2020 by the Young Diplomats Society

2020.
F o r e w o r d
It seems 2020 cannot be mentioned without delving into cliches. Unprecedented. The New Normal. A Year for the
History Books. ‘2020’ has been repurposed as a punchline for stories of unfortunate coincidences, complaints and
disappointment. A way to say ‘typical’, or ‘bad luck’, without expressing it. Something to blame, something to hate and
something you wished to be over.
From the headlines that gripped us throughout the year – big weather events (McClintock, pg.12-13), the Black Lives
Matter protests (Gatwech, pg.46-51), and of course, the coronavirus pandemic (pg.56-69) – to the headlines we might
have missed (Greaves, pg.30-31), this YDS Special Edition seeks to highlight the year that was; the good, the bad and the
Trump-y.
Our ten regional correspondents remind us of the events that shaped the political, economic and social landscape of
numerous regions. Among these, protests were a dominant feature, and peppered the year in the Pacific (Arthur,
pg.17), Europe (Archer, pg.70, Hosen, pg. 72-73), Thailand (Diamantopoulos, pg.24), Nigeria (Hynam, pg.38-40), and
Chile (Gaymer, pg.88-89).
Furthermore, Iain D. Johnson, (pg.25-27), Declan Curtin (pg. 55) and Samuel Garrett (pg. 82-83) help us come to terms
with the successes, failures, and implications of lockdown responses in Southeast Asia, Canada, and South and Central
Asia, contributing to the complex global discussion of what constitutes an adequate pandemic response.
The guest writers featured throughout the edition move incisively beyond buzzwords: Fires. Floods. Typhoons. Border
Conflicts. Border Closures. Explosions. Elections. Violence. Protests. Togetherness. Distance. Their unique contributions
prove that the origins and legacies of the year’s global events cannot be neatly encased in a period of twelve months.
Olivia Green (pg.62) advocates for a new reputation for Wuhan, Anet McClintock explores Libya ten years on from the
Arab Spring (pg.43) and Kelly Phan explains the consequences of the Brereton Report for Australia’s Special Forces
(pg.8-9).
The edition also reflects on the careers of prominent global leaders Jacinda Ardern (Desai, pg.20-21), Shinzo Abe
(Radford, pg.76-77), Kamala Harris (Balakumar, pg.54), Bobi Wine (Hynam pg.36) and Aung San Suu Kyi (Pinzone,
pg.28-29), highlighting not only the events, but the people who have shaped the international political landscape this
year and in years past.
Unprecedented. The New Normal. A Year for the History Books.
Perhaps cliches are the natural result of trying to summarise the indescribable. So, when it came to naming this
publication, there were no words.
Just ‘2020’.
VICTORIA COOPER - EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

B L A C K S U M M E R
Australia began the new year in the intense lingering smoke of the 2019 bushfire season. The
2019-20 bushfire season, now commonly known as ‘Black Summer’, was a devastating period of
unprecedented bushfires that burned through 18,636,079 hectares of land. January 1, 2020
marked one of the worst days of the bushfire season with out-of-control bushfire prompting the
evacuation of residents on New South Wales’ South Coast and Victoria’s East Coast. Images of
bright red skies and trapped residents huddled onto beaches surfaced in the morning of the new
year -- the devastation punctuated by the, now iconic, image of a young girl steering a boat off
the coast of Mallacoota.
The nation’s Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, stumbled into the new year with a damaged
reputation after taking an ill-timed holiday in December of 2019. The Prime Minister angered
many in the country with his New Years’ address reminding Australians that “there’s no better
place to raise kids anywhere on the planet.” Morrison’s approach to the bushfire season and
residents of bushfire affected areas, including one blistering incident where he forcibly shook an
angry Cobargo resident’s hand, saw him swiped with a barrage of criticisms and public outrage.
For Australians, Black Summer brought the issue of climate change and issues of climate
inaction into sharper focus. As the year unfolded, reports of the Federal government’s failure to
heed warnings of the increased bushfire risks ushered a wave of condemnation for Morrison’s
‘business as usual’ approach to climate policy.
Throughout Black Summer, Morrison was resistant to talking about climate change focusing
instead on applauding the ‘Aussie spirit’ of resilience and hard work. On the eve of the new year,
Morrison stated, “we have faced these disasters before and we have prevailed, we have
overcome… that is the spirit of Australians, that is the spirit that is on display, that is a spirit
that we can celebrate as Australians.” Political commentators were quick to denounce such
patriotic rally-crying as a convenient way to bypass more challenging conversations about
Australia’s climate policies and emissions reductions targets.
18,636,079
hectares
3,500
HOMES
3 billion
animals
34 people

AUSTRALIA'S COLLECTIVE SHAME: THE
BRERETON REPORT ON WAR CRIMES IN
AFGHANISTAN
In 2016, the Inspector-General of the Australian Defence Force
(ADF) launched the Afghanistan Inquiry (The Inquiry) to
investigate allegations of breaches of the Laws of Armed Conflict
by the Special Operations Task Group and their superiors in
Afghanistan from 2005 to 2016. Videos and witness reports
detailing these war crimes, including the killing of unarmed
civilians, killing of prisoners of war and planting guns and radios
on civilians, have been shocking and damning.
In the public version of the final report of the Inquiry, it
concluded that the rumours of war crimes were substantiated in
23 incidents. With the release of the final report of the Inspector-
General of the ADF Afghanistan Inquiry, commonly known as the
Brereton Report, Australia must now deal with its collective
shame - the commission of war crimes by Australian soldiers.
“BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THIS INQUIRY, WHICH IS NOT A
CRIMINAL TRIAL, IT CANNOT AND DOES NOT FIND GUILT IN ANY
INDIVIDUAL CASE. IN CONFORMITY WITH LEGAL PRINCIPLE, THE
PRACTICES OF COMMISSIONS OF INQUIRY, AND THE INQUIRY
DIRECTIONS, ITS FINDINGS IN ANY INDIVIDUAL CASE ARE LIMITED
TO WHETHER THERE IS ‘CREDIBLE INFORMATION’ OF BREACHES
OF LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT (‘WAR CRIMES’). HOWEVER... THE
ANSWER TO THE QUESTION ‘IS THERE SUBSTANCE TO RUMOURS
OF WAR CRIMES BY ELEMENTS OF THE SPECIAL OPERATIONS TASK
GROUP’ MUST SADLY BE ‘YES, THERE IS’.”
In the 23 incidents of the commission of war crimes, the report
detailed that 39 individuals were killed, an additional two were
cruelly treated and a total of 25 current or former ADF personnel
were perpetrators as principals or accessories. In all cases, the
victims were clearly non-combatants and protected under the
Geneva Conventions.
There were several incidents of ‘throwdowns’ - where foreign
weapons or equipment such as pistols, small hand-held radios,
weapon magazines and grenades were placed on victims for the
purpose of ‘site exploitation photography’. In essence, members
of the ADF were attempting to portray victims as legitimate
targets or combatants to conceal deliberate unlawful killings.
There were also practices of ‘blooding’, where junior soldiers were
required by their patrol commanders to shoot a prisoner to
achieve their ‘first kill’. ‘Throwdowns’ would be placed and a cover
story created for operational reporting, and soldiers were subject
to a ‘code of silence’.
A small number of patrol commanders and their protegees
(corporals or sergeants) have been found to be responsible. The
Inquiry has not conclusively reported on the motivations of
these individuals, but has listed several possible intentions: (1)
‘clearing’ the battlefield of people believed to be ‘insurgents’ in
disregard of the Laws of Armed Conflict; (2) ‘blooding’ new
members of the patrol and troop; and (3) out-scoring other
patrols in the number of enemy killed in action achieved.
Although direct criminal responsibility has not been found at the
higher levels of the ADF, the Brereton report has not absolved
them of responsibility. It calls for Special Operations Task Group
troop, squadron and task group Commanders to bear moral
command responsibility and accountability for the actions of
corporals and sergeants. It pinpoints indirect contributions of
senior-level officers by accepting deviations from professional
standards, sanitising or embellishing reports and failing to
challenge accounts given from lower-level officers.
However, these factors have not resulted in alleged liability for
senior-level officers under the doctrine of command
responsibility (see section 268.115 Criminal Code). Under this
legal doctrine of liability, senior-level officials can be responsible
for war crimes if they have a sufficient degree of command and
control over their subordinates.
The facts suggest that superior officers were not in a position,
organisationally or geographically, to influence the Special
Operations Task Group. Moreover, they had responded
appropriately when allegations arose, with investigations only
being frustrated through ‘outright deceit by those who knew the
truth’. Thus, the report concluded that: ‘there was little
opportunity for the Commanding Officer of any Special
Operations Task Group rotation to create a Special Operations
Task Group culture’.

Major General Justice Brereton, who led the Inquiry, has
described the acts of ADF officers in Afghanistan as ‘disgraceful
and a profound betrayal’ of the ADF. Since the release of the
Inquiry’s report, the chief of the ADF, General Angus Campbell,
has accepted all 143 recommendations outlined in the Inquiry.
This includes referrals to a new office of the special investigator
to consider criminal prosecutions, changes in the ADF’s
organisational structure and an apology to the people of
Afghanistan.
The involvement of Australia in war crimes is another blow in
Australia’s international image, which has already been marked
by acknowledgement of genocide and crimes against humanity
during the Stolen Generations by UN Special Rapporteur Tauli-
Corpuz and breaches of international refugee and human rights
law in Australia’s asylum seeker detention policies by UN Special
Rapporteur Crépeau.
The Brereton report also has serious ramifications for Australia’s
Western allies, as it sets a precedent for Western countries to
finally be held accountable for their own conduct in armed
conflicts. Already, advocates are calling for British and American
defence forces to be investigated for war crimes in
Afghanistan. Australia’s support for international organisations
and instruments designed to end impunity such as the
International Criminal Court has also been weakening, with
diplomats joining U.S. and U.K. scepticism for its efficiency and
efficacy.
Over the next few years, Australians will witness prosecutions
that mark dark moments in Australian history. This will be the
first time that the war crime provisions of the Criminal Code will
be utilised in Australian courts, serving as a stark reminder to all
of what the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute were
designed to prevent.
Kelly Phan
“WHEN YOU’RE BACK AT THE UNIT, PEOPLE WOULD MAKE JOKES ABOUT THE SIZE OF
THE RUG THAT THEY’VE SWEPT EVERYTHING UNDER, AND THAT ONE DAY IT’LL ALL
COME OUT AND PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE THROWN IN JAIL FOR MURDER OR ANYTHING
ELSE THAT THEY’VE DONE.”

I n t h e s h a d o w o f a g l o b a l
p a n d e m i c ,
S i n o - A u s t r a l i a n
d i p l o m a t i c r e l a t i o n s h a v e
s u n k t o a n a l l - t i m e l o w .
T h e d e p a r t u r e o f B i r t l e s
a n d S m i t h m e a n s t h a t
t h e r e a r e n o j o u r n a l i s t s
w o r k i n g f o r A u s t r a l i a n
m e d i a
o r g a n i s a t i o n s
c u r r e n t l y o p e r a t i n g i n
C h i n a . T h i s i s a t r a g e d y
f o r t h e c o v e r a g e o f C h i n a -
r e l a t e d t o p i c s i n t h e
A u s t r a l i a n m e d i a . N o t o n l y
w i l l i t u n d e r m i n e
A u s t r a l i a n s ’ e x p o s u r e t o
C h i n e s e c u l t u r e a n d
s o c i e t y , b u t i t w i l l a l s o
j e o p a r d i s e t h e n u a n c e o f a
n a t i o n a l d e b a t e a b o u t o u r
r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h C h i n a
t h a t i s m o r e i m p o r t a n t n o w
t h a n a t a n y p o i n t i n t h e
p a s t 4 0 y e a r s .
DARCY FRENCH - CHINA AND AUSTRALIA'S DIPLOMATIC SPAT WILL UNDERMINE CROSS-CULTURAL EMPATHY AND UNDERSTANDING (SEPT 24)

The Australian Antarctic Territory (AAT) has always been a territorial
oddity, encompassing an impressive 42% of the Antarctic continent
and situated more than 3,500 kilometres away from Canberra.
Paradoxically, while the territory is enormous - almost 77 per cent of
the size of Australia itself - the AAT occupies little to no space within
the Australian psyche. Few Australians are aware of its existence and
fewer still recognise its importance to the nation’s welfare.
Neglected though it may be, the AAT is nonetheless of vital
significance to Australia. Its fragile ecosystems are intimately tied to
those of the Australian continent. Moreover, its political status under
the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS) as a military-free region ensures
that Australia does not have to worry about its southern flank turning
into an area of inter-state competition.
HUGH MCFARLANE
Australia must rapidly step up its efforts to better
integrate the AAT into its strategic policymaking, as the
territory is an integral part of its geopolitical landscape.
The effort to turn theoretical sovereignty into a reality
must begin in the minds of the Australian public and
Australia’s Antarctic policymakers. The fact that 42% of
the Antarctic continent is legally Australian territory
should not be a little-known fact reserved for trivia nights.
It should be something that is taught in Australian schools,
reflected on Australian maps, and taken seriously by all
policymakers with responsibility for the AAT. This will
naturally increase the political importance of the AAT to
Australian policymakers as the public comes to expect
Canberra to take the territory seriously.
Once the AAT is on the priority list, Australia must increase
the size and number of its Antarctic stations so that
Australian scientists and technicians can protect and study
larger portions of the AAT in line with Australian
environmental law. This should include significant
investment in the types of infrastructure, personnel, and
emerging technologies that already promise to make the
frozen continent more accessible.
DEFROSTING AUSTRALIA'S ANTARCTIC POLICY
At the same time, Australian officials must ensure that
other ATS member states with research stations in the
AAT are not only abiding by the rules and regulations of
the ATS, but also by Australian expectations.
The fact that the ATS has managed to preserve Antarctica as a
scientific preserve free of military activity, mineral exploitation, and
nuclear weapons has allowed Australia to take the benign conditions
on the continent for granted. However, as climate change grows in
severity and the ban on Antarctic mining eventually lapses,
environmental conditions that were previously favourable are now
deteriorating. Likewise, as a confident China expands its network of
Antarctic stations and continues to push illegitimate territorial claims
elsewhere in the Indo-Pacific, the time has come for Australian
strategic policymakers to take Antarctica and the AAT seriously.
However, the argument for increased Australian influence
in the AAT should not be interpreted as a push for
colonial-style expansion into a continent rightly
recognised by the ATS as an asset to be shared by all of
humanity. Rather, the assertion of Australian sovereignty
should be recognised as the best method for Australia to
ensure that a continent of vital importance to its fragile
environment is protected from human mismanagement
and damaging resource exploitation. It is also imperative
that cities like Hobart, Melbourne and Adelaide do not
eventually come under threat from a militarised Antarctic
continent.
ULTIMATELY, AUSTRALIA’S ENVIRONMENTAL AND
NATIONAL SECURITY PROSPECTS IN ANTARCTICA ARE
RAPIDLY CHANGING. THE TIME HAS COME TO BRING
AUSTRALIA’S ANTARCTIC POLICY IN FROM THE COLD
AND REASSERT AUSTRALIAN SOVEREIGNTY IN THE AAT.

BIG WEATHER THAT
SHAPED US
Anet McClintock
FLOODS
Sudan
Record-breaking floods in Sudan this year forced the
Sudanese government to call a state of emergency across
the country. By the end of August, the Nile, the major river
system that flows through Sudan, reached nearly 17.5
metres.
Later this year, the United Nations advised that the floods
affected more than one million people in the country. The
floods also triggered major landslides which have affected
much of its population.
China
Meanwhile, in China, the Yangtze River broke its banks. 130
other rivers in the country experienced flooding.
Cumulatively more than 130 people died and more than 1.5
million people were forced to evacuate. The floods were also
important since they shed light on the shortcomings of
China’s largest hydroelectric dam - the Three Gorges Dam.
Many say the dam, which is less than 20 years old, has
failed to do exactly what it was designed to do; prevent
destructive floods.
Cambodia and Vietnam
Tropical storms were the cause of floods in central Vietnam
and Cambodia in October this year. The torrential rain,
together with the ensuing landslides, killed at least 132
people and affected more than 5 million people in the South-
East Asian countries. Many of the countries’ livestock were
also wiped out with more than 650,000 livestock and
poultry were killed due to the rains. Many Cambodians and
Vietnamese people rely on farming as their main source of
income, and so the loss of their livestock may cause longterm
devastation.
EARTHQUAKES
Turkey and Greece - Aegean Sea Earthquake
The Mediterranean was rocked by one of the worst
earthquakes of the year. The Turkish holiday city of Izmir
was particularly hard hit - approximately 17 buildings fell,
and more than 116 people died. A couple of young people on
the Greek island, Samos, were killed due to the earthquake
as well. It was the largest earthquake in Turkey in over ten
years.
US
The biggest earthquake this year happened just off the
southern coast of Alaska. The 7.8 magnitude earthquake did
not cause significant damage, and luckily, no people were
injured or killed.

CYCLONES, HURRICANES &
TYPHOONS
Philippines
Typhoon Vamco, the 21st typhoon to hit the south-east
Asian country, has resulted in a death toll of 67 people, with
a dozen people still missing. Nearly 26,000 houses were
damaged, and destruction to infrastructure and agriculture
is estimated AUD$43 million.
LA NINA
Although only in its infant stages, Australia is in for a La
Niña Summer. Especially tropical regions on the east coast,
such as Queensland and Northern Territory, are going to
experience increased rainfalls, tropical cyclones, and
flooding.
Somalia
Tropical Cyclone Gati originated in the Indian Ocean and has
landed in Somalia on Africa’s east coast. The cyclone
dropped two years worth of rain on the coastal African
country, in merely two days. Although the cyclone itself was
quite small, it was damagingly fast, reaching 185km per
hour. The cyclone made landfall at small desert communities
north of the country’s capital, Mogadishu.
HEATWAVES
Nicaragua
More than 800,000 people had to be evacuated from the
central American country’s east coast after destructive
Hurricane Iota battered the state. The hurricane landed mid-
November, just two weeks after Hurricane Eta wreaked
havoc on the same region, killing 120 people. Both El-
Salador and Honduras were also impacted by the hurricane,
whose powerful winds and torrential rain caused flooding
and landslides.
Siberia
Siberia in northern Russia experienced record-breaking
heatwaves this year. One town in the usually extremely cold
tundra recorded a temperature of 38 degrees. This type of
climate event usually only happens once every 80 000 years
in Siberia, but climate change has made it 600 times more
likely. The heatwaves have caused massive wildfires to
spread across the region. More than 20.9 million hectares of
land has been lost since the start of the year due to fires in
Siberia.
U.S.
DUST STORMS
In the middle of this year, a giant dust cloud, nicknamed
‘Godzilla’ swept across the Atlantic Ocean from Africa to the
continental U.S. Cities on the east coast such as Miami
were shrouded in a brown cloud, and air quality alerts were
issued for millions of citizens in these areas. The dust
originated in the Sahara desert in Northern Africa, the
largest non-polar desert in the world. Air pressure systems
carried the dust to the Americas and formed the unusually
thick cloud.
Australia
It appears that 2020 in Australia will be bookended by
record-breaking heatwaves. The country made headlines
earlier in the year for the ‘Black Summer’ bushfires that
killed 34 people, and more than half a billion animals. With
the Bureau of Meteorology announcing that Australia has
experienced its hottest spring on record, many are fearing
another scorching summer is just around the corner.

