reflect this attitude, with some protesters comparing Sánchez's behavior to that of a dictator.

The bill will return to debate in parliamentary committees before it returns to the lower house for another vote. In the meantime, Junts members want to continue negotiating the bill's terms.

When describing the party's decision to vote against it in parliament, Míriam Nogueras, a member of the Together for Catalunya party in the Congress of Deputies, noted, "there is no reason to approve an amnesty law with holes in it." Regardless of specifics, the bill's rejection and its highly controversial nature demonstrate the fragile state of Sánchez's minority-rule government and call into question its sustainability in the coming years.

Pakistan: Relations with Iran improve amid promises of security cooperation

Written by: Diya Jain; Edited by: Luke Wagner

Less than two weeks after exchanging airstrikes that led to national outrage and an unraveling of diplomatic relations, Iran and Pakistan have agreed upon terms to pursue joint security cooperation and de-escalate tensions at their border.

Iran initiated attacks against Pakistani military bases which Tehran claimed were being used to harbor military combatants and violent separatist factions. Islamabad faced immediate pressure by its constituents to punish Iran’s actions, prompting retaliation within the next 48 hours. By January 25, both sides had launched their respective offensives, Pakistan had recalled its ambassador to Tehran, and all diplomatic and trade engagements were temporarily frozen. 

This recent escalation reignited fears amongst world leaders that the instability emanating from the conflict in Gaza may be destined to spread and engulf the Middle East. Over the weekend, the United States and European Union both issued statements to deescalate tensions between Iran and Pakistan.

On Monday, despite the confrontation and its resulting deaths – totaling eleven – top Iranian and Pakistani diplomats sat down to talk. Both Tehran and Islamabad re-emphasized a shared commitment to combating terror and preserving political stability in the region. They announced mechanisms for strengthening their relations, including returning ambassadors and diplomats to their posts, pushing for more frequent and transparent diplomatic meetings, and sharing security and counterterrorism technology for identification and targeting of insurgents. Iranian negotiator Hossein Amirabdollahian touted the establishment of new free-trade zones near border regions to facilitate higher volumes of bilateral trade. 

The prospect of nuclear-armed Pakistan providing more robust security technology to Iran poses deep concerns to the international community. While the resolution of tensions between Pakistan and Iran comes as an immediate relief to many across the region, closer alignment between the two could pose worrying trends for Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

Iranian-backed militias: Biden decides how to respond to fatal drone attack

Written by: Aliyah Jaikaran; Edited by: Luke Wagner 

Three US soldiers were killed and at least 34 injured in a drone attack by “Islamic Resistance in Iraq” (IRI) – a coalition of militias backed by Iran – on a U.S. military base in Jordan near the Syrian border, says the Biden administration. The attack has intensified ongoing tensions in the Middle East since Hamas’ October 7th attacks on Israel, igniting the Israel-Hamas war and Israel’s depredation of Gaza. It is the first occurrence of fatalities among U.S. troops in the Middle East since the outburst of the Israel-Hamas war.  

The attack took place at Tower 22, a U.S. military outpost, in northeast Jordan where the borders of Iraq, Jordan, and Syria meet. The armed drone struck the outpost’s barracks.  

Speaking to a concerned nation, President Biden vowed to punish those responsible for these unprovoked attacks.  Biden then said, “I do hold [the Iranian Government] responsible [for the attacks] in that they’re supplying weapons to the people who did it.” However, direct confrontation between the two rivals seems at this moment unlikely. When asked if the President is considering a strike within Iranian territory, National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said, “We are not looking for a war with Iran.” 

Like the Houthis in Yemen, IRI tried to justify its attacks as acts of solidarity with the Palestinians in Gaza.  The militias claimed that targeting U.S. military assets served as a “continuation” of its resistance against American occupation in Iraq after 2003.  

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kanaani rejected allegations that Iran had helped plan or had commissioned the attack. Kanaani asserted that IRI and other militias act autonomously and do not carry out orders from Iran.  

Since Hamas’ October 7th attack on Israel, U.S. troops have been attacked more than 150 times by Iranian-backed militias in Syria and Iraq which resulted in at least 70 wounded before January 28th’s drone attack in Jordan.  

On Wednesday, Biden publicly stated that he had decided on his course of action. As of Friday February 2nd, the United States has not yet responded. 

Chad: Putin’s Bid for Educational Diplomacy in Africa

Written by: Chloe Baldauf; Edited by: Luke Wagner

On Wednesday, Chad’s interim leader General Mahamat Idriss Deby met with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the Kremlin to discuss growing Russian-Chadian relations. During the talks, General Deby called the visit “history-making” and expressed his hopes to strengthen bilateral ties. 