S c o r c h e d E a r t h - A n I n t e n s e Ye a r
o f I n t e r n a t i o n a l F i r e s
KATE BACKSHALL
In the shadow of the pandemic, you could be forgiven for missing the scale of this year’s global fire crisis.
2020 has sadly broken global fire records that should never have been broken. With 2019 already a recordbreaking
year for global fire outbreaks, it is worrying that 2020 is beating it by a further 13 per cent.
Fire is a natural seasonal occurrence in many parts of the world, however, the scale of these events have been
increasing for decades and the length of fire-seasons has been extending over the past 40 years. A
concerning characteristic of the world’s fire events, in addition to their immediate threat to lives, homes and
landscapes, is that their CO2 output is enormous. Fire has always made up a part of our planet's natural
carbon cycles but, due to human-induced climate change, they are increasing in regularity and severity. These
increasingly intense fire seasons risk contributing to a feedback loop that exacerbates CO2 levels, which inturn
further aggravates the fire crisis. The planet has physically begun to see the impacts of climate change
with a 0.9-degree rise in temperatures already changing landscapes to be more prone to fire.
BLAZES IN AUSTRALIA AND THE US
Globally, the ferocity of Australia’s bushfires sparked further conversations about the impacts that climate
change is having on extreme weather events across the world. Shortly after, the US’ fire season reminded the
world that this was not simply a freak occurrence, but a worrying trend.
Australia’s ‘Black Summer’ fires took nearly nine months from when they first began, unseasonably early in
June, to be brought under control in March. In that time, the fires managed to ravage an area roughly the size of
the United Kingdom and the smoke plume they generated physically impacted 57 per cent of the Australian
adult population and circled the earth for over three months. The smoke and ash also contributed to the
creation of new fires because as it cooled in the atmosphere they created fire-induced thunderstorms, which
generated new blazes. Sadly, 34 Australians lost their lives, thousands of homes were destroyed and a revised
figure estimates nearly 3-billion animals were impacted by the fires (either killed or displaced). This disaster has
been considered one of the worst wildlife catastrophes in modern history. The interconnected state of the
world’s weather, through phenomena like the Indian Ocean Dipole - which moves heat across the ocean -
means that severe weather events do not operate in a vacuum. For example, while this phenomenon
exacerbated the dry conditions in Australia, which contributed to such a harsh fire season, it simultaneously
caused the worst flooding in Africa in two decades .
In addition, the fires in the US began in July with some still burning as of late November 2020, impacting 13
states across the country. The conditions have mimicked the Australian fires, with many states facing extreme
drought and dry winds off the back of some of the hottest summers on record. These fires are the latest in an
increasing trend of fire intensity, with six of California’s 20 largest fires since reliable record-keeping began
happening this year. The pandemic has further complicated the situation by putting pressure on resources and
ideological disputes about fire management.

OTHER SIGNIFICANT
WILDFIRES
While these two major headline-grabbing fires captured
the attention of the media, for good reason due to their
devastation and severity, they were hardly the only
significant fires that raged on this year.
In Brazil, fires are spreading within both the Amazon
rainforest and the lesser-known but also spectacularly
diverse Pantanal Wetlands, home to many endangered
species including Jaguar and Tapir. This year’s blaze is on
the heels of similar fires last year which, at the time, drew
concern because of the sheer devastation to the precious
ecosystem. The tragedy is worse this year but it is drawing
far less of the world’s attention. The rainforest is extremely
biodiverse and possesses important carbon sink properties
- which absorbs carbon, helping to manage C02 levels
which would otherwise contribute to climate change. The
fires are the result of, in large part, dryer weather paired
with slash-and-burn agriculture and land-grabbing
practices. Fears surrounding fires contributing to a
negative feedback loop are particularly relevant for the
Amazon. For example, the levels of deforestation have
flagged concerns that it could approach a tipping point
where it would no longer sustain itself and instead begin
degenerating into a savannah, wreaking havoc due to its
role in regulating Latin American weather systems.
Fires in Ukraine were the biggest ever seen within the
exclusion zone forests near the Chernobyl nuclear power
plant site, which notoriously melt-down in 1986. There was
serious concern that the flames might reach the highly
radioactive site as it burned less than 2kms away. The air
quality in Kyiv was recorded as the worst in the world
during the event and authorities worried about the
possibility that radiation trapped in the environment would
be released into the air from burning wood and soil.
Indonesia’s 2020 fires have been milder in comparison, but
they follow on from severe fires from last year, which were
considered more toxic than those in the Amazon and
created a smoke haze which choked their regional
neighbours. The fires this year have further impacted the
biodiversity within the Sumatran rainforest and their tropical
peatlands. In the economic fallout from the pandemic,
Indonesia has sped through an ‘omnibus bill’ to encourage
more industry. Controversially, this bill reverses
environmental protections designed to reduce the slash and
burn practices used to clear land for palm oil, pulp and
paper.
The Arctic is one of the fastest-warming regions of the
planet. Fires in the Arctic are not unusual but this wildfire
season has been the worst since record-keeping began,
with fires emerging in areas normally too wet or frozen to
burn. The region is experiencing a phenomenon called
‘zombie fires’ which smoulder underground in the carbonrich
peat beneath the surface, sparking new fires. This is
significant because as the permafrost thaws due to climate
change, it releases flammable gases like methane which
allow the fire to potentially holdover into the next season.
CONCLUSION
This year has been significant for fire activity across the
globe. From the ‘top’ in the Arctic Tundra to the ‘bottom’ in
Australia, and scattered generously in between, there have
been devastating fires concerning climate scientists the
world over. The trend of increasingly dry conditions which
have worsened these fire events can be attributed to
human-induced climate change and deforestation. It is,
however, still possible to curb the worse effects of climate
change and avoid increasingly severe fire seasons across
the globe by enacting timely environmental protections.
Fortunately, many of the solutions required to make
comprehensive changes and lower C02 emissions already
exist but this is a complex geopolitical problem that
requires commitment and collaboration across borders.

NEW
ZEALAND &
THE PACIFIC

As West Papua celebrated its self-proclaimed independence day
this year on December 1, independence leaders declared a
provisional “government-in-waiting” for the Indonesian province.
This “provisional government” was announced by the United
Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP), which alongside
issuing a new constitution, appointed exiled leader Benny Wenda
as interim president for the “government-in-waiting”.
In order to stem this independence movement, Indonesia’s
government is currently trying to extend the “special autonomy”
provisions first granted to West Papua in 2001 under the Special
Autonomy Law. This law gives West Papuan leaders the authority
"to regulate and manage the interests of the local people".
However, pro-independence fighters say the law is only there to
quell any independence aspirations from being realised.
The ULMWP says its new "government-in-waiting" wants to hold
a referendum on independence, which would grant the
organisation legitimacy to form government. However,
Indonesian authorities are reluctant to release their grip on the
territory. Indonesian Foreign Affairs Ministry spokesperson, Teuku
Faizasyah, said: "[u]nder what pretext [does] somebody by the
name of Benny Wenda make a self-proclaimed status as
representative of the Indonesian people of Papua?”
West Papua has long struggled with the idea of independence.
When Indonesia gained independence from The Netherlands in
1949, West Papua remained separate but then was later
incorporated into the nation in 1963. In 1969, the UN General
Assembly called for a referendum to determine whether West
Papua was to be independent, but this was unsuccessful. Since
then, West Papuan nationalists have fought against West Papua’s
absorption into the Indonesian state and have led an
independence movement calling for another referendum to
decide the sovereignty of West Papua.
Jakarta is unwilling to grant the province independence, as it
sees the area – which is rich in natural resources – as an
indivisible part of the nation. One of President Joko Widodo’s
(Jokowi) 2019 election promises was to develop Indonesia “from
the periphery”. In 2019, 22 per cent of West Papua’s population
were considered to be living in poverty, compared to just three
per cent of Jakarta’s population. This wealth disparity prompted
policies focusing on closing the economic gap between rural and
urban areas, through the stimulation of economic growth in
regional communities. However, despite the Government pouring
millions of dollars into development and infrastructure projects
in the region, West Papuan independence leaders have made it
clear that such projects are not enough: they want
independence.
The fight for independence is not unique to West Papua. The
Pacific region has been grappling with a colonial hangover for
years, with several islands achieving independence over the last
fifty years. New Caledonia was the most recent nation to take the
independence question to a referendum, with secession being
narrowly rejected by the populace.
RHIANNON ARTHUR
Snapshot of Independence Movements in the
Pacific
• PAPUA NEW GUINEA: Papua New Guinea achieved
independence from Australia on September 16, 1975.
• TUVALU: Tuvalu achieved independence from Britain on
October 1, 1978.
• KIRIBATI: Kiribati achieved independence from Britain on July
12, 1979.
• VANUATU: Vanuatu achieved independence from France and
Britain on July 30, 1980.
• TIMOR LESTE: Timor Leste voted overwhelmingly, in a UNsanctioned
referendum, for independence from Indonesia on
August 30, 1999, but was plunged into violence soon after. It
was not until May 20, 2002 that the nation had its full
independence restored.
• BOUGAINVILLE: Bougainville achieved independence from
Papua New Guinea in December, 2019, with the populace voting
overwhelmingly, with 98.31 per cent of votes in the referendum,
in favour of independence.
WEST PAPUA'S
FIGHT FOR
INDEPENDENCE
Not independence but?
There are also other Pacific islands that have not achieved
outright independence but fit into a third category of partial
independence. For example, Niue and the Cook Islands are
self-governing in free association with New Zealand. This
allows the two countries to be responsible for their own
domestic and foreign affairs, while residents hold New Zealand
citizenship. Similarly, the Micronesian nations of Palau,
Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia are
independent states, but have close defence relationships with
the United States. Citizens of these three countries have the
right to live and work in the United States too, suggesting it is
more than just a strategic relationship.
While there are many Pacific islands that have achieved
independence through referenda, or have achieved partial
independence, the right of West Papuans to govern
independently is being subjected to continuous challenges.
Indonesia is a vast archipelago made up of more than 1,300
ethnic groups spread out over 17,000 islands. Indonesia’s
national slogan is “unity in diversity” (Bhinneka Tunggal Ika),
which stands true with its many ethnic, linguistic, cultural and
religious groups. While Indonesia is a multicultural and
ecumenical success story in many ways, not everyone feels
part of the nation. The question of West Papuan independence
looks to remain contested for years to come.

The Pacific
Access Visa
scheme: a
Viable Climate
Mitigation
Strategy?
In the words of Tuvalu’s Prime Minister Rt Hon Enele Sosene
Sopoaga, “climate change represents the single greatest
threat to the livelihoods of the people living [in] low-lying,
vulnerable countries; their security, long-term sustainability
and well-being”. While the region has been battered by the
economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has also
faced several extreme weather events this year. Cyclone
Harold swept through the Solomon Islands, Vanuatu, Fiji, and
Tonga in April. Kiribati continues to battle rising sea levels.
The Philippines suffered the wrath of Typhoon Vongfong in
May and most recently, Typhoon Vamco. Further, there is no
reprieve in sight as the cyclical La Niña weather pattern is
expected to bring more rainfall and a deluge to the region in
the coming months.
More frequent extreme weather events, in combination with
rising sea levels, coastal erosion, and disrupted food and
water supplies mean that internal and cross-border
displacement is likely to increase across the Pacific. According
to Oxfam, an estimated 20 million people have been
displaced due to climate-induced disasters, making it the
main cause of internal displacement. As these natural
disasters become more frequent in the Pacific region, climate
refugees will become a challenge with which Australia will
need to reckon.
PACIFIC ACCESS VISA
In recognising this likely increase of climate refugees, a recent
policy paper from the Kaldor Centre for International Refugee
Law has recommended that Australia should introduce a
Pacific Access Visa for Pacific Islanders who have been
displaced by climate change. The paper argues that
implementing a visa program could ward off future regional
instability caused by the migration of Pacific Islanders, who will
find themselves displaced by natural disasters, seeking a new
home. Notwithstanding the “humanitarian imperative” of such
an initiative, the paper says it would also be in Australia’s
national interests as “the stability and prosperity of Pacific
Island countries directly impact[s] Australia”, and would allow
Australia to gain from the “economic and social contributions
Pacific Islanders [could] make as temporary and permanent
migrants”.
The program would be beneficial in a number of other ways as
well. First, voluntary migration would not only reduce
population pressures, but it would also increase income
diversification through remittances. It could also help to
transfer skills learnt abroad to locals which would improve
Pacific Islanders’ capacity to respond to climate change.
Further, implementing a visa system like this would
complement Australia’s previous commitments to building
climate-resistant infrastructure in the region, and would
expand upon existing visa programs, thereby adding to its good
global citizen status. Finally, it would allow Australia to show
leadership on an issue that is relatively novel in international
law. While climate refugees currently represent an ambiguous
concept in international law, having only recently entered the
legal lexicon, Australia could show leadership by spearheading
a framework to support these vulnerable people. Australia is
already facing the prospect of becoming more isolated in the
region when it comes to climate policy, so implementing this
scheme could show it is serious about the humanitarian
concerns of climate change, even if it will not commit to net
zero emissions by 2050.
WHILE THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC HAS DOMINATED MUCH OF THE MEDIA LANDSCAPE THIS YEAR,
OTHER EQUALLY DIRE GLOBAL CHALLENGES, SUCH AS CLIMATE CHANGE, ARE STILL MAKING
WAVES BELOW THE SURFACE. THE PACIFIC ISLANDS, MADE UP OF LOW-LYING ATOLLS GIRT BY SEA,
IS ONE OF THE REGIONS MOST SUSCEPTIBLE TO THE DIRE IMPACTS OF GLOBAL WARMING. A NEW
POLICY PAPER ADVOCATING FOR A PACIFIC ACCESS VISA FOR PACIFIC ISLANDERS MAY BE ONE WAY
AUSTRALIA CAN ASSIST ITS NEIGHBOURS GRAPPLING WITH RISING SEA LEVELS AND MORE
FREQUENT NATURAL DISASTERS.

THE VISA'S DRAWBACKS
On the other hand, the program could be viewed merely as a “band aid solution”, one that does not address the
real cause of climate change. The scheme does not specifically deal with the triggers of climate change, and
does not acknowledge the fact that Pacific Islanders may be resistant to the idea of leaving their place of
residence. The onus rests upon Pacific Islanders to uproot, rather than on developed nations to stop polluting
the atmosphere.
The paper’s authors Jane McAdam and Jonathan Pryke are well aware of this oversight. They argue it is a
practical response “in the absence of a radical reset of the domestic debate on energy policy”. Unfortunately,
changing Australia’s tune on its reliance on fossil fuels seems unlikely, at least in the near future, as it embraces
a gas-fired economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic. While other players in the region, like Japan and
South Korea, are committing to bold climate targets, Canberra has thus far maintained its intransigence on
overhauling Australia’s current climate policy. With this refusal to implement progressive climate-based
solutions, the proposed Pacific Access Visa aims to offer a solution based on short-term practicality.
IF THIS, WHAT NEXT?
While the Pacific Access Visa scheme provides a pragmatic
response to addressing the consequences of climate-induced
displacement, the only meaningful way Australia can play its
part in addressing the deleterious impacts of climate change is
through bolder climate policies.
Pacific Islanders have long been crying out for Australia to
change its climate policy. However, this appeal has all but fallen
on deaf ears. Jenny Hayward-Jones notes the disconnect
between Australia’s and the Pacific’s regional concerns: for
Pacific islanders, climate change is the single most pressing
security threat this century; for Australia, it is China’s increasing
assertiveness in the region. Hayward-Jones says: “Australia is
the principal aid donor and security partner in the region ...
most vulnerable to climate change, but has not exercised
leadership on climate change in its diplomatic, aid or security
planning.” Over the next decade or so, Australia will need to
reconcile with this and begin listening to its neighbours’
grievances if it wishes to maintain trusting and workable
relationships with its Pacific “family”. After all, Pacific leaders
will only withstand so much watering down of joint
communiques following regional summits.
Last month the Climate Transparency Report 2020 was
released, revealing that Australia is one of the largest users and
producers of fossil fuels out of all G20 nations. In fact,
Australia’s emissions are nearly three times higher than the
G20 average per capita. Australia has been a witness to the
terrible impacts of climate change, as much of the country
fought off bushfires last summer. It will be interesting to see if
domestic and international pressures could eventually force
Canberra to commit to net zero emissions by 2050, especially
in light of a Biden administration in the United States. Failure to
do so will see Australia isolated in the increasingly contested
Indo-Pacific region.
THE FUTURE?
The 2020 Cop26 Climate Conference was delayed this year
due to COVID-19, and will now take place in November 2021.
This provides Canberra with a year to reassess its climate
policies. In the meantime, the Pacific Access Visa represents a
practical step towards addressing the impacts of climate
change for our closest neighbours. They have long been
campaigning for Australia to take greater action on climate
change, and in the absence of bold targets, this represents a
welcome step in the right direction.
Rhiannon Arthur