In a transcript from the Kremlin website, Putin addressed the growth of “humanitarian ties” between the two countries, remarking that Moscow “doubled the quota” for Chadian students to study in Russia on scholarship and that he intends to double it again. Putin next spoke of growing interest in Russian education among young Chadians and affirmed Moscow’s intent to cooperate on the growth of educational opportunities.  

Educational diplomacy is commonly understood as a type of “soft diplomacy” that “builds mutually beneficial and reciprocal relationships between countries.” Russia has placed increasing emphasis on strengthening humanitarian ties through investment in Africa, which was a central topic at last year’s Russia-Africa Summit. 

At the last year’s summit, Putin declared his intent to “significantly increase” the number of African students in Russian higher education institutions. Specifically, he proposed building ties between sports universities and encouraging more student exchange. Putin also commented during the summit that Moscow sought deeper cooperation with Africa in the field of mass communications – starting with “the exchange of content [and] organization of training courses for media personnel and students.”  

Educational diplomacy in Africa has become an issue of significance in the diplomatic sphere recently. Luke Williams, Australia’s high commissioner, called education exchange “the bedrock” of Australia’s relations with Africa.  

As tensions brew in Chad over the legitimacy of current leader Deby’s interim presidency, it is unclear how growing Russian interest in Chad’s education sector will affect voter attitudes. If Deby manages to emerge victorious from the October election, it is likely that Russia will continue efforts to gain influence in the country as it strives toward great-power status at the expense of destabilization. 

Israel-Hamas War: Why has the Global South supported the genocide case against Israel?

Written by: Luke Wagner; Edited by: Chloe Baldauf

On Friday, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that the allegations claiming Israel had committed acts in violation of the United Nations 1948 Genocide Convention were “plausible” enough to justify the court’s continued deliberation of the case.  The South African Government brought the case to the international court alleging that “acts and omissions” by Israel in its offensive in Gaza have been “genocidal in character” because they are intended to bring about the “destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian [people].”

The ICJ case’s strongest proponents have been states of the Global South.  Many Muslim-majority states such as Iran, Turkey, Jordan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Malaysia, and the Maldives have supported South Africa’s case.  Additionally, many Latin American and African states have been among the loudest proponents of the genocide case against Israel.

Jakkie Cilliers, founder of the Pretoria-based Institute for Security Studies think tank, said that the Western support for Ukraine and Israel has made many African nations feel neglected while they continue to face their own struggles.  Cilliers suggested that this shared feeling is perhaps why many in the Global South have come to identify strongly with the Palestinian cause.

Johann Soufi, an international lawyer and former legal office chief at the UN agency for Palestinian refugees (UNRWA) in Gaza, said that many nations in the Global South feel that the international system has never worked for them and are frustrated to see the international community respond quickly to the concerns of the West – like Russian aggression against Ukraine and Hamas’ October 7th attacks.  Many in the Global South view international justice increasingly as “selective justice” and a reflection of a “neo-colonial” status quo, according to Mr. Soufi.

In early January, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken called South Africa’s accusations of genocide “meritless” and a distraction from efforts to improve the humanitarian situation in Gaza although the US has refrained from making any public comments on the trial.  Washington’s strong support of Israel has made it isolated among members of the Global South who wish that the United States were more willing to criticize Israel.  Steven Gruzd, head of the African Governance and Diplomacy Program at the South African Institute of International Affairs, said that “African states are beginning to identify more strongly with the global south [identity] than the US.”  According to Ms. Cilliers, “the momentum has swung to Russia and China.”  

These are concerning trends for US diplomats not only in Africa but also in Latin American and Muslim-majority states.  This week, Secretary Blinken is traveling throughout the African continent this past week, presumably to rekindle some connections and show some attention to a region which has felt sorely neglected during the conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East.  Additionally, Blinken spoke with South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor on Thursday to discuss the conflict in Gaza, including “the need to protect civilian lives,” provide humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians, and work towards lasting peace that “ensures Israel’s security and advances the establishment of an independent Palestinian state.” 

If alienating members of the Global South becomes an issue of greater American concern, it is possible that more conversations about the future of Gaza include African and Latin American states.

Mexico: $10 billion lawsuit against U.S. gunmakers goes forward while more arms flow across the border

Written by: Luke Wagner; Edited by: Chloe Baldauf

Early this week, a U.S. federal appeals court ruled that a $10 billion case brought forward by Mexico’s government against multiple American gun manufacturers did not violate U.S. law.

This ruling had reversed a lower court’s 2022 decision to dismiss the case for violating the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), which provides gunmakers broad civil protections against lawsuits for the misuse of their products.  Mexico’s lawyers argued successfully that the PLCAA does not legally shield manufacturers from their argument that the manufacturers facilitated the trafficking of weapons across the U.S.-Mexico border.