JACINDA ARDERN - Leader
of a Utopia?
Jacinda Ardern was elected as Prime Minister of New Zealand in 2017 and enjoyed a historical
re-election in 2020, acquiring the absolute majority of parliament seats for the Labour Party.
Ardern’s first term, which included the 2019 Christchurch shooting and the COVID-19 pandemic,
was characterised by her gentle yet firm leadership style and her charismatic persona. These
qualities have led her to become one of the most effective and popular global leaders of the
twenty-first century and a role model of what leadership can and should be.
Ardern’s leadership during COVID-19 has been consistently supported by expert scientific
research and advice from New Zealand’s Director-General of Health, Dr Ashley Bloomfield,
which has contributed to New Zealand’s effective management of the pandemic. New Zealand
was one of the earliest countries to enforce strict lockdowns with a Stage 4 national lockdown
on March 25, despite only having 50 cases at the time. Although the international community
commented on the harsh nature of the measures, Ardern insisted that she would “make no
apologies”. Due to this preemptive lockdown, New Zealand became one of the first countries to
eliminate community transmission, as noted by Professor Berka from Massey University. In
addition, Ardern held Facebook Live sessions to hear public feedback and took a 20 per cent
pay cut in solidarity with those who have faced unemployment during the virus.
It is Ardern’s compassion for her constituents, coupled with popular support of her party’s
policies, that make her a beloved, trustworthy and inspirational leader. On March 15 2019, New
Zealand fell victim to an unprecedented anti-Muslim terrorist attack in a Christchurch mosque
that resulted in 51 fatalities. At a turbulent time when the racial divide could have been fuelled
by Ardern’s administration, she responded with a message of unity, claiming that “they are us”,
when referring to the victims of the shooting. She reiterated that New Zealand is a safe, diverse
and anti-racist country, and this symbolic speech was followed by Ardern consoling relatives of
the victims while wearing a black headscarf. Not only did she prioritise compassion after the
shooting, but she also immediately implemented stricter gun laws nationwide. In addition, her
decision to provide free sanitary products for schoolchildren and extend paid parental leave to
22 weeks shows that she leads with an understanding of womens’ issues and a commitment to
strive for meaningful social change.
Ultimately, Jacinda Ardern has led New Zealand for the past four years with a distinct brand of
kindness, empathy and compassion, which has been thoroughly supported by an array of
progressive policies that cater to marginalised and neglected groups. Even whilst facing some of
the biggest challenges any global leader has encountered, she has retained her charisma,
endearing personality and integrity, allowing the New Zealand public to feel safe and secure as
she is welcomed into her second term.
Isha Desai

“The worst case scenario is simply intolerable. It would represent the greatest loss
of New Zealander’s lives in our country’s history. I will not take that chance. The
government will do all it can to protect you. None of us can do this alone.”
- Jacinda Ardern

TRAVEL
Nathaniel Sgambellone

It is a well-worn truism that as we push further into the uncharted waters of the digital age,
every aspect of our lives is increasingly interconnected. The word ‘globalisation’ is often met
with flurries of concerned head-nodding and mentions of technological titans such as
Amazon and Tesla. Populist movements decry the dominance of global capitalist elites, and
the neoliberal world order seems to continually produce damaging global recessions and a
disaffected youth. And yet, the COVID-19 pandemic that has shaken the world to its core this
year has for the first time in living memory forced an almost universal, coordinated retreat
from our formerly interconnected lives, as state after state has transitioned into the uneasy
slumber of strictly enforced lockdowns. By far, the most visible impact of this rapid, drastic
shift has been the end of travel as we know it. A growing number of airlines such as Chile’s
LATAM and Virgin Australia have gone into voluntary administration, once-mighty cruise
ships are being dismantled and forgotten, and the United Nations has warned that the
pandemic will cost the global tourism industry upwards of $1.2 trillion US dollars. It seems
unlikely that it will be easy or cost-effective to embark on much-needed holidays for the
foreseeable future.
However, there is an important caveat to be made here. While globalisation has allowed the
citizens of many developed states to experience the vibrant patchwork of cultures and
histories that comprise the world we live in, this is a luxury that not all have been able to
afford. Indeed, for many of the world’s poor and disenfranchised, COVID-19 has merely added
a layer of complexity to the already systemic geopolitical issues that rendered international
travel a distant concept long before this latest pandemic. The ongoing crisis in Yemen has
resulted in over 24 million people requiring humanitarian aid; the Syrian civil war is in its
tenth year; and in excess of five million people have been killed since conflict began in the
Democratic Republic of the Congo in 1998. At the beginning of 2020, there were an estimated
79.5 million forcibly displaced people worldwide. Moreover, refugee status is only granted
once a person traverses an international border, which is increasingly difficult given the hard
borders and quarantine restrictions that have become a stark feature of the COVID-19
pandemic.
In the developed world, the fact that successive governments have limited our ability to travel
in response to COVID-19 rightly inspires a gamut of intense emotions, ranging from despair
to anger and regret. After all, the arbitrary suspension of a citizen’s right to leave their home
state is a source of great contention. This is particularly the case in states such as Australia
which, despite its democratic nature, strictly limits outbound travel, even though other
Western liberal democracies such as the United States have advised against but not
prevented their citizens from travelling abroad. As proud global citizens, we should continue
to mourn for the loss of international travel and look hopefully towards the day when we will
be able to enjoy it again. However, we must also remember that the ability to travel is a rare
gift, and one that countless millions do not enjoy. One can only hope that the silver lining to
the widespread socio-economic devastation of this year is that when we board that next
flight, we may do so more committed than ever to solving some of the pervasive problems
that prevent those less fortunate from enjoying the privilege of travelling for pleasure.

S O U T H E A
THAI DEMOCRACY PROTESTS
Akin to the symbolism of yellow umbrellas, Thai protesters have used
everything from rubber ducks to inflatable dinosaurs to protect themselves,
and highlight the disconnect between youth and the current government. Most
iconic is their use of the three-fingered salute, taken from popular film
franchise The Hunger Games, which protesters use to show their discontent
with the establishment and solidarity with one another.
Noah Diamantopoulos

S T A S I A
RESPONSES ACROSS SOUTH-EAST ASIA
THE MIXED SUCCESS OF COVID-19
Despite being one of the first regions to be hit with
COVID-19, the number of coronavirus cases in Southeast
Asia has been significantly lower than in other parts of
the world. This, alongside the success of states like
Vietnam and Thailand, has led to wide reporting of the
region as an ideal model for pandemic response. Taken at
face value, it is easy to see why this might be the case.
With the 2003 SARS outbreak still in the living memory of
the region, there has been rapid government response
and the enforcement of behavioural changes that have
been demonstrably effective in containing the spread of
the virus. On average, it took 17 days for Southeast Asian
states to implement lockdown measures or a state of
emergency following confirmation of 50 cases.
Additionally, there has been strong regional cooperation
through ASEAN with the establishment of the COVID-19
ASEAN Response Fund at a Special Summit of April 14.
In Southeast Asia, COVID-19 has been treated as a public
health issue rather than a partisan issue, and perhaps it is
this difference in approach that has led to Western states
embroiled in facial mask counter-movements to claim
Southeast Asia as a success story. However, under close
examination, it is plain to see that the spread of COVID-
19 in Southeast Asia has not been without its own unique
challenges. Worrying spikes continue to occur on a
cyclical basis, and Indonesia and the Philippines are
currently facing runaway daily infections.

With a total of 534,266 confirmed cases at the
time of writing, Indonesia leads the region by
a significant margin. Although the government
was quick to announce a state of emergency
on March 31, mixed messages have confused
the country’s pandemic response. As the
central government continues to carefully
balance the spread of the virus against the
threat to the Indonesian economy, President
Joko Widodo has emphasised physical
distancing over strict lockdown measures and
encouraged job creation in the face of
increasing case numbers. In response, local
leaders have imposed community-led
lockdowns and public health campaigns,
though these have been met with
condemnation by the government.
Following the announcement of a plan to
begin vaccinating Indonesian citizens by the
end of 2020, it is clear that Indonesia’s
COVID-19 response is centred around
achieving herd immunity. However, questions
have been raised about how the logistical
challenge of vaccinating 270 million people
across 17,000 islands may be realistically
overcome in a short enough time span to
achieve a sufficient level of immunity in the
population. Further, it is unclear how
vaccination programs will be received given
the false sense of security that has been
provided by the false cures previously touted
by members of Jokowi’s cabinet.
The Philippines has reported the secondhighest
number of confirmed cases at 428,864
cases at the time of writing. The first country
outside of China to report a confirmed case,
Filipinos have been dealing with COVID-19
since January 30. Like Indonesia, the
Philippines was quick to declare a state of
calamity, and militaristic lockdowns of various
strictness were implemented across the
country that disproportionately affected the
poor.
Though President Duterte has fiercely
emphasised social distancing, a year of
natural disasters has made such efforts
challenging to say the least. In late
October, the approach of Typhoon Goni
saw the evacuation of nearly 1 million
people to evacuation centres, that in some
cases, were already being used to house
coronavirus patients.
In November, the Philippines rolled out a
vaccination plan seeking to achieve herd
immunity by vaccinating 60 – 70 per cent
of citizens in the next 3-5 years. Logistical
challenges aside, the Philippines is still
gripped by an anti-vax movement that has
led to recent resurgences of previously
eradicated diseases including measles and
polio. With only 32 per cent of surveyed
Filipino parents strongly agreeing in 2018
that vaccines are important—down from
93 per cent in 2015—it is unclear how the
rollout will be received by vaccine
sceptical citizens.
Despite the comparatively lower number
of active cases to other regions, the
challenges that some of the less affluent
states within the region will experience in
receiving adequate doses of vaccines, as
well as the logistical and cultural
challenges of achieving widespread
vaccination, will result in COVID-19 being
a fixture in the landscape of Southeast
Asia for the coming years. As it stands,
Southeast Asian states are on average
posting GDP growth rates 6.45% lower
than projected for 2020, and many are
currently experiencing the effects of
COVID-related recession. These effects
will continue to drive the desire to reopen
economies, and without effective
immunity, will inevitably result in further
outbreaks among unvaccinated
populations.

In addition to this, while the virus itself has
not faced partisan political debate in the way
we have seen in the West, there have
certainly been political challenges. The
enforcement of emergency measures has led
Southeast Asia to experience what has been
described as one of the most extensive
democratic regressions in the world. Rising
populism, authoritarian rule, military
involvement in politics, punitive
punishments, mass surveillance, media and
protest restriction, and the targeting of
refugees are just some of the concerning
outcomes identified in a recent Freedom
House report.
Important to note is that Southeast Asia is
not homogenous. The states of the region,
while bound together through their shared
participation in regional cooperation bodies
such as ASEAN, are unique and disparate. In
addition, they face less visible challenges in
responding to COVID-19 when we attempt to
understand and respond to the pandemic
beyond the number of individuals infected. It
is true that there have been successes, and it
remains true that the early handling of the
pandemic provides a number of lessons to
states still refusing to acknowledge the
efficacy of behavioural modification policies
such as mask-wearing and social distancing.
However, there is a danger in touting
Southeast Asia as a success story and
discounting the number of reported
infections as low. Some states will be fighting
this pandemic for years to come and
underreporting of this fact has the potential
to lead to complacency in the face of the
dangers of the virus, but also in the slow and
steady rollback of liberal freedoms.
IN SOUTHEAST ASIA, COVID-19 HAS BEEN
TREATED AS A PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE RATHER
THAN A PARTISAN ISSUE, AND PERHAPS IT IS THIS
DIFFERENCE IN APPROACH THAT HAS LED TO
WESTERN STATES EMBROILED IN FACIAL MASK
COUNTER-MOVEMENTS TO CLAIM SOUTHEAST
ASIA AS A SUCCESS STORY.
IAIN D. JOHNSON

2020 Myanmar Election
Recap and Aung San Suu
Kyi’s Image
Myanmar's national election this year continues the trend of
democratic elections in the country with the National League of
Democracy (NLD) Party winning its second consecutive election and
gifting State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi’s Government a second
term. Being only the third legitimate election since 1990, this result is
a significant victory for Counsellor Suu Kyi and illustrates the
development of democracy in the country. With the country still
recovering from military and autocratic rule, this election serves as a
significant step forward for democracy in the country.
Despite the increasing pressure and international criticism around
Counsellor Suu Kyi’s handling of the Rohingya crisis - including
barring the Rohingya people and the Rakhine state the right to vote -
Counsellor Suu Kyi’s government still remains popular enough to
secure another overwhelming majority in both the House of
Representatives and House of Nations giving the State Counsellor a
huge mandate and expectation to perform over the next 5 years.
This election was also a significant result for democracy in Myanmar
with over 6900 candidates from 92 political parties contesting the
election which demonstrates the rapid rise of the electoral process in
the country. The Rohingya peoples were still left without a voice with
the Rakhine state disallowed from voting, 6 Rohingya candidates had
their campaigns scrapped and delegitimised which meant they could
not contest seats. This is in direct contrast to Counsellor Suu Kyi’s
many promises to the Rohingya peoples that she would provide
them the right to a political voice and representation.
On top of this, due to the country’s limited history with democracy,
opposition party Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) has
contested the results. However, Richard Horsey from the
International Crisis Group is doubtful that the election result will be
overturned regardless of the USDP’s election claims due to how
conclusive the victory was on election night.

Counsellor Suu Kyi still has a favourable, yet precarious position in the
public eye. While Counsellor Suu Kyi has experienced criticism in her
own country since ascending to Government, particularly her inability
to deliver promised reforms to the Rohingya peoples and her
Government’s seizure and arrest of students presenting their political
views; she still has a strong public position that has been carried by her
international reputation as a Nobel peace prize laureate and her
support for a democratic Myanmar. However, her support may
continue to dwindle if she fails to progress on her promises in the next
5 years.
To many, it appears that Suu Kyi has had difficulty negotiating a very
precarious political landscape where she needs to lead in coordination
with a military that has a constitutional mandate to hold cabinet
positions in the Home Affairs, Defence and Border Affairs portfolios.
This has made it difficult for her to lead outright, even despite her
Government majority. Her Government’s conclusive re-election
demonstrates that she is seen as an effective leader and that the
country understands that reform takes time and she should be given a
chance to prove herself.
With this election result Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi can rest easy
knowing that her country is supporting her, but she will also be aware
that she will be expected to deliver her promised reforms in her second
term including support for the Rohingya peoples, and more support for
freedom of speech despite what power the military may have in her
Government.
This election demonstrates the patience of the Myanmar people, who
after enduring years of dictatorships and military led autocracies, are
making the most of their opportunities to exercise their right to vote.
Even despite the overshadowing of the COVID-19 pandemic,
constituents were still prepared to vote and candidates were still eager
to contest and be involved in the political process.
Myanmar’s transition to a full democracy seems to be well on track
even despite the limited voting rights for the Rohingya peoples. The
people of Myanmar seem keen for the future of democracy in their
country and are hoping for more continued progress over the next 5
years. However, it remains to be seen what may happen with the
Rohingya people and the impact that the Rakhine state may have on
future elections and on Myanmar politics. The next 5 years may also
make it clearer as to whether Counsellor Suu Kyi is being controlled by
the military or whether she is acting of her own accord. How
Counsellor Suu Kyi manages her next term may also have huge
implications on her legacy and whether she lives up to her reputation
as a beacon of democracy and freedom in Myanmar or whether she is
just another cult of personality political figure who loses her way after
gaining power.
As a result, Myanmar and the international community should watch
with interest the affairs of the NLDP Government and Suu Kyi’s
leadership, and how Myanmar handles a post pandemic future, and
whether this solidifies the country’s transition towards becoming a full
and more stable democracy on the world stage.
TIMOTHY PINZONE

F O R G E T T I N G : A N U P D A T E O
M I S S E D I N T H E W
Forgotten are the days we shake each other’s hands, hug our loved ones or even cough in public. In the year that
caused immense pain, suffering and loss, 2020 has also been the year many of us have forgotten about ongoing
conflicts and disasters around the world. The COVID-19 pandemic has seen many of those concerns, regarding human
rights, corruption and civil wars around the world, forgotten.
Following the declaration of a global pandemic, the United Nations Secretary-General called for a global ceasefire in
March, 2020. Despite this, long term conflicts have continued to contend with the pandemic. It is therefore important
the world continues to stay abreast of these continuing conflicts in the hopes that our roles in trying to solve them
aren’t curtailed, especially in a year of reactive politics.
Here are eight newsworthy developments you may have missed
this year:
2.
LIBYAN CIVIL WAR
1.
SYRIAN CIVIL WAR
The Northern Syrian province of Idlib has seen an increase in
hostilities throughout 2020. Syria confirmed its first case of
COVID-19 on March 23, 2020, and its first COVID-19 death on
March 30, 2020. Despite this, earlier in the month Russia and
Turkey agreed to a three-part ceasefire agreement. With
speculation over its ability to withstand the tensions in the
region, this agreement aimed to impose a ceasefire in the
rebel-controlled province of Idlib and stop the further
displacement of Syrian civilians. However, as with previous
ceasefire agreements, this ceasefire did not last. The
agreement has been consistently broken since its inception.
On June 3, 2020, Russia carried out airstrikes targeting rebelheld
regions which border Hama, Idlib and Latakia. This was
the first major attack by Russia since the ceasefire deal.
Retaliation from Turkish forces saw 309 Syrian troops killed. A
suspected Russian air raid was also carried out on October
26, 2020, killing rebel fighters in the Idlib province. Continued
aggression by both Russian and Turkish forces in the Idlib
region means a continued humanitarian crisis. The UN has
declared numerous human rights violations from all sides of
the conflict and calls for all parties involved to refrain from
these continuous abuses.
This year saw the Libyan Civil War continue to
strengthen an “unfolding geopolitical power play”
between Turkey, Russia, Egypt and the United Arab of
Emirates. The UN-recognised Government of National
Accord (GNA) has since acquired control of much of
western Libya and pushed the Libyan National Army
(LNA), led by General Khalifa Haftar, out of key strategic
geographical regions. Following the defeats of the LNA
by the GNA throughout 2020, militias have since
realigned themselves with the GNA, strengthening the
GNA’s momentum in gaining control of oil fields in the
region.
3.
THE FIGHT AGAINST
ISIL
Throughout 2020 ISIL have continued to lose key posts
throughout Syria and Iraq. This has hurt their ability to
perform “large-scale internal and external attacks”.
However, ISIL has continued to source funding via illicit
activities and strengthened its low-level operations. ISIL
inspired attacks have continued across both the Middle
East and Western countries, including the recent
attacks in France and Iraq. Despite their ensuing
presence throughout the world and their ideologies, ISIL
fighters have continued to be prosecuted throughout
2020.

N W H A T Y O U M I G H T H A V E
O R L D T H I S Y E A R
ELLE GREAVES
4.
SOUTH SUDAN
The South Sudanese Civil War came to a head on February
22, 2020 with a transitional coalition government forming
and taking power throughout the country. This marked the
cumulative end to the civil war which began in 2013.
Despite concerted efforts of coalition forces, the current
political climate in South Sudan is fragile - corruption,
militia and a humanitarian crisis remains rampant
throughout the region. Most recently, violence broke out
between the army and civilians killing 70 individuals.
Although this violence does not amount to a civil war, it is
resemblant of the beginnings of a conflict like that of the
previous seven years.
5.
UKRAINE
The Russo-Ukrainian War saw a ceasefire agreement
come into effect on July 27, 2020. Although only covering
eastern Ukraine, this ceasefire has seen an 88.9 per cent
decrease in casualties within 100 days of the agreement.
This ceasefire dramatically decreased the likelihood of
civilian casualties and displacement from heavy shelling
in the Donbas region. However, this agreement has been
violated multiple times, reflecting the situation which
occurred in Syria.
6.
ROHINGYA REFUGEE
7.
CRISIS
MIDDLE EAST PROTESTS
The COVID-19 pandemic caused the UN to issue a call for
a more holistic and lasting solution to the Rohingya
refugee crisis. As of 2020, Bangladesh hosts 9 out of 10
Rohingya refugees. The call from the UN referenced the
need for “whole-society engagement” which would see
Rohingya people safely return to Myanmar. In addition to
this latest call, the COVID-19 pandemic has seen many
Rohingyas move to Malaysia and other Southeast Asian
countries as a result of great poverty and a lack of
opportunities to return home.
8.
ISRAEL-PALESTINE
RELATIONS
Reminiscent of the 2011 Arab Spring, anti-government
protests continued to spring to life throughout the Middle
East in 2020. Reflecting on the first anniversary of the
2019 anti-government protests, many countries saw a
resurgence of protests, albeit significantly more peaceful.
In Iraq, protestors stormed Tahrir Square to demand
reforms and an end to corruption. Lebanese protesters
took to the streets and lit candles in mass
demonstrations outside key government buildings. Syria
also saw anti-regime protests erupt in dissent of the
Assad regime. Despite these demonstrations being more
peaceful than those in 2019, and especially those in
2011, many individuals were still arrested and beaten as
a result of their political beliefs.
In their attempt to continue to act as a broker between Israel and Palestine, the United States have taken it one step further in
2020 by negotiating numerous peace deals. The Abraham Accord was one such agreement which the Trump administration
brokered between Israel and the United Arab Emirates. This agreement is aimed at normalising relations between the two
states. Agreements with Bahrain, Qatar and Sudan followed, slowly mending relations between Israel and the broader Middle
East. However, Palestinians maintain that these agreements undermine their efforts of statehood. Palestinian efforts took a
step backwards in their attempt to gain recognition instead of normalisation, with the death of their chief negotiator, Saeb
Erekat, in early November.

MILESTONES AND SET-
BACKS FOR LGBTQI
RIGHTS IN 2020
ERICA BELL

2020 has been a year of both
challenges and progress for the
LGBTQI+ community. The following is
a list of notable events and
landmarks in LGBTQ rights that
took place around the world this
year.
JANUARY
A law allowing a third gender option on driver licenses takes
effect in New Hampshire, USA.
Same-sex marriage legislation comes into full effect in Northern
Ireland.
FEBURARY
Croatia's Supreme Court ruled that blocking same-sex couples
from fostering children is unconstitutional. The ruling makes
fostering legal for same-sex couples in Croatia effective
immediately, by overruling part of a law regarding the foster
system introduced in 2018 that barred same-sex couples from
fostering.
In Israel, a change of gender on a passport no longer requires
surgery to have occurred and the age for which this change is
possible has been lowered from 18 to 16 years old.
MARCH
In Hong Kong, the High Court struck down discriminatory public
housing policies. The judge continued "There is no reason to
believe that low-income families constituted by same-sex
couples have any lesser need for housing than low-income
families constituted by opposite-sex couples without children."
This ruling effectively means public housing for families will now
be available to same-sex couples in Hong Kong.
JUNE
In the United States, the Department of Health and Human
Services rolled back an Obama-era executive order which
made it so transgender individuals were protected from
discrimination in healthcare. Discrimination on the basis of
sex had also included discrimination of sex-stereotypes in
relation to HHS guidelines because of this executive order,
effectively making it illegal for healthcare and insurance
providers to discriminate against individuals for being
transgender. The rolling back of this executive order means
that transgender people in US can legally be discriminated
against in access and price of healthcare and health
insurance on the basis of being transgender.
JULY
In Russia, a referendum on more than 200 constitutional
amendments resulted in a constitutional ban on same-sex
marriages.
The President of Gabon signed a law decriminalising samesex
sexual activity in the country.
Sudan lifted the death penalty for homosexuality. However,
it remains criminalised.
AUGUST
In Barbados, discrimination on the basis of sexuality has
become illegal after the House and Senate passed a bill that
inserted various employment-discrimination protections
into the law.
SEPTEMBER
In Hong Kong, the High Court ruled that the inheritance and
intestacy laws of the city have to apply equally to same-sex
couples as they do for opposite-sex couples.
APRIL
In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration relaxed
blood donation restrictions for men who have sex with other
men, reducing the deferral period from one year to three months.
MAY
Albania became the third European country to ban conversion
therapy.
The president of Zambia has pardoned nearly 3,000 inmates that
were convicted for homosexuality in the past decade. However,
homosexuality remains illegal in Zambia.
Hungary ended its recognition of changes of sex for legal
purposes including on documents for those who are transgender
or intersex.
OCTOBER
In Mexico, the State of Mexico becomes the second state to
ban conversion therapy.
NOVEMBER
Yukon becomes the first Canadian territory to ban
conversion therapy.
In Nevada, during the 2020 United States elections, ballot
measure "Question 2" was passed with a majority support
of voters, enshrining protection for same-sex marriage in
the state constitution. While this has no legal effect
because the Supreme Court ruled in 2015 that barring
same-sex couples from marrying is unconstitutional, Nevada
still had an unenforceable ban on same-sex marriage in its
state constitution, which was repealed and replaced by this
ballot measure.

SUB-
SAHARAN
AFRICA

In late January 2020, President Donald Trump announced that the
US would expand its travel ban, which was first enacted mere
days after President Trump took office in 2017. The expanded
travel ban included Nigeria, Eritrea, Sudan, and Tanzania. Although
citizens from these countries were allowed to obtain tourist
visas, the US suspended the issue of any visas which could be
used to gain permanent residency.
The Department of Homeland Security insisted that the
travel ban was only a result of the countries failing to meet US
security and information sharing standards. Although officials
maintain that the US will assist countries attempting to get off
the list through bolstering security, President Trump’s 2021
Budget proposal slashed US foreign aid by 21 per cent. The
proposal also saw an 8 per cent decrease in the State
Department budget, following the steady downward trend of the
last few years.
In past years, Africa has been one of the largest recipients
of US foreign aid, followed closely by the Middle East. As such,
any changes in the US foreign aid budget will be sorely felt by
African countries.
These US policies stand in stark contrast to Chinese influence
and activity in Africa. Since the turn of the century, China has
actively endeavoured to foster very close relations with African
countries. In 2000, the first Forum on China-Africa Cooperation
was held in Beijing. Seven forums have been held since then,
most recently in Beijing in 2018, with every African country being
present except Swaziland.
During these forums, China usually commits large amounts of
money towards development in Africa. In 2015, China pledged
$60 billion, a pledge it renewed in 2018. The African Development
Bank estimates that Africa needs between $130 and $170
billion per year in order to finance the infrastructure required to
industrialise the continent. Pledges such as China’s constitute a
significant proportion of this total amount.
On the other hand, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
announced his first visit to Sub-Saharan Africa in February 2020,
two years since President Trump installed him as the country’s
top diplomat. Mr Pompeo stopped in Senegal, Ethiopia, and
Angola, before moving on to Saudi Arabia. These three countries
are key partners for China in the region. Senegal was the first
West African country to sign up to China’s Belt and Road
Initiative (BRI), China’s global, multi-billion dollar infrastructure
project. In Ethiopia’s capital, Addis Ababa, China has financed
multiple factories, highways, a metro system, and a multi-billion
dollar railway to Djibouti. Angola is China’s second-largest African
trading partner and third-largest oil provider.
Mr Pompeo’s choice of countries reflected the desire of the
US to curb Chinese influence in Africa. During his visit, Mr
Pompeo openly criticised China’s investment and activity in
the region, saying it promotes corruption and threatens the
rule of law. Despite this criticism, however, the US has done
very little to improve investment in the region. The US is still
mainly focused on security issues, and US presence is
predominantly asserted through military bases in countries
like Niger and Djibouti. However, amid increasing extremist
violence in West Africa, the Trump administration is
considering withdrawing US troops from the region.
Mr Pompeo has warned African states of depending on China.
“Countries should be wary of authoritarian regimes with
empty promises. They breed corruption, dependency,” Mr
Pompeo said in a speech in Addis Ababa. Mr Pompeo has also
attempted to convince African countries of Washington’s
ability to boost financial growth in Africa. However, “America
First”, and a desire to curb Chinese expansion, are clearly the
only driving forces behind these decisions regarding US
investment in Africa. Mr Pompeo says the Trump
administration wants to improve relations with African
countries, and yet the US is withdrawing troops, imposing
strict visa conditions, and reducing foreign aid. At best, the
US is sending mixed signals to African countries.
The US and China’s policy decisions are not arbitrary. They
reflect a deliberate desire to influence the African continent
in key sectors which are beneficial to either China or the US.
As political analyst Joseph Ochieno notes, “The US is
realising that they were playing games with Africa but China
came in - and came in fairly big with minimum, if any,
conditions … Africa is up for grabs, unfortunately."
AFRICA
FIRST?
Anet McClintock

B O B I W I N E
Robert Kyagulanyi Ssentamu, more commonly known
by his stage name Bobi Wine, is a Ugandan musician
and celebrity turned politician. He joins a growing
trend of African musicians trying their hand at politics
in an attempt to use their influence to change the
status quo. The difference for Wine is that he might
actually win.
As a musician, Wine’s music was always political, yet it
wasn’t until he expressed a desire to run for office that
the Ugandan government began to pay attention. They
sought to ban his music from being played in 2017, thus
beginning a series of attempts to thwart Wine’s
growing influence on Ugandan politics. In 2018, a year
after first being elected to the Ugandan Parliament, he
was tried for ‘treason’. Even as recently as November
2020 he was detained and denied access to his family
and lawyers after hosting a political rally contravening
the government’s coronavirus regulations. Despite
being in power for 35 years, President Yoweri
Museveni seems afraid of Wine’s influence.
And so he should be. Bobi Wine enjoys considerable support from younger voters, voters who were not even
alive when Museveni first came to power. While Museveni can claim to be a better leader than his predecessors
and has some achievements to show for his three and a half decades in office, Wine represents a major shake up
to not only his power but Ugandan politics as well. Wine’s first campaign relied heavily on the phrase, “Since
parliament has failed to come to the ghetto, then we shall bring the ghetto to parliament.” It demonstrates his
undeniable populist charm. “People power, our power” he cries, often wearing his iconic red beret (which the
government has now also deemed ‘illegal’), appealing to those desperate to see Museveni gone, and the high
proportion of unemployed Ugandans who feel he represents a much-needed change.
But does Wine actually stand a chance in the upcoming 2021 Ugandan presidential election? He’s already proven
many analysts wrong and is now firmly established as the main opposition challenger to Museveni. Even Kizza
Besigye, who has come runner-up in every election since 2001, announced he isn’t running in 2021, seemingly an
acknowledgement that Wine’s campaign has eclipsed his. But defeating Museveni is still a mammoth task. The
incumbent leader is able to tap into a fear of regime change. Many in the country fear a return to the bloody
exchange of power that occurred in 1986, and Museveni also enjoys large swathes of support with rural voters.
COVID-19 has also provided Museveni with legitimate ways to stretch the limits of his powers, such as banning
campaign rallies and cracking down on journalists spreading ‘misinformation’.
CASSIUS HYNAM
Bobi Wine still has a mountain to climb if he wishes to become Ugandan
President in January. But even if he doesn’t, his candidacy and popularity
has shaken the old-school institutions of Ugandan politics. His political
footprint will inspire a younger voice and generation regardless of the
election’s outcome.

T H E U N I T E D N A T I O N S H A S E X P R E S S E D C O N C E R N S T H A T
T H E E T H I O P I A N C O N F L I C T M AY B R E A K O U T I N T O C I V I L
W A R . R E C E N T LY, P R I M E M I N I S T E R A B I Y S E N T O U T A N
U L T I M A T U M T O T I G R AY F O R C E S , S AY I N G T H A T T H E Y H A D
7 2 H O U R S T O S U R R E N D E R B E F O R E T H E M I L I T A R Y F O R C E S
W O U L D C O M E A N D A T T A C K A S A ‘ F I N A L P U S H ’. T H E
G O V E R N M E N T H A S A L S O W A R N E D C I V I L I A N S I N T H E
T I G R AY C A P I T A L T H A T T H E R E W O U L D B E ‘ N O M E R C Y ’ I F
T H E Y D I D N ’ T ‘ S AV E T H E M S E LV E S ’.
W I T H A B I Y D E C L A R I N G T H A T T H E C O N F L I C T I N T H E
T I G R AY R E G I O N W A S A T ‘ T H E P O I N T O F N O R E T U R N ’, T H E
P R O S P E C T O F M O R E C I V I L I A N S B E I N G C A U G H T I N T H E
C R O S S F I R E S I S E X T R E M E LY L I K E LY, E S P E C I A L LY B E C A U S E
T H E T P L F D O E S N O T S E E M T O B E S U R R E N D E R I N G .
I N S T E A D, T H E Y H AV E I S S U E D A S T A T E M E N T S AY I N G T H A T
T H E Y W O U L D ‘ D I G T R E N C H E S A N D S T A N D F I R M ’.
A C I V I L W A R W O U L D A L S O B E D E VA S T A T I N G F O R T H E
H O R N O F A F R I C A . A L R E A D Y, E R I T R E A H A S B E E N
I N C R E A S I N G LY I M P L I C A T E D I N T H E C O N F L I C T, W I T H T H E
T P L F A C C U S I N G T H E M O F T E A M I N G U P W I T H T H E
E T H I O P I A N G O V E R N M E N T. T H E O U T F L O W O F R E F U G E E S
F R O M E T H I O P I A W O U L D C R E A T E A R E F U G E E C R I S I S I N
O T H E R C O U N T R I E S A N D L E A D T O D E S T A B I L I S A T I O N .
U N L E S S T H E T W O P A R T I E S R E A C H A P E A C E D E A L , T H E R E
W I L L L I K E LY B E I N C R E A S E D C A S U A L T I E S A N D L O N G -T E R M
R A M I F I C A T I O N S T O T H E E N T I R E A F R I C A N C O N T I N E N T.
THE POINT OF NO RETURN? ETHIOPIA'S CONFLICT IN THE TIGRAY REGION - JENNIFER CHANCE (11 DEC)

#ENDSARS: THE MOST SIGNIFICANT
PROTEST OF 2020 YOU’VE NEVER HEARD
OF
The Nigerian ‘#EndSARS’ protests of 2020
successfully campaigned to shut down a notorious
police group, the Special Anti-Robbery Squad. But the
implications of the protests extend far beyond that.
The movement has politically empowered and
emboldened an entire generation of young Nigerians,
utilised new social media techniques which will
revolutionise future African protests, and also taken
steps towards overcoming the British colonial
influence which still permeates Nigerian life today.
NO, NOT COVID-19
While most of the world was occupied with one form
of SARS this year, Nigerians in early October hit the
streets demanding an end to their own SARS, a
notorious police unit known as the Special Anti-
Robbery Squad. On October 8th, protests erupted
after footage emerged of a young man being killed by
non-uniformed police in Lagos, Nigeria. The video,
shared widely on Twitter, not only documented the
clear abuses of power committed by the SARS officers,
but reminded young Nigerians of their shared
experiences with the corrupt group.
SARS, formed in 1992 under then-dictator Ibrahim
Babangida, was initially a successful organisation
combating rising crime rates in Lagos. However, a
rapid expansion of their reach and powers, low wages,
and a culture of entitlement and impunity turned
SARS ‘bad’. Since the early 2000s, many thousands of
Nigerians have been the targets of SARS violence.
Amnesty International has reported widespread
human rights abuses, ranging from targeted
streetside arrests and extortion, to illegal detention
centres where detainees have been tortured and
killed. Even high profile Nigerians, like prominent
radio journalist Kofi Bartels, are not shielded from the
abuse.
Protests which began in Lagos soon spread to Abuja
and other cities. Despite some resistance, and the
shocking deaths of twelve peaceful protesters at the
hands of police in Lagos, President Muhammadu
Buhari promised to disband the unit and commit to
reform. Even today the movement continues. While
its deliberate lack of leadership and broad demands
simply for ‘better governance’ have stalled the
movement’s progress, in other metrics the #EndSARS
protests have had massive implications for both
Nigeria and Africa.
AN EMPOWERED AND EMBOLDENED
YOUTH
President Buhari’s government at first ignored the
protests. No one in his ministry thought the young
and well-off protesters had the stamina or the passion
to protest indefinitely. Not only were they wrong, but
the protests’ lengthened success will transform
Nigerian politics as an entire generation realises they
can create change. Despite 40 per cent of
Nigeria’s 200 million inhabitants being younger than
30, a culture of deference in the country has resulted
in little political struggle from Nigerian youths,
despite growing dissatisfaction with governance,
corruption and policy. This attitude was mirrored by
senior elites, who perceived the youths’ pleas as
“usual mischief making.”
Yet #EndSARS was able to shake a malaise which had
settled over Nigerian politics for two reasons. Firstly,
because SARS was indiscriminate in its targeting of
people across ethnic and class barriers, young
Nigerians were able to coalesce around a shared
suffering. Secondly, the protesters eschewed
traditional forms of leadership which could be
corrupted, thus garnering the trust of a population
usually untrusting of politics. Similarly to the Arab
Spring, #EndSARS avoided providing a pedestal to
politicians or celebrities who could compromise the
movement for their own interests. Instead, the
protests were leaderless and dynamic. If a young
person shared their location on Twitter, others would
head there and congregate around each other. Whilst
the inability to seat someone ‘at the table’ and
negotiate a deal has likely weakened the efficacy of
the protests, the movement would not have been so
large, so substantial, nor had such significant
repercussions without these key characteristics.