Mexican Foreign Secretary Alicia Bárcena called the ruling “great news,” and the country’s U.S. lawyer in the case, Steve Shadowen, called it “an important step forward in holding the gun industry accountable.”

Mexican cartels have long bragged about their ability to acquire U.S. weaponry.  They have not been shy to post images on social media of gang members in tactical gear posing with their military-grade firepower.  Last June, the Mexican army said that it had seized 221 fully automatic machine guns, 56 grenade launchers, and a dozen rocket launchers from cartels since 2018.  However, these weapons are not sold for civilian use in the United States.

On Monday, Foreign Secretary Bárcena publicly conveyed to Washington that an investigation is “very urgent” to determine how weapons that are “for the exclusive use of the U.S. army” have entered Mexico.

U.S. Ambassador to Mexico Ken Salazar confirmed Monday his awareness of the issue and that the United States is committed to working with Mexico’s Defense Department “to see what's going on.”

Philippines: Defense Cooperation with Canada amid Simmering South China Sea Tension

Written by: Chloe Baldauf

Today, the Philippines and Canada signed a memorandum of understanding, securing the countries’ shared hopes for deeper defense cooperation. Gilberto Teodoro, the Philippines’ Defense Secretary, referred to the historic moment in Canada-Philippines relations as a sign of “strong intention on both sides to deepen and strengthen the relationships by forging new milestones in our defense relations” and alluded to the possibility of a Visiting Forces Agreement.

The Philippines already has a VFA with the U.S. in addition to the 2014 Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, which ensures U.S. military forces have access to certain training locations in the Philippines and authorizes them to assist with humanitarian initiatives and disaster relief. This may be mirrored in the Philippines’ future defense collaboration with Canada, who has been an open supporter of the Philippines during the dispute over the South China Sea. Canada backed the Permanent Court of Arbitration’s ruling in 2016 that China’s claims to the South China Sea were unfounded, incentivizing the two countries to cooperate more closely but not entirely deterring Manila from striving for peaceful relations with Beijing.

Last month, a Chinese embassy spokesperson responded to Canada’s support for the Philippines with a statement warning that the South China Sea should not become a “hunting ground” for Canada and the U.S. to “pursue their geopolitical interests.” 

However, China-Philippines relations have swiftly improved this month with the release of a statement yesterday by the Philippines Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) saying that China and the Philippines both agreed to “calmly deal with any incidents…through diplomacy.” This came after a meeting in Beijing between Chinese Assistant Foreign Minister Nong Rong and Undersecretary of the Philippines DFA Theresa Lazaro that resulted in discussions surrounding maritime security and the need for stability in the South China Sea.

While no more than the initial memorandum of understanding has been signed by the Philippines and Canada, Teodoro expressed expectations that it would “jumpstart” defense cooperation between the two countries by way of military training, military education, and disaster relief.

Ecuador: President Noboa Decides to 'Neutralize' Criminal Gangs

Written by: Candace Graupera; Edited by Chloe Baldauf and Luke Wagner

Prosecutor César Suárez was fatally shot on Wednesday in Guayaquil, deemed Ecuador’s most dangerous city. Suárez, known for his involvement in high-profile cases, was targeted while driving.  

This month, Mr. Suárez had been investigating an incident during which masked gang members stormed the set of a public Ecuadoran television station, brandishing pistols and what appeared to be sticks of dynamite. The intrusion occurred during a live broadcast on the TC Television network – terrorizing public audiences and prompting the Ecuadoran President Daniel Noboa to assert that his nation had fallen into an "internal armed conflict." 

The assault is part of a series of attacks that have rattled Ecuador, such as the reported prison escapes of two prominent narco gang leaders. President Noboa declared a national state of emergency, which suspended the rights of prisoners and suspected gang members.  Additionally, the presidential decree identified twenty narco gangs as terrorist groups and ordered the military to "neutralize" these illicit organizations.  

The recent escalation of violence in Ecuador has been linked to the prison escapes of two gang leaders, Adolfo Macías and Fabricio Colon Pico.  “Los Choneros” – a narco gang led by Macías and that has strong connections to Mexican and Colombian cartels – are vying for control of routes and territory, even within detention facilities where they exert considerable influence. 

Suárez was also handling the Metastasis case, involving an Ecuadorian drug lord accused of receiving preferential treatment from various authorities. The murder of Suárez adds to the wave of violence in Ecuador, including the abductions of police officers, following the escape of gang leader José Adolfo Macías Villamar from prison. Macías, associated with the Los Choneros gang, triggered a state of emergency, prompting military intervention in prisons and sparking a series of attacks across the country. 

Earlier this month, President Noboa declared a nationwide state of emergency in response to an uptick in organized criminal gang activity across the country. A nighttime curfew has also been instated as a precautionary measure, which remains in place as attorney general Diana Salazar’s office investigates the murder.