The implications of this political invigoration are
already being seen elsewhere. When a handful of
youths broke into the palace of the traditional ruler of
Lagos, vandalised his throne and swam in his pool, it
was demonstrative of a generation that now knows
they don’t need to remain silent. With a general
election approaching in 2023, experts are predicting
higher voter turnout and an electorate with a clearer
idea of what they want from their leaders. Young
Nigerians don’t want a coup, they simply want greater
returns from their votes. This will likely be at the
forefront of Buhari and his party’s minds when
Nigerians head to the polls.
A REJECTION OF COLONIALISM
The #EndSARS movement is also a pivotal part of the
Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, and represents a
major inflection point in dismantling the colonial
influence which remains in African policing today.
In the early stages of the movement, protesters were
quick to draw equivalency to the BLM movement
which spread across most of the western world. Black
lives matter on all continents, they argued, even when
black victims suffer at the hands of black policemen.
And the equivalence is valid. #EndSARS protesters,
like their BLM counterparts, were demanding the
dismantling of a police unit which had developed a
culture of exploitation and entitlement. This police
culture in Nigeria, experienced similarly across Africa,
is unarguably a remnant of brutal colonial police
practices.
Now, as #EndSARS achieves success, disempowered
Africans across the continent will seek to follow
Nigeria’s lead and reject the colonial influence which
still restrains Africans today.
AGGRESSIVE, NEW SOCIAL MEDIA
TECHNIQUES
The protesters’ aggressive social media tactics also
represent a shift in the role social media can play in
generating change. Coordinated campaigns to shame
news organisations and western celebrities for their
lack of engagement with the protests proved
incredibly effective in spreading the #EndSARS
message. Future African movements will likely
leverage similar techniques for success.
The Tunisian Revolution of 2011, which sparked the
Arab Spring, was the first protest movement to fully
utilise social media to organise people, realise a
shared experience, generate support, and ultimately
bring down a regime. It’s what earned it the name the
‘Facebook Revolution’. Young Nigerians were able to
use similar tactics, except that protesters also had to
grapple with a global consciousness which views
corruption and violence in Africa as not only normal,
but expected. Simply sharing videos was not enough
to capture global attention, particularly in a year
where police brutality has been so prominent. In light
of this, protesters coordinated a flurry of tweets
aimed at shaming British and American celebrities
with links to Africa who had earlier in the year
pledged their support for the Black Lives Matter
movement but had remained silent about #EndSARS.
Traditional colonial policy was to subvert and subdue
colonised peoples rather than protect them. The
behaviour of SARS officers was particularly
reprehensible, but ultimately reflects the overall
attitudes and culture of policing in Nigeria. Law
enforcement in Nigeria was built on antagonistic
grounds, which viewed all Nigerians as potential
threats. The police’s disproportionate and deadly
response to a peaceful protest in Lekki emphasises
this point. Even their most tried and tested tactic of
extorting well-off Nigerians represents a colonial
practice of using coercion to keep all Nigerians in line.
No matter how successful or rich you become, you’re
still subordinate to police rule.
This is what makes #EndSARS so significant. By
rejecting and overthrowing a powerful police group,
they are also rejecting the colonial cultures which
allowed the corrupt behaviour to flourish. As the ‘big
brother’ of Sub-Saharan Africa, people across many
African nations were watching anxiously as the
Nigerian protests panned out.

Eventually, British-Nigerians like actor John Boyega
and boxer Anthony Joshua tweeted in support of the
movement. They were then joined by major US artists
like Rihanna, Nicki Minaj and Kanye West.
Collectively, the world started to pay attention.
Protesters also focused on news outlets, attacking
them for not broadcasting or covering the protests.
The BBC’s Nigeria correspondent labelled the
experience a “swarm of shame”.
Though social media activism has always relied on
shaming and peer pressure to create a movement,
#EndSARS made this attempt more explicit. But the
technique worked. At the height of the protests, the
#EndSARS hashtag was being used 14 million times a
day. The Twitter movement proved so effective that
major news outlets like the Washington Post, BBC,
Guardian and more were including the hashtag
#EndSARS in their article titles, speaking to the
movement’s ability to create a tangible online
identity.
For a continent where human rights abuses,
corruption, and protests rarely puncture the
mainstream western consciousness, #EndSARS was
incredibly effective. The aggressive techniques and
creation of a mostly online identity will likely be used
again and again by future protest movements in
Africa and elsewhere.
WHERE TO FROM HERE?
While protesters continue to hit the streets,
#EndSARS has more or less achieved its aims. The
SARS group has been disbanded, President Buhari
has committed to police reform, and the rest of the
world has condemned the Nigerian government’s
actions. For Nigerians, a general election in 2023 will
be the next time an emboldened people get to ensure
their voices are heard. Expect a population who will
demand only the best.
CASSIUS HYNAM

MIDDLE
EAST
NORTH
AFRICA

The Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region, established by
the Soviet government in the 1920s, is located wholly within
Azerbaijan but has a population that is 95% ethnically
Armenian. Since Armenia gained independence in 1991, the
region has been marred by constant tension; multiple
ceasefires have been attempted and ultimately all have failed.
Recent hostilities follow a number of cross-border attacks that
occurred in June and July this year which resulted in multiple
deaths, including an Azerbaijani General. This escalation of
tension is largely due to increased militarisation, failed
mediation efforts and violations of ceasefire promises. To
complicate things further, global powers including Russia,
Turkey, the US and Europe all have an interest in this fragile
conflict which could potentially be escalated by only a small
misstep.
On September 27th this year, increased fighting began along
the border of Nagorno-Karabakh. More than 500 soldiers and
civilians were killed, with thousands injured and displaced.
Despite the UN Security Council, the UN Secretary-General
and powers such as the US and Russia calling for hostilities to
end, both Armenia and Azerbaijan have rejected these
requests. Rather, tensions have escalated with the two
countries pledging to continue fighting.
THE NOVEMBER CEASEFIRE
Another Russian-brokered ceasefire was reached on November
10th which negotiated a truce to end the war after a series of
victories for Azerbaijan. The deal, which will be monitored by
Russia, guarantees a land corridor linking Armenia and
Nagorno-Karabakh and the withdrawal of Armenian forces.
Nagorno-Karabakh was thus returned to Azerbaijan and
Armenia is to hand over regions it holds outside the separatist
area. Russia will be deploying 2000 peacekeepers and 100
armoured personnel carriers to monitor compliance with the deal
and to help ensure the return of refugees over the next five
years.
The Agreement was seen as a victory in Azerbaijan, however
Armenia and the residents of Nagorno-Karabakh are not
pleased with the outcome, sparking protests in the Armenian
capital Yerevan. After the loss of the strategically vital town of
Shusa, Armenia was left helpless with its only choice to sign the
peace deal in the hope of saving lives. The lack of response
from its allies and from Russia has also left Armenia in internal
turbulence. As such, whether and for how long this new peace
will last remains uncertain.
F O R E I G N P O W E R S C O M P L I C A T E
F R A G I L E G E O P O L I T I C S I N N A G O R N O -
K A R A B A K H
THE OCTOBER CEASEFIRE
On October 10th, Russia mediated a new ceasefire between
the states. Together with the US and France, Russia
organised peace talks as part of the Minsk Group, working
under the auspices of the Organisation for Security and
Cooperation in Europe.
The ceasefire was intended to halt fighting and allow forces in
Nagorno-Karabakh to swap prisoners of war and reclaim the
dead. If the truce did hold, it would have been a major
diplomatic effort for Russia, which has warm ties with
Azerbaijan as well as a security pact with, and military base in,
Armenia. Armenian officials have said that they are open to a
ceasefire. Azerbaijan, on the other hand, says that any
potential truce would be conditional upon Armenia
withdrawing forces from Nagorno-Karabakh. Azerbaijan
argues that the failure to negotiate a political settlement by
international efforts has left it with only one option: to resort to
force.
The ceasefire was over less than 24 hours after it was
negotiated, with both sides accusing each other of violating its
terms when nine people were killed in clashes.
FUTURE IMPACTS
Russia has been guarding both Armenia and Azerbaijan against
foreign influence since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Russia's
trip-wire military has been stationed in Armenia since 1994 and
was placed there specifically to limit Turkish expansion in the
region.
Meanwhile, Turkey, which has long backed Azerbaijan’s claims
in Nagorno-Karabakh, has stepped up its military support at the
risk of destabilising not only Armenia but other neighbouring
states as well. NATO has accused Turkey of fuelling the conflict
by backing and arming Azerbaijan.
World powers including the US want to prevent Turkish and
Russian involvement with fears it would escalate the conflict.
Under Trump, the US has had little involvement in the conflict,
but with the outcome of the Presidential election this may yet
change. With the upcoming change in administration in the US
and the potential for involvement from Russia and Turkey, this
fragile conflict may still be further escalated. The next few
months will be pivotal, not only for the region, but for global
power dynamics.
HOLLY-ROSE BISKUP-HARWIG

LIBYA ATTACKED FROM ALL FRONTS
Almost a decade after the Arab Spring protests sparked the Libyan Civil War and consequent ousting of
Muammar Gaddafi, in mid-2020 Libya was once again in the grip of a domestic conflict that threatened
to destabilise the country at one of its most vulnerable moments.
Libya’s administrative authority is currently split between two rivalling forces: one located in Tripoli and
one in Benghazi. The divide dates back to 2014 when the renegade general Khalifa Haftar captured
Benghazi and established a rival government to the UN-backed Government of National Accord (GNA) in
Tripoli.
During June, the world witnessed the tail end of a year-long siege on Tripoli by Haftar’s forces, the
Libyan National Army (LNA), who are supported by the United Arab Emirates, Russia and Egypt. Since
Haftar’s advance stalled there was a marked increase of violence, including indiscriminate bombing of
civilian hospitals in the capital. European embassies in Libya have noted that this year alone there have
been 12 attacks on medical facilities in Tripoli, as well as the shelling of a hospital in Tareeq al-Shouq
which destroyed the intensive care unit.
The World Health Organization (WHO) warned that the increased fighting was impeding on Libya’s ability
to prepare for and respond to the coronavirus outbreak. At the time of the siege, 61 people contracted
coronavirus, and three died. By early December, that number skyrocketed to 87,000 cases and 1,255
deaths. Even these conservative estimates indicate the WHO’s worst fears for Libya were realised.
Beyond the country’s decimated medical facilities, a number of other factors threatened to upset
Libya’s delicate balancing of civil war with a global pandemic. The fighting has also impacted the
delivery of basic necessities. Tripoli’s water and electrical infrastructure was critically damaged, and
some power deliberately cut off as part of the campaign against Haftar’s LNA. Tarhuna, a town that lies
sixty kilometres south-east of Tripoli, was used by the LNA for weeks to supply materials to fighting
groups. Haftar’s forces temporarily blocked gas supply to nearby Khom’s power station, and in
retaliation, power supply to Tarhuna has been blocked for several weeks.
Water was also being leveraged in the fighting. Tripoli, like most of northern Libya, gets the majority of
its water from the Great Man-Made River (GMMR), a network of pipes that forms the world’s largest
irrigation project. The pipelines run from the rich aquifers in the country’s south to the densely
populated north. A Haftar-backed mayor cut water supply to Tripoli in early April as retaliation for the
disappearance of his brother, which he attributed to the GNA. Since then, water has only been sparsely
dripping in to supply Tripoli’s two million residents.
The situation is also particularly tenuous due to the country’s large number of migrant workers. Many
workers go to Libya from poorer regions in Africa to look for work, and to potentially cross the
Mediterranean Sea into Europe. Currently, more than 1500 migrants and refugees are kept in detention
centres in Western Libya after being intercepted by Libyan coast guards. The curfews and travel
restrictions enacted by the GNA in early April have made it extremely difficult for migrants to survive.
Many are left without a means of income and can’t travel back to their countries. Human rights
organisations are worried that a coronavirus outbreak among migrant workers could be disastrous.
Poverty, inadequate sanitation, and poor living conditions will only exacerbate the spread of the virus
among the migrant community.
Despite Haftar’s ceasefire offer for the month of Ramadan, the violence continued to escalate. Although
we are hopefully approaching the last few months of the pandemic, Libya’s situation continues to
deteriorate. The country is in desperate need of diplomatic and humanitarian intervention to ensure that
the precarious combination of civil war, inadequate infrastructure, and a vulnerable migrant community
doesn’t collapse into chaos.
ANET MCCLINTOCK

Y E M E N I C I V I L WA R C O N T I N U E S
THE CAUSES AN

D EFFECTS OF THE BEIRUT EXPLOSION
In Beirut, Lebanon thousands of people are rebuilding from the
devastation left by the explosion on 4 August this year. Some
300,000 people were left homeless – that's 5% of the whole
population – 200 are dead and 5,000 were injured. The culprit?
Sheer neglect by the Lebanese government.
In 2013 customs officials confiscated some 2,750 tonnes of
ammonium nitrate, a highly explosive material used for mining,
quarrying and other industrial uses, from a Russian-owned ship.
There was talk of exporting it or giving it to the army, but the
government approval that was needed never came. Officials at
the port warned that the ammonium nitrate was the equivalent
of leaving a bomb on the doorstep of the city, yet they were
ignored.
The Lebanese government for more than a decade could not
agree on a budget. This government also left the same person
in charge of the central bank for almost 30 years while it ran
what is essentially a state-sanctioned pyramid scheme,
involving paying back debts by maintaining the Lebanese pound
fixed exchange rate through pegging it to the US dollar. This has
created an unsustainable economic model which is evident, for
example, in the government’s lack of investment in the service
sector. Lebanon cannot maintain 24-hour electricity and rubbish
is littered on the streets of Beirut. The explosion is a
catastrophic situation that served to amplify the negligence of
the government.
The country has been slipping into an economic crisis since
October 2019, with the Lebanese pound losing most of its
value and resulting in runaway inflation. In a country that
imports almost everything from food to fuel, inflation is sitting
at around 80% and for food around 200%. Fuel shortages
continually cause black outs, some lasting 20 hours or more.
This has led to widespread poverty: official figures show that at
least half the country is below the poverty line and that this
could rise to 75% by the end of the year.
A new technocratic government was installed in January to
tackle the current looming crisis and negotiate a rescue
agreement with the IMF, yet it has made almost no progress.
Negotiation with the IMF cannot happen while officials are still
negotiating a plan among themselves.
In September, Lebanon’s Prime Minister resigned amid a
political impasse over the formation of Cabinet and
increasing calls for the government to step down. The
government is now in caretaker mode, meaning that the
current administration will remain until a new one is
formed and a new leader is chosen, which is up to the
parliament to decide. However, this is likely to be mired in
the same corrupt bureaucratic process which many people
have been protesting against for the past months.
Over one hundred days after the explosion, a 350-page
report was released by Lebanon’s elite Information Branch
intelligence agency. The report found that a host of state
officials and security agencies were responsible for the
explosion. Al Jazeera was told by a senior judicial source
familiar with the agency’s report that the Beirut Port
Authority and Lebanese Customs are to blame for leaving
the ammonium nitrate at Hangar 12 for nearly seven years
in unsafe conditions. The current and former customs
chiefs Badri Daher and Shafik Merhi were noted as
admitting that they could have acted on their own to
remove the explosives and prevent the blast.
Many survivors, human rights advocates and lawyers are
still calling for an international investigation into the
explosion, as there are reservations about the recent
report. According to Legal Action Worldwide (LAW), “an
independent and impartial fact-finding mission is now
required to establish the facts of the explosion but equally
the root causes, which include a vacuum of rule of law and
lack of effective governance”. An international probe must
be conducted to ensure accountability given the politically
exposed nature of the Lebanese courts. Victims and their
families “should not be a ‘test’ case for the justice system
to show that it has changed and that ‘truth’ will prevail –
history has shown that this is not possible”.
The Beirut explosion is a symbol of neglect and of suffering
which could have been avoided. The focus must now be on
meaningful change, conducting an internationally-led
inquiry to secure accountability and justice, and
restructuring the Lebanese government to ensure that
such grave neglect of citizens never happens again.
GEN MARCOCCI

8 M
LIEP GATWECH
26 MILLION
Over two months after the
death of George Floyd, on July
3rd, demonstrations were
ongoing. With demonstrations
and protests having occurred
in over 40% of the counties in
the United States with reports
suggesting that up to 26
million Americans took part in
the demonstrations over the
past 3 months. This made the
demonstrations the largest in
US history.
FEBRUARY 23 - While jogging, 25-Year-Old Ahmaud Marquez Arbery, an unarmed African
American man, was pursued and gunned down by three white men, simply because according to
them, he had “looked suspicious”. The Glynn County Police Department was advised not to make
any arrests by the district attorney’s office and no arrest were made until more than 70 days
later.
3.59 KMS

MAY 25 – George Floyd was arrested for allegedly using counterfeit currency.
After a struggle in the backseat of a police vehicle, Floyd fell from the vehicle to
the pavement, restrained. Handcuffed, lying flat, with his cheek to the ground,
Derek Chauvin then began to kneel on his neck, with two other officers applying
pressure to Floyd’s legs and torso. During his final moments, Floyd repeated 16
times that he could not breathe. Floyd also said, “I’m about to die” to which
Chauvin responded with “relax”.
After 8 minutes and 22 seconds of kneeling on George Floyd’s neck, Derek
Chauvin finally let up, Floyd was unconscious. Paramedics arrived 5 minutes after
the officers called for medical assistance and Floyd was pronounced dead almost
exactly an hour after the Chauvin began kneeling on Floyd’s neck.
The altercation was filmed and witnessed by multiple individuals with many
individuals calling for Chauvin to stop kneeling on Floyd’s neck during the
altercation as Floyd was compliant, was restrained, was not resisting, was seen
bleeding from his nose and repeated the phrase, “I can’t breathe”.
INS : 22 SECS
$6.5 MILLION
MARCH 23, 26-Year-Old unarmed Emergency
Medical Technician Breonna Taylor was shot dead by
officers from the Louisville Metropolitan Police
Department as they attempted to serve a no-knock
warrant at 12:40AM, at the home of her boyfriend.
Drawing parallels with the Ahmaud Arbery case,
initially Taylor’s case did not garner much media
attention, rising to prominence alongside the rise in
protest and demonstrations following the mid-year
deaths of George Floyd and Rayshard Brooks.
The case has been the centre of a campaign with
millions across the globe organising on social media
and in person to call for justice for Breonna Taylor.
With a GoFundMe page that was set up to tackle
police reform and fund other cost involved with
organising Raising more than $6.5 Million Dollars, from
its $500,000 goal.

BLACK
LIVES
MATTER
2020 has been a major year for the Black Lives Matter Movement. Starting in 2013, the movement has
been seven years in the making. 2020 has been a year in which millions of people across the globe have
had to recognise and take part in uncomfortable but necessary conversations about race, racism and
xenophobia.
In 2020, the Black Lives Matter movement went global. Millions attended protests worldwide but in the
United States the call for justice and equality, despite the coronavirus pandemic, made the movement
one of the largest civil rights movements in history. Protests were seen across 6 continents, with the
movement and the global conversation on race, justice and accountability among factors acting as the
catalysts for other important national movements such as the #EndSARS movement in Nigeria and the
Black Lives Matter movement as it pertains to Aboriginal Australians, here at home, in Australia.
Exacerbated by the, at the time, impending US election, political discourse and divisive rhetoric by the
US President, the Black Lives Matter movement has been a force like no other, prevailing despite
discrete and non-discrete attacks from members of the legislative and executive branches of the US
federal government.
In 2020, no matter where you are in the world, the phrase “Black Lives Matter” is probably one you’re
familiar with, so prominent this year that it has likely been impossible to ignore

SAY
THEIR
NAMES
GEORGE FLOYD
An artist, a mentor, a revolutionary, a father. 46
years old and 6 foot 4, George Perry Floyd Jr, or
Big Floyd as he was known, was described as a
“gentle giant”. Previously involved in charity work
and mentoring male youths, he was actively trying
to effect positive social change in his community.
Floyd was not perfect but instead was a work in
progress, making the most of the opportunities he
had and rebuilding a life centred around
community, faith and family. Taken from the world
too soon, Floyd’s 6 year old daughter says she
“misses” her father and that “Daddy changed the
world”. Little does Gianna know the truth reflected
in her words.
BREONNA TAYLOR
An emergency medical technician and an aspiring
Registered Nurse, Breonna Taylor was nothing but
hardworking and selfless, dedicating her own life to
saving others. Breonna was born in Michigan and
lived in Grand Rapids before relocating to
Louisville, Kentucky in 2008. Tragically, at 25 years
old, full of life and a bright future, she was gunned
down in her own apartment. As a paramedic, she
was failed by those she often served alongside,
those who had vowed to ‘serve and protect’ her.
Posthumously, Breonna has been described by her
mother as “a queen willing to build up anyone
around her”. What is clear in Taylor’s death is that
heaven has gained another angel. Protect black
women.
AHMAUD ARBERY
On February 23rd 2020, African Americans
awoke to the reality that ‘jogging while black’
could possibly be a death sentence. Ahmaud
Marquez Arbery was 25 years old when he was
gunned down in the streets of Satilla Shores,
Georgia. Before his name joined a chorus of
hashtags that bore the names of countless black
men and women. Arbery was a scrawny,
competitive young man with hopes of making it
to the NFL. He was taking a break from college
and on the verge of vocational and educational
success before tragically losing his life.
Described as having “infectious laughter” and an
“easy smile”, a plaque dedicated to Arbery
reads, “It’s hard to forget someone who gave us
so much to remember.”
TONY MCDAD
Anti-transgender violence in America is an
epidemic that Tony McDade tragically fell victim
to. Before McDade, a transgender man, was killed
at 38 years old, he was described as “very loving”.
McDade grew up in Florida, attending school
there. A clear embodiment of “happiness and joy”,
McDade possessed qualities the world needs right
now. Unfortunately, McDade was gunned down
before he could share them further. It is important
to actively assert that Black LGBTQIA Lives
Matter too.
DION JOHNSON
LIEP GATWECH
Dion Johnson was killed on the same day that
George Floyd died in Minnesota, approximately
2500 kilometres away in Arizona. Shot following
an interaction with a police o cer who alleged he
had passed out in his vehicle, Johnson was only 28
years old. Growing up in the town of Tempe,
Arizona, Johnson only had his siblings and his
mother. Described as being “very respectful to his
mother”, Johnson was a family man and is
survived by his teenage daughter.

That's not a chip on my shoulder, that's your foot on my neck - Malcolm X (1964)
I CAN'T BREATHE

NORTH AMERICA
NORTH AMERICA
United States Presidential legacies are often framed in reference to their
influence or consequence. Abraham Lincoln is remembered for his moral
authority, Franklin D. Roosevelt for his economic management and John F.
Kennedy for his skills in public persuasion. At the close of 2020, the legacy
of Donald Trump’s Presidency is still in formation and likely will be for
years to come. Twelve months ago, in last year's Young Diplomats Society’s
Special Edition, I wrote that trials of impeachment and the economic
repercussions of the US-China trade war would define Trump’s Presidency
and would become the defining issues of the 2020 election. Yet by early
2020, impeachment was viewed as a distraction by the Democratic
presidential nominees and the US-China trade war felt like a distant
memory, despite its lasting ramifications.
Perhaps Trump's true legacy will be the magnitudinal shift in political
norms he has left in his wake. This has been exemplified most potently in
2020 by the President’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic and his
refusal to accept defeat against Joe Biden in the November 2020 election.
This piece will focus on the latter and show how, by disregarding
presidential norms, Trump’s legacy as a bombastic political agitator will be
enshrined.

Presidential Precedent
Prior to World War II, presidential transitions were
relatively informal. The president-elect usually
remained in their old role until mere days before
their inauguration and were not expected to enter
o ce with a legislative agenda. Meanwhile, the
incumbent ‘lame duck’ Presidents (as all were before
the introduction of a two four-year term limit in 1947)
would continue to govern and generally accomplish
little. However, two presidential transitions in the
20th century give us an insight, and perhaps a
warning, into the contentious transition playing out
today.
President Herbert Hoover’s landslide loss to
Roosevelt in 1932 was the first. Taking place during
the height of the Great Depression, the ‘lame duck’
Hoover tried repeatedly to persuade Roosevelt to
abandon the New Deal, insisting that economic
recovery was already underway. Animosity grew until
inauguration day with Hoover refusing to support
the early implementation of Roosevelt’s agenda and
talks between both men repeatedly breaking down.
Forty-five years on, Jimmy Carter’s transition in 1977
would set the precedent for decades to come. As the
demands on the executive branch increased
throughout the 20th century, the once informal
transition became a behemoth of administrative
work involving thousands of civil servants and
political professionals. The incoming Carter
administration began its work early, recruiting key
administrative personnel and selecting cabinet
members. At the end of Carter’s single term
presidency, Ronald Reagan’s administration was
afforded the same benefits of early access to
information and an obliging incumbent despite
Reagan's clear intentions to reverse the ideological
direction of the federal government.
A New Direction?
The situation in 2020 echo’s the past in many
respects. In the midst of both the dual public health
and economic crises resulting from the pandemic and
like Roosevelt, President-Elect Biden cannot afford to
wait until his inauguration to begin dealing with
these issues. He must open a dialogue with the
outgoing administration. Similarly, Biden does not
have the luxury of Presidents past to assume o ce
without a legislative agenda and like Carter, is
assuming control of an immense executive branch
and has already announced key cabinet picks and
White House staff.
At the time of writing, President Trump has refused
to concede to Biden but permitted his team to begin
working with the incoming administration.
LEGACY
Declan Curtin
While enough states have certified their results to
secure Biden’s election win, Trump still has legal
avenues to pursue. However 26 of Trump's 38 legal
bids to overturn or alter the result of the election
have been denied, dismissed, settled or withdrawn.
Protracted legal stouches are not entirely unknown in
the US General Election and losing presidential
candidates have not always been forthcoming with
their concessions. Republican candidate Charles
Evans Hughes took two weeks to congratulate
incumbent Woodrow Wilson after a close race in 1916.
More recently in 2000, Democrat Al Gore conceded
to George W. Bush on election night before
retracting his concession once the race tightened.
Trump stands on the brink of history. No presidential
candidate in US history has refused to concede
defeat once all the votes and legal challenges have
been resolved. In a move one step closer to
concession, Trump announced on November 27 that
if the electoral college result was certified for Biden
he would leave o ce, stating: “certainly I will”, whilst
adding, “and you know that if they do, they’ve made
a mistake.” Pressed on the issue of Trump not
leaving, the Biden campaign said: “the United States
Government is perfectly capable of escorting
trespassers out of the White House”.
Trump has already sown the seed of doubt amongst
his supporters despite no evidence of fraud. A
Politico poll conducted in November 2020 reported
that 70 per cent of Republicans say the election
wasn’t ‘free and fair’. Perhaps that is all he needs.
Just as was the case with his portrayal of Hillary
Clinton, his impeachment trial and his messaging
around coronavirus, Trump is incredibly persuasive to
his base. Ultimately, the Trump Presidency has shown
that through politics, personality and persuasion the
truth can be easily obscured long enough and well
enough to distract from the real issues.
Trump may well intend to concede this election and
remain politically active, either through the rumored
launch of his own TV station or another Presidential
run in 2024, or both. By breaking with presidential
precedent one last time during this transition period,
Trump has rallied his base, divided the nation and
damped his own downfall as he always does. The
question that remains is whether Trump’s legacy will
be an isolated presidential phenomenon or an
example other presidential candidates will aspire to
in pursuit of the White House.

Kamala Harris
A Career of Firsts
When Kamala Harris stepped onto stage in
Wilmington, Delaware as Vice President-Elect, millions
in the United States and around the world waited with
bated breath. Amid a campaign that had seen over
250,000 Americans die from COVID-19, and protests
erupt over racial violence, many had become numb to
the possibility of change. But as Harris began to
speak, reflecting on the historic nature of her election,
the anxieties of Democratic voters gradually began to
dissipate. They had sent the first woman, Black woman
and Asian American woman to the White House, and
rea rmed that for all its flaws, the US was still a
country of hope, possibility and progress.
For many politicians, such expectations would be an
immense burden. However, for Harris, it has come to
define her storied political rise. Born in Oakland,
California to Indian and Jamaican immigrants, her
biracial identity has become the identifying feature of
her professional career. After attending the HBCU
Howard University and the University of California
Hastings College of Law, Harris pursued a career in
the public service, inspired by her parents’ activism
during the civil rights movement. Recruited to the
Alameda County district attorney’s o ce, she cracked
down on and reformed law enforcement’s approach to
teenage prostitution. This presaged her successful run
for San Francisco district attorney, where she became
the first Black woman to hold the o ce. In 2010, she
narrowly became the first woman of colour elected as
Attorney General of California. During her tenure, she
was lauded for creating Open Justice, an online
platform that publicised criminal justice data and
helped improve police accountability.
Having then been rumoured as a potential Supreme
Court nominee of President Barack Obama, Harris
instead became a US Senator for California in 2016; a
position wherein her sharp, incisive questioning
continues to earn widespread acclaim.
Nevertheless, Harris has also experienced sustained
criticism for her prosecutorial record, particularly
among progressive Democrats. She was previously
found to have withheld information about a police
laboratory technician compromising evidence,
resulting in the dismissal of 600 legal cases. As
California’s Attorney General, Harris criminalised
habitual truancy; a move that disproportionately
affected Black and Latino children. Moreover, she
appealed a Federal Judge’s decision that deemed the
death penalty unconstitutional, opposed a bill
mandating her o ce investigate police shootings and
refused to support state-wide standards for police
bodycam usage. Harris also has a questionable record
of pursuing wrongful conviction cases.
Activist and voter backlash to these decisions,
together with staff squabbles and diminishing
campaign contributions, are what eventually grounded
her 2020 presidential run. This was despite initial
promise, when she challenged Joe Biden on his
previous opposition to busing. Nonetheless, Biden’s
selection of Harris as his running mate, was proof that
her star, while hurt, had certainly not been
extinguished. Many now view her as the presumptive
frontrunner for the 2024 Democratic Party
nomination, given the unlikelihood of Biden seeking a
second term. If that were to happen, Harris would
again make history. After a career of shattering glass
ceilings, it would be foolish to bet against her.
SANJAY BALAKUMAR

Canada and Australia: A Skin
Deep Resemblance?
In a multitude of ways, Canada and Australia have a lot in common, from our sparse populations and immense
size to our ethnic diversity and economic output. Even our colonial past and constitutionally enshrined
monarchical system is tied to the same small island in the North Atlantic thousands of kilometres away.
Yet each nation's response to the COVID-19 pandemic has yielded radically different results. As of December 1,
2020, Australia has recorded close to 28,000 COVID-19 cases and 908 deaths since the start of the pandemic.
Meanwhile, Canada has recorded a total of 400,000 cases and 12,211 deaths with over 5,000 new daily cases
while the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) has predicted a worst case scenario of 60,000 new daily
cases by the end of December.
AT THE OUTSET
Behind the early numbers were a string of differing public policy decisions leading to drastically different
outcomes. The formative decisions were made early. Both nations discovered their first cases on January 25 and
implemented physical distancing measures by mid-March. However, while Australia imposed travel bans on
international arrivals from China on February 1, Canada did not, citing the advice of the World Health
Organisation that such a restriction was not necessary.
Further, on March 15 Australia ordered a 14-day self-isolation direction for anyone arriving in the country
followed quickly by mandatory quarantine in hotels. Two weeks later, Australian cases began to decline. By
comparison, self-isolation in Canada was only announced and enforced from March 25.
ENDURING THE PANDEMIC
As the pandemic dragged on, Canada’s deeper structural deficiencies began to show. Decades of government
cutbacks and decreased public spending have reduced the Federal government’s power to intervene and ensure
that provinces conform to health care standards. Perhaps most strikingly, by mid-year 82 per cent of all
COVID-19 related deaths in Canada occured in long-term care homes, while in the same period in Australia
such homes accounted for only 25 per cent of mortality rates. Federal cuts to healthcare in Canada have led to
an estimated CAD$31 billion shortfall by 2017, leading the nation's universal healthcare system to rely heavily
on the private sector.
In light of escalating COVID-19 cases, by November 2020 Canadian media outlets were heralding the success
of Australia’s ‘extreme’ second lockdown in Melbourne and imploring their own government to head the lessons.
While Canada’s largest city Toronto has moved back into lockdown as of November 23, the measures are not
as strict as those seen in Melbourne and health experts still warn that the nation is on the brink of being
overwhelmed by the pandemic over winter.
Without doubt, Australia was aided greatly by luck and circumstance. Our unique isolation by sea and our
ability to effectively manage the influx of people and goods, gave Australia an advantage against the virus.
Yet even in lieu of these conditions, it is undeniable that swift government action, effective stimulus and a
preparedness to implement hard lockdowns have effectively managed the spread of the virus in Australia.
Canada’s immediate challenge is to regain control over its recent surge of cases which began in September
2020. Ultimately, the perils of managing an unprecedented global virus have revealed more of Australia’s
differences with Canada than our similarities. Beyond the pandemic, lessons will surely be learnt in managing
the immediate governmental response. However, deeper changes to federal administration and attitudes
towards health and aged care will be more challenging to overcome.
DECLAN CURTIN

B O D Y P O L I T I C K I N G
I have reviewed a handful of COVID-19 ‘cures’
promoted by various political leaders with the
help of Dr Lawrence Huang, a medical registrar
with an interest in infectious diseases who was
part of the Queensland COVID-19 response.
VYZANTINON
Vyzantinon is an antiseptic hand cream
promoted by Kyriakos Velopoulos, a
telemarketer and leader of the antiestablishment
party Greek Solution. The teatree
balm is claimed to protect people from
pneumonia and COVID-19 if rubbed on hands
twice a day.
Dr Huang: “I support good hand hygiene for
preventing the spread of any infection.
However, I’m not aware of any good evidence
that tea tree oil has a place in preventing the
spread of COVID-19. Various ‘essential oils’
have been touted for the treatment or
prevention of infections with varying degrees
of efficacy (and quality of scientific evidence)
by people who want a ‘natural’ approach.
Ethanol is natural—we drink it. Why not stick
with 100 per cent natural ethanol as the
antiseptic used in hand hygiene?”
EUCALYPTUS ‘ANTIVIRUS’ NECKLACE
It was described as being able to kill 42 per
cent of the virus if worn for 15 minutes. The
Indonesian Ministry of Agriculture filed patents
for the eucalyptus necklaces in India,
Singapore and Malaysia,
later retracting efficacy claims after
widespread criticism, and repositioning it as
jamu, or herbal medicine, and an accessory for
aromatherapy.
Dr Huang: “This delivery approach would
smell great but is arguably even less effective.
If people want a natural antiviral necklace,
why not wear copper?”
HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE
Hydroxychloroquine, an antimalarial drug,
entered the public imagination thanks to a
viral Breitbart video shared by several
prominent right-wing personalities. The video
was viewed tens of millions of times before
Twitter and Facebook removed it from their
platforms for violating disinformation policies,
sparking outcry from some groups for a
perceived anti-conservative bias.
Dr Huang: “I believe the medical community
has to take some of the blame for the
hydroxychloroquine craze that spread to a
wider non-medical audience. Doctors were
desperate for treatment options and in the
early days grasped onto non-published, nonpeer
reviewed, non-randomised and poorly
designed trials as evidence that
hydroxychloroquine had some beneficial
effect. Moreover, some were in vitro studies
(studies in a petri dish) that the media, lay
people, and some doctors were willing to
accept as evidence that the drug will work in a
human... Much of this has been discredited or
disproven. Some were even proven to be
harmful. Unfortunately, garbage science
persists in the community and in the dark
corners of the internet.”
MONIQUE CURRIE

T O
D I S M A N T L E
O R T O R E F O R M ?
T H E
W O R L D
H E A L T H
O R G A N I Z A T I O N ’ S
R E S P O N S E
C O V I D - 1 9
The year when we most needed a global health
body has also been the year when cracks began
to show in the system. The World Health
Organisation (WHO) is the agency under the
United Nations charged with coordinating
international health efforts, meaning that it is a
key player in providing information regarding
infectious diseases and hindering a worldwide
health crisis. This year, however, revealed issues
in the WHO that prevented it from dealing
effectively with the COVID-19 pandemic.
INEFFECTIVENESS OF THE COVID-19
HANDLING
T O
When COVID-19 first broke out in China, initial
secrecy and the WHO’s hesitance to declare the
virus as a serious issue exacerbated the
pandemic’s reach. In mid-January, the WHO
tweeted that there were no signs of human-tohuman
transmission of the virus in China, even
though Taiwan had approached the WHO with
transmission concerns as early as December 31.
The WHO also only declared the coronavirus a
pandemic on March 11, almost two weeks
after Australia made this announcement on
February 27. These delays prevented more
serious action from being taken early on to
prevent the spread of the virus across the
globe. Moreover, when the rest of the world
criticised China’s delayed announcement of
the virus, WHO’s Director-General Tedros
Adhanom praised Xi Jinping for his approach
to the pandemic.
Resulting from this ineffectiveness, President
Trump declared that the WHO “really blew it”
and announced that he would pull US funding,
which makes up 15% of the organisation’s
budget. Vice President Mike Pence stated that
the US could have done better “if China had
been more forthcoming”.
The US is not the only country that saw the
WHO as unprepared for the task of dealing
with a global pandemic. The Japanese Deputy
Prime Minister, Taro Aso, called the WHO the
“Chinese Health Organization”. Australia,
when calling for an independent inquiry into
China’s handling of COVID-19, declared that
it did not want the WHO to lead the
investigation. All of this suggests an erosion
of trust in the ability of the WHO to remain
impartial and effective in the face of a global
crisis.

Evidently, misuse or disruption in Zoom can result in significant
inconvenience or loss for thousands of individuals and
businesses, and it poses a potential risk to national security.
US intelligence and security agencies have warned of the risk
of hackers exploiting weaknesses in the videoconferencing
software to conduct surveillance on high-value targets, steal
sensitive information, conduct follow-up espionage operations
against individuals and businesses, and engage in extortion.
GEOPOLITICAL CONCERNS
Although Zoom’s cybersecurity and privacy vulnerabilities are
alone troubling, they have been overshadowed by concerns of
foreign interference and espionage - given the company’s
alleged links with China. Governments across Australia,
Canada, New Zealand, the UK, and the US have expressed
distaste over the Chinese government’s capacity to potentially
intercept sensitive information communicated over the service.
Consequently, this issue has come to form part of the wider
debate concerning China’s growing dominance in technology
and opposing Beijing’s subversive use of advanced technology
acquisition strategies.
In June 2020, several US lawmakers requested that Zoom
clarify its relationship with the Chinese government following
news that the firm had complied with demands from the
Chinese government to suspend the accounts of US and Hong
Kong-based activists holding events related to the Tiananmen
Square massacre. Zoom responded that its decision to
suspend accounts was to comply with Chinese law. The
decision to censor individuals residing in the US, beyond the
jurisdiction of the Chinese government, contributed to the view
that the company prioritises the interests of the Chinese
government over human rights and freedom of speech. The
public’s focus has centred upon the nationality and background
of Zoom’s founder Eric Yuan, generating rumours questioning
his loyalties. Yuan gave a public statement in May clarifying
that he had lived in the US since 1997 and had adopted US
citizenship in 2007, while providing assurances that Zoom is a
fully American company.
While Zoom’s headquarters are based in California, its main
applications have been developed, in part, by several Chinese
companies all known as Ruanshi Software. Two of these
companies are owned by Zoom, but another is owned by an
unknown company named American Cloud Video Software
Technology. Zoom has approximately 700 research and
development employees in China in a bid to reduce operating
expenses and improve business margins. These factors are a
cause for concern, given the purported degree of authority
exercised by the CCP over mainland Chinese companies, and
the routine embedding of government officials within mainland
private tech companies.
The apparent routing of Zoom calls from non-China users
through China has also fuelled unease over security and
privacy, given the applicability of Chinese law and lack of strict
data privacy laws in China. Under the 2015 National Security
Law, the Chinese government requires that key internet and
information systems be “secure and controllable”. The law
provides a legal foundation for the comprehensive
management of internet activities within China’s territory,
where such activities can undermine Beijing’s cyberspace
security. Further, the 2017 Cybersecurity Law compels
network operators to store select data within China and
permits government officials to conduct spot-checks on
network operations.
SUMMARY
Accentuated by the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, the
increasingly digitised nature of modern societies under the
Fourth Industrial Revolution has resulted in an increased
reliance upon information and communications technology as
an integral element of our daily lives. The capacity of Zoom
and other videoconferencing services to facilitate education
and research, banking and finance, healthcare, and
communication sectors underscores its growing importance
as critical infrastructure. Consequently, governments are
anticipated to be increasingly compelled to regulate such
services in the public’s interest.
Zoom has since acknowledged its information security
shortfalls, and taken various steps to improve and manage its
cyber jurisdictional issues. However, the controversy
surrounding the company highlights the challenges faced by
transnational corporations amid the growing balkanization of
the internet. Where online interactions and activities have
become an increasingly integral aspect of modern societies,
nation states have correspondingly sought to expand their
control of online activities. This has given rise to the creation
and enforcement of diverse cyberspace norms across various
jurisdictions, with a significant dichotomy observed between
democratic versus authoritarian governments.
The issues surrounding Zoom thus symbolize the distinct and
differing priorities between China and the West over human
rights and civil liberties, how such priorities extend to their
actions in cyberspace, and how it impacts upon transnational
companies caught in the middle. Accordingly, this divergence
of perspectives across online spaces and technology sectors
imperils international peace and security and will contribute to
an increasingly hostile cyberspace environment.
JONATHAN LIM

19/12/2020: 18:09:12

UROPE
A CONTINENT OF PROTESTS
Europe was no exception to the worldwide Black
Lives Matter and various “anti-lockdown”
protests seen across the globe. However, amidst
soaring COVID-19 numbers, which saw Europe
as the epicentre of the virus on numerous
occasions, citizens still took to the streets in the
hundreds of thousands throughout the year.
In July, Bulgaria observed a series of protests in
response to ongoing grievances about
government corruption. These protests were
sparked by a police raid alleged to have been
directly targeting opponents of the government,
resulting in protesters taking to the streets for
more than 100 days.
In November French citizens took to the streets
in a separate protest to declare their opposition
to new security legislation - granting greater
power to the police and posing a perceived threat
to civil liberties. The announcement of this law
came just days a er police were lmed
physically and verbally abusing a black man. UN
experts have stated that the law is “incompatible”
with international law and human rights.
Of course, a year of French protest would not be
complete without the presence of the Yellow Vest
protesters - emerging a er a coronavirus
lockdown enforced hiatus in September. These
protests, which rst began in 2018, have
continued to have a presence in public discourse
throughout France. This tinderbox of issues
across France are sure to result in increased
discontent over the coming year.
November saw the eruption of disruption in
North Macedonia, where people came out in
protest to demand the country’s Social Democrat
Prime Minister, Zoran Zaev, resign.
In France, protesters spilt onto the streets
following the beheading of a schoolteacher who
displayed cartoons of the prophet Muhammad to
his students. President Macron’s response to the
attack saw counter-protests in the Muslim
world, which called for boycotting of French
products.
Furthermore, protests and disruption across
Belarus has been present for more than 100
days, with arrests of protestors continuing into
November. Protestors are demanding that the
country's authoritarian leader, President
Alexander Lukashenko, resign. These protesters
have been making noise on a daily basis since
early August.
Additionally, Poland also saw its fair share of
protests, largely against the actions of its rightwing
government. New restrictive abortion laws,
LGBT free zones, and interference in the judicial
system have sparked a wave of demonstrations
by citizens - marking some of the largest
protests in the countries history.
Finally, Greta Thunberg continued the school
strike for climate online.
ELIZA ARCHER

M E G - X I T A N D B R E X I T
One of the quirkier events of 2020 was that Brexit, which saw the United Kingdom (UK) withdraw from
the European Union (EU) and sparked international debate in 2016, was satirically compared to the Duke
and Duchess of Sussex’s decision to leave the royal family to pursue an independent life.
Whilst the concept of the UK leaving the EU had been debated for decades, the term ‘Brexit’ was coined in
2012 by academic Peter Wilding, eight months before Prime Minister David Cameron o cially
announced a national referendum on the issue. Since then, it has been used colloquially to describe the
arguments, processes and consequences concerning the UK’s exit from the EU and its place within wider
Europe, resulting in Brexit being chosen as the word of the year in 2016 by the Collins dictionary. Four
years later, while the logistics of a UK withdrawal from the EU were still being discussed, the Duke and
Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, announced that they would be o cially leaving
their royal duties on the 31st of March 2020. They planned to live in Canada and pursue independent and
philanthropic initiatives. The timing of the announcement, combined with personal media attacks on
Meghan Markle concerning her ‘in uence’ on Prince Harry, resulted in what was referred to as ‘Megxit’, a
word coined by The Sun newspaper to describe how the Duchess had supposedly negatively in uenced
the Duke and tarnished the royal family’s reputation.
Both events symbolise a drastic change from decades of history, diverging from traditionalist ideals to
pursue more independent and liberalist ventures. However, the announcement of Megxit this year
developed into a convenient proxy for analysing the intersections of race, class and gender in British
identity. Megan Markle’s African American heritage, combined with her middle class upbringing and
previous divorce, have become signi cant when discussing what it means to be ‘British’ and the
importance of having someone with a non-traditional background represent the national identity.
However, this similarity between Brexit and Megxit was overshadowed by the harsh public backlash
targeted at Meghan Markle a er announcing the decision, prompting political scientists and academics
to explore the sexist and racist undertones of the criticism. Meera Selva, director of the Reuters
Journalism Program at Oxford, noted the contradiction in the British public’s eagerness to exit the EU
compared to their outrage when the royal couple chose to leave the royal family. ‘Megxit’ perpetuates a
narrative that places blame on the Duchess of Sussex for manipulating Prince Harry and encouraging
him to stray from the royal line of duty. This misogynistic behaviour has been observed since Meghan
Markle rst became part of the royal family, which sparked an outpouring of public hate and resentment
targeting the former actress for being a “social climber and ‘gold-digger’”. These sexist and racist tropes
provided further incentive for the Duke and Duchess to leave the UK to live a more private life.
Furthermore, the tabloid attacks culminated in a lawsuit against Associated Newspapers following their
exit from the royal family.
To conclude, therefore, whilst both Brexit and Megxit were described in like terms and coined using
similar language, the crucial paradox lies in the general acceptance of the UK’s choice to leave the EU
compared to the personal o ence the British public felt when the Duke and Duchess of Sussex chose to
take some time away from the royal family.
ISHA DESAI

THE IMPLICATIONS
OF THE PROPOSED
GLOBAL SECURITY
LAW IN FRANCE
The controversial decision by France’s National Assembly to
change the proposed wording of Article 24 in the Global
Security Law (GSL), was momentous. While there is hope
that an amendment can bring a balance between protecting
fundamental freedoms and the protection of law
enforcement officers, the damage has already been done.
Given the international backlash and mass protests arising
from the proposal, and the decision to go ahead with the
amendments in spite of it, many have questioned France’s
commitment to human rights, with many continuing to
oppose the purposes of the bill as a whole.
The controversy surrounding the GSL stems primarily from
the proposed wording of Article 24, which would penalise
the publishing of images or videos of police officers in
certain circumstances. Advocates for the bill argued that
there are currently insufficient protections for law
enforcement in France and note that Article 24 is intended
to “protect those who protect us.” However, instances of
police brutality in recent protests and the recent release of a
video showing a black music producer, Michel Zecler, being
beaten by police on November 22, have brought into
question the implications that this law could have.
With the significance and global influence of the Black Lives
Matter movement, and increasingly publicised examples of
abuse of power by law enforcement in France looming in
the background, the implications of the GSL must consider
human rights and justice.
CONTEXT
Proposals to amend the GSL were first presented by the
majority party in government, La République en Marche, for
the purpose of respecting the identity and the work of those
that reinforce and maintain security. This is explicit within
the text of the proposed amendment to Article 24, wherein:
“IT SHALL BE PUNISHABLE BY ONE YEAR’S IMPRISONMENT
AND A FINE OF EUR 45, 000 FOR DISTRIBUTING, BY
WHATEVER MEANS AND ON WHATEVER MEDIUM, FOR THE
PURPOSE OF HARMING THE PHYSICAL OR MENTAL
INTEGRITY, THE IMAGE OF THE FACE OR ANY OTHER
IDENTIFYING ELEMENT OF A NATIONAL POLICE OFFICER
OR NATIONAL GENDARMERIE OTHER THAN ITS INDIVIDUAL
IDENTIFICATION NUMBER WHEN THEY ARE ACTING IN THE
CONTEXT OF A POLICE OPERATION”.
According to French Interior Minister, Gérald Darmanin, the
contents of the proposal arose in response to the increasing
volume of threats levelled against police officers on social
media platforms. The proposed bill was welcomed by police
unions in France, who recently addressed their complaints
and concerns to President Emmanuel Macron.
Consequently, on November 24, amid escalating public
protests, the National Assembly moved to adopt the first
reading document of the GSL.
PHOTOGRAPHING LAW ENFORCEMENT
The widespread occurrence of police brutality and racial
profiling in France has motivated individuals to record and
broadcast images and videos of police officers. One recent
example concerns the death of Cédric Chouviat, a delivery
driver who suffered a heart attack after police put him in a
chokehold. Additionally, in December 2018 gillets-jaunes
(yellow-vest) demonstrators were assaulted by police in a
Burger King outlet.

HAMAH HOSEN
Other examples have also included police deliberately
tripping demonstrators, police throwing a brick at
protestors, or police being recorded saying racist slurs. In
these cases, taking images or videos, and subsequently
publishing them, has not only raised a conversation about
police brutality, it has also been used as evidence in
journalistic and criminal investigations. Advocates for
photographing law enforcement posit that the purpose is
intended to protect the public and improve police
accountability instead of being used for nefarious purposes.
According to Claire Hédon, France’s appointed Defender of
Rights, “the publication of images relating to police
interventions are legitimate and necessary for democratic
functioning.” However, the introduction of the GSL would
have precluded such investigations, and undercut wider
public dialogue on the issue of police violence.
ANALYSIS
From a human rights perspective, the bill has been criticised
for hindering freedom of information or freedom of
expression. The press and various media organisations have
raised concerns regarding the potential impact of this law
upon journalists conducting live news reports. The NGO
Reporters Without Borders (RSF) noted that the law is likely
to “undermine the freedom to inform”, echoing the
sentiments of Chris Myant, Chair of the National Union of
Journalists in France.
However, the implications of this law can go beyond harms
to press freedom or journalists conducting their live reports.
These days, the filming or photographing of police officers is
often done by everyday individuals, by bystanders or by a
passer-by - both intentionally and unintentionally. For many
in France, filming for the purposes of accountability can
often be a life or death situation. Like America, France
similarly grapples with racial injustices and police violence
towards minorities. This too has led to disproportionate stop
and search measures, wrongful arrests due to racial
profiling, and the use of disproportionate force.
On the face of things, witnesses who capture and share
photographic evidence with the intent to promote the
administration of justice do not possess the requisite
harmful intent that Article 24 entails. But, as Journalist
Guillaume Bernard questions, “Who will determine whether
there is a desire to harm the police?”.
It is concerning that, should the law pass the senate in its
current state, it can be arbitrarily enforced by any police
officer who is being recorded or photographed. Noting the
prevalence of racial profiling by police in France, and the
Article’s ambiguity, this law may potentially be employed as
another means of perpetuating structural racism.
SUMMARY
Advocates of the GSL often consider the idea of police brutality
as a bitter pill to swallow, often noting its absurdity. For example,
Interior Minister Darmanin has previously stated that simply
hearing the term “police violence” makes him choke and
ascribes to the belief that police officers use legitimate violence.
While the French government may want to seek to cover up or
deny the realities of police brutality, the attention that the GSL
has received has positioned France within wider global
conversation on structural racism and police brutality. Should
the amendments progress through the Senate as is, France
would be signaling to the rest of the world their stance on this
issue: the protection of police officers above all others, the
disregard for structural racism, and an additional barrier in
improving accountability and transparency within the police.

I n O c t o b e r 2 0 2 0 , P o l a n d e x p e r i e n c e d t h e l a r g e s t
p r o t e s t s i n t h e n at i o n ’ s h i s t o r y s i n c e t h e f a l l o f
C o m m u n i s m . H u n d r e d s o f t h o u s a n d s o f P o l e s t o o k
t o t h e s t r e e t a m i d s t s o a r i n g C O V I D - 1 9 c a s e s t o
p r o t e s t p r o p o s e d c h a n g e s t o P o l i s h a b o r t i o n
l a w s . I n t h e c o n t e x t o f a c o u n t r y, w h o s e
n at i o n a l i d e n t i t y i s s o i n t e r t w i n e d w i t h t h e
C h u r c h , t h e q u e s t i o n a r i s e s a s t o w h at h a p p e n s
w h e n t h e C h u r c h ’ s p o s i t i o n r e p r e s e n t s a
d r a m at i c d e p a r t u r e f r o m p o p u l a r o p i n i o n .
ELIZA ARCHER - THE NEW SOLIDARITY MOVEMENT: POLISH WOMEN (16 DEC)

Abe announced sweeping economic reforms in a speech unveiling his
cabinet. These economic reforms would later be referred to as
Abenomics; a nod to Ronald Reagans controversial Reaganomics in the
U.S. “Bold monetary policy, flexible fiscal policy and a growth strategy
that encourages private investment," were the three facets which would
herald the new economic strategy, designed to revive a stagnated
Japanese economy, still reeling from the effects of the infamous Lost
Decade of the 1990s. The first four years of Abe’s reign saw profound
stimulus measures aimed at raising inflation to 2%, in efforts to increase
the desirability of Japanese exports as well as direct government
spending, which reached $116 billion as part of the $210 billion
economic recovery packages. The largest reform in terms of labour
market restructuring involved the encouragement of the elderly and
women into the labour force as part of the Plan to Realize the Dynamic
Engagement of All Citizens, increasing productivity in the labour market
whilst understanding Japanese cultural stances on household roles.
Despite the relative success of Abe’s economic reforms, the aristocratic
politician never truly found the popularity of some of his predecessors.
Winning the 2012 election with only a 60% voter turnout, the lowest
since World War II, was a precursory signal for his unpopular domestic
polling. Abe found himself at the centre of criticism for fracturing
relations with South Korea, due to an unwillingness to interact with the
issue of Korean comfort women during the Japanese occupation of
South Korea before World War II. Furthermore, relations with China
deteriorated not solely due to conflict over the Senkaku/Diaoyutai
Islands, but two controversial visits to the Yasukuni Shrine in 2013 and
2020. Yasukuni Shrine most notable houses the graves of 14 Japanese
wartime Generals who are now regarded as War Criminals for actions
committed towards China and Korea during World War II. Combined
with multiple failed efforts to empower the Japanese military through
constitutional revision, Abe showed a misunderstanding of Japanese
sentiment towards World War II, with 61% of those surveyed against any
revisions.
Abe announced his retirement on August 28th, citing health issues due
to a history of ulcerative colitis impairing his response to the current
COVID-19 pandemic. Despite being a controversial figure in Japanese
politics, the hawkish stalwart’s mantle will be heavy for any new arrival.
SAMUEL RADFORD

SOUTH &
Stranded: The Pandem
Asia's Migrant Worke
Central Asia’s migrant workers have been especially hard hit
by the COVID-19 pandemic. Rapid border closures and the
implementation of lockdowns have stranded people across
the region and decimated local industries, leaving thousands
with no income and no way home. The loss of remittances,
critical to Central Asian economies, will have significant
secondary impacts. The plight of Central Asia’s migrant
workers has brought into sharp focus the difficulties of
shutting down a globalised world and holds implications for
the region’s recovery in the years ahead.
Every year, millions of people across Central Asia travel
abroad for short-term employment. According to official
statistics, 2 million Uzbeks travel abroad for work annually,
though the true figure is believed to be far higher. 1 million
Tajiks work in Russia each year, a remarkable figure given
Tajikistan’s population of some 9.5 million. At least 74 per
cent of migrant workers in Russia are Central Asian. Crucially
for their home countries, Central Asian migrant workers
send home billions of dollars annually in remittances,
constituting almost 30 per cent of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan’s
GDP; this figure places them in the top five globally.
The impact of the pandemic on this massive sector has been
devastating. Up to 40 per cent of Central Asian migrant
workers lost their jobs by August, while those lucky enough
to remain employed saw their wages plummet. Conditions
for migrant workers are notoriously exploitative. Limited
regulation of private employment businesses in Uzbekistan
has left Uzbek workers particularly vulnerable. In addition,
the prevalence of illegal migrant work has made it especially
difficult for many to access assistance through official
channels.
With the rapid closure of borders early in the year, hundreds
of migrant workers were stranded at airports and border
crossings, either unable to enter or unable to leave. With
lockdowns forcing many out of work, thousands soon found
themselves on the wrong sides of sealed borders. Russian
border closures early in the year came before the usual
spring high season, preventing many of those who had
secured work from commencing employment. Although
Russia has historically been the most popular destination for
labourers, internal migration within the region has also
grown in recent years, having once boosted local economies
but now complicating repatriation efforts. While Russia has
since reopened its borders to Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan,
thousands from Uzbekistan, Tajikistan and Turkmenistan
remain stranded. Chartered flights have been cancelled amid
disputes over which airlines should be permitted to operate,
demonstrating how migrant workers have become the main
casualties of the current economic turmoil. In many places
around the region, the economic crisis evolved into a
humanitarian one. Thousands of Tajik and Uzbek workers
faced poor conditions in makeshift camps in Russia’s Samara
region while attempting to return home via Kazakhstan.
Those in the Samara camps were permitted to transit in
Kazakhstan only after clashes broke out along the border.
Many workers do not blame governments for taking
protective measures aimed at addressing the pandemic –
surveys have indicated that, early in the pandemic, migrant
workers in Russia were more aware of the dangers of
coronavirus than locals. However, millions now face a
troubled future unless they receive assistance which their
governments are in no position to provide. Governments
across the region must also weigh the potentially serious
public health implications of repatriating large numbers of
now-unemployed migrants, many of whom are already at
high risk of contracting COVID-19 in overcrowded
accommodation. Concerned about potential economic and
health ramifications, many back home are not supportive of
a large influx of returning citizens, placing workers in an
exceptionally difficult bind between stigma and lack of
opportunity at home, and insecurity and xenophobia abroad.

CENTRAL ASIA
ic's Impact on Central
rs
SAMUEL GARRETT
With the rapid closure of
borders early in the year,
hundreds of migrant workers
The implications for Central Asia’s pandemic recovery are
significant. The International Organization for Migration (IOM)
estimates that over 90 per cent of Central Asian migrant
workers will not be able to send home remittances due to
this year’s crisis. While the IOM launched an appeal in May
seeking millions of dollars to help poverty-stricken migrants
in Central Asia, this will not address the impact of billions of
dollars in lost remittances. As borders have slowly reopened,
tens of thousands have been able to return home, but the
long term knock-on effects of this year will only now begin
to be felt. The loss of remittances will impact families across
Central Asia who rely on the funds for study, rent, and basic
essentials. Governments will also now be forced to do more
with less for thousands of workers returning without income
or employment.
The predicament of Central Asia’s migrant workers is not
unique. Similar stories have played out across the globe,
including in Australia. The World Bank estimates that global
remittances will fall by 20 per cent this year alone. However,
Central Asian economies’ heavy reliance on remittances has
seen the region especially hard hit. The region’s experience
serves as a stark reminder of the pandemic’s
disproportionate impact on migrants and developing
countries, and the importance of wealth, stability and a
powerful passport to being able to easily navigate a complex
world of borders; a fact often taken for granted. For those
most affected, the immediate future is bleak.
were stranded at airports
and border crossings, either
unable to enter or unable to
leave. With lockdowns
forcing many out of work,
thousands soon found
themselves on the wrong
sides of sealed borders.

SOUTH & CENT
Book Review - Turkmen Alabay
by President Gurbanguly
SAMUEL GARRETT
Berdymukhamedov
Turkmen President Gurbanguly Berdymukhamedov is a prolific author. In 2020, he published The Spiritual
World of the Turkmen, the 53rd book he has written during his 13-year authoritarian rule. While we await
with anticipation the official translation of The Spiritual World of the Turkmen, enjoy this review of Turkmen
Alabay, Berdymukhamedov’s 2019 book on the Alabai dog, in recognition of his unveiling of a 6m golden
statue of an Alabai in Ashgabat this year.
Turkmen Alabay is a 272-page exploration of every facet of the Alabai dog and its connections, both
historical and spiritual, with Turkmenistan. The book offers an engaging history of the Alabai, including a
period when Alabai were hunted for their fur under the Soviet Union. Its pages are replete with drawings of
idyllic traditional Turkmen life and dozens of images of Alabai out in nature, often appearing with the
President himself. Berdymukhamedov paints the Alabai as an embodiment of Turkmen values of bravery,
courage and loyalty, while offering such insightful thoughts as “All living beings are alive from a point of
view of physiology”. Alabai clearly maintain a significant position in Turkmen cultural history, and the book
describes in detail their apparent role in shaping Turkmenistan’s national identity.
Berdymukhamedov uses the book as a jumping-off point for broader reflections on Turkmen life, weaving
in idiomatic wisdom and Turkmen proverbs to reaffirm the present structure of Turkmen society and the
“justice and inviolable principles of democracy” supposedly enshrined in the constitution. In
Berdymukhamedov’s telling, Turkmenistan is on the verge of breaking onto the world stage and is being
applauded internationally for its wisdom and virtue. He also writes variously of the importance of ensuring a
strong supply of thoroughbred dogs, expresses dismay at the common name ‘Central Asian sheepdog’
erasing the Alabai’s Turkmen roots, and provides notes on Alabai puppy development. Naturally, he can’t
resist name-dropping a few of his own policies, such as a proposal for a new specialised veterinary centre
near Ashgabat.
As the 272 pages begin to wear on, however, one begins to wonder about the priorities of a president who
has apparently averaged a book every three months for the past 13 years. Turkmen Alabay’s overtly spiritual
approach mirrors the tone taken in a number of Berdymukhamedov’s recent works. Analysts have
suggested that this represents a change in strategy from previous writings which emphasised
Turkmenistan’s material wealth and prosperity, given the severe economic crisis the country now faces. The
book clearly serves to support the creation of a national mythos, with constant emphasis on the country’s
independence and neutrality. Berdymukhamedov ends the foreword with the worthy prayer “May the light
of prosperity and happiness illuminate our Motherland”. After a tumultuous year, in which Turkmen
authorities have continued to deny the presence of COVID-19 in Turkmenistan and the Turkmen people
have suffered from intense poverty and food shortages, Berdymukhamedov’s words ring somewhat hollow.
Free access to translated copies of Berdymukhamedov’s writings can be found, courtesy of the Turkmen
government, at https://www.neutrality.gov.tm/library/en

RAL ASIA
SAMUEL GARRETT
WEST TO EAST:
Vorukh (Kyrgyzstan-Tajikistan);
Sokh (Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan);
Kashmir (India-Pakistan);
Aksai Chin (China-India);
Kalapani (India-Nepal);
Doklam (Bhutan-China);
Sakteng Wildlife Sanctuary
(Bhutan-China);
Arunachal Pradesh (China-India)
border incidents and contested regions in south and central asia
S i n o - I n d i a n B o r d e r D i s p u t e s : 2 0 2 0 U p d a t e s
Among the political and economic turmoil of 2020, both the Indian military and People’s Liberation Army (PLA) have been making
headlines for their actions at the Karakoram range bordering China, India and Pakistan. Their conflict in this area spans decades but
has abruptly turned violent once again, further complicating bilateral relations.
The 3440km Himalayan border that spans the Karakoram
range is framed by bodies of water and snowcaps, resulting in
vague national boundaries that fuelled the confrontation and
stand-off between the Indian and Chinese militaries earlier this
year.
Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, India and China’s conflict over
this region resurfaced on June 15, when 20 Indian soldiers
were killed in the Galwan Valley in an animalistic confrontation
with sticks and clubs. Not only was this a devastating episode
for both parties involved, but it was their first fatal border
dispute since 1975. Accordingly, it reignited long-standing
political tensions between the two industrialising nations.
India and China both intend to build infrastructure along the
contested border (LAC) and India’s new road leading to a
military air base has been identified as a possible trigger for the
initial conflict in June this year that killed 20 Indian soldiers.
The following months saw both countries allege that the other
had provoked tensions at the border. In August, India claimed
that China’s PLA had carried out ‘provocative military
movements’ in Ladakh, creating a perceived need to
strengthen their own military position to protect territorial
integrity. These accusations were denied by China, who
asserted that India were the initial aggressors at the border
escalating tensions.
Shortly after, on September 7, China accused India of firing
shots at Chinese troops while India claimed that it was the
Chinese military that fired intimidation shots into the air. While
no fatalities occurred, it violated a 1996 agreement which
banned the use of guns and explosives at the border.
Most recently, on October 21, it was revealed that a Chinese
soldier, who had crossed the disputed border at Demchok in
Ladakh, had been returned by the Indian military. Indian
authorities provided the PLA soldier medical assistance and
oxygen before ensuring he returned to his home country’s
base. Protocols that govern the accidental wandering of
soldiers along the border mandated that India return the lost
soldier.
Siince June, politicians and the military commanders from
India and China have been through eight rounds of
negotiations to determine clearer national zones and negotiate
conflict de-escalation. Patrolling limits, buffer zones and early
disengagement to protect soldiers during winter have been the
main topics of discussion; however, these agreements merely
aim to facilitate a fairer playing field between the parties as
opposed to achieving long-term solutions to their decadeslong
dispute.
ISHA DESAI - SINO-INDIEAN BORDER DISPUTE: THE
HISTORY AND 2020 UPDATE (NOV 14)

I s P e a c e F i n a l l y I n
S i g h t f o r
A f g h a n i s t a n ?
Faseeha Hashmi (22 SEPT)
In a bid to end the two-decade protracted war, a definitive
peace process is finally underway in the landlocked country of
Afghanistan. Acknowledging the co-signing of a peace
agreement between the Taliban and the US, there remains a
considerable way to go in achieving lasting peace with the
Taliban in a post-conflict Afghanistan. With Washington’s
impending withdrawal, the question arises as to how the
Afghan government will manifest a power-sharing
arrangement with the Taliban.
The current administration in Kabul faces numerous
challenges to its legitimacy that extend beyond the Taliban.
Indeed, settling the score amongst competing political actors
demonstrates a treacherous path forward. The future of
Afghanistan hangs in the balance. What exactly will it take for
peace to become a reality for the Afghani people, or are current
peace efforts doomed to falter?
The achievement of peace in Afghanistan has been a long time
coming, and the Withdrawal Accord represents the most
significant achievement to end the conflict to date. Now, more
than ever, the path forward requires ongoing international
attention and support. It is hoped that a political arrangement
between Kabul and the Taliban can be sorted out before the
complete withdrawal of US troops. However, this process has
been further complicated by additional Taliban requests for the
withdrawal of all US military advisers from the country. Once
the dust settles and American election has taken place in
November, at least the American administration's commitment
will be clarified moving forward.
The US has a checkered history with the Taliban. Beginning in
2001, Washington invaded Afghanistan in pursuit of the
international terrorist organisation, Al-Qaeda. The main
insurgent group fighting against the Afghan government and
coalition forces, known as the “students,” then granted
sanctuary to Al-Qaeda and its now-deceased former leader
Osama Bin Laden.
Following years of fighting, diplomatic and peace efforts
intensified in 2018 between the Taliban and Washington. These
efforts gave rise to the US-Taliban deal, officially signed on 29
February 2020 in Qatar's capital, Doha. Under the Agreement
for Bringing Peace to Afghanistan (also known as the
“Withdrawal Accord”), Washington agreed to discontinue all US
and coalition operations in Afghanistan within the following 14
months. In return, Taliban leaders have committed a reduction
in armed violence and pledged not to cooperate with terrorist
organisations such as Al-Qaeda. In addition, to encourage the
key players to the Accord, a prisoner swap was incorporated as
part of the deal. While these exchanges have helped to propel
dialogue, the promises made by the Taliban to meet those
goals have been vague and it has been difficult to ensure
compliance.
As the Accord’s name suggests, the government of Afghanistan
is not a party to it. Woefully, this constitutes a missing and
crucial ingredient to long-term peace. Open dialogue between
the Afghan government and the Taliban in a power-sharing
arrangement is a necessity. Therefore, the intra-Afghan
dialogue is fundamental as both sides must continue to coexist
in a post-US exodus era. This will require the arrangement of a
permanent and comprehensive ceasefire between the warring
sides. However, there are no publicly available details on how
such a roadmap will materialise.
Acknowledging the role of the US as one of the main actors in
this conflict, it is essential that Washington provides continuing
assistance to ensure Afghanistan’s long-term socio-economic
development. At some point, negotiations between Kabul and
the Taliban must be made concerning the fate of Afghanistan
moving forward. The long-fought achievements of women’s
empowerment, freedom of speech, and freedom of expression
must not be compromised - forlornly, representing
attainments paid for in American and Afghan blood.
Fortunately, in December, it will also soon be winter in
Afghanistan, therefore there are higher chances of dialogue,
making war less feasible. Irrespective of the current situation,
the desire of the Afghan people to live in peace and harmony
should not be underestimated, and the achievement of peace
in Afghanistan must remain the focus of all parties. Despite
decades of continuous conflict, the resilience and
determination of the Afghan people continue to shine through.
To this end, Afghan President Ashraf Ghani has boldly declared
that failure is “not an option.”

L A T I N
A M E R I C A

JOINING THE DOTS:
PINOCHET’S LEGACY AND
THE CHILEAN PROTESTS
September 11, 1973, is a day that has been indelibly etched into Chile’s history; a seismic shift in the
country’s leadership that has reverberated throughout time and continues to affect its political
landscape to this day.
Whilst ‘September 11’ has since been eclipsed in notoriety by the al-Qaeda attacks of 2001, Chileans
across the political spectrum are acutely aware of this date with reference to 1973 and the
upheaval that took place. Almost five decades ago, a then 57-year-old military general called
Augusto Pinochet led his US-backed group of officers to depose democratically-elected President
Salvador Allende and seize control of the Chilean government. As bombs shattered the walls of the
Presidential Palace and bricks crumbled to the ground, so too did Allende’s tenure as President.
With gunfire and explosions engulfing the building, Allende committed suicide that day in the very
office he was elected to serve.
What later ensued was the 16-year-rule of President Pinochet, taking power as the military dictator
of the Government Junta of Chile before the country moved back to a democracy in 1990. This
period saw the dictator brutally crackdown against political opponents and Allende-sympathisers,
with approximately 3,200 people being executed or disappearing and 28,000 arrests with cases of
torture.
Perhaps the most enduring legacy of Pinochet’s reign was the creation of Chile’s “Constitution of
Liberty” created from a 1980 plebiscite held in a climate of intense repression and voter fraud. With
blank votes being counted as “yes” and more votes being counted than there were voters in remote
areas, the 67 per cent majority that allowed for the creation of the constitution has since been
charged with being artificially inflated.
The constitution, which is still in place today, had two key purposes for the Pinochet government:
firstly, to enshrine an economic blueprint for a free-market and neoliberal society protected from
democratic interference and, secondly, to codify these tenets to ensure their longevity beyond
Pinochet’s reign as President. In 1977, Austrian neoliberal economist Friedrich Hayek met with
Pinochet to provide his views on the danger of “unlimited democracy” and the importance of
rights, only insofar as to protect economic freedom at the expense of social welfare. Pinochet
named the constitution after Hayek’s major work which was published two decades earlier.
Fast-forward to now and the past 18 months has seen Chile gripped by protests against a range of
social and economic causes; the likes of which the country has not seen for decades. The protests
began in response to a raise in public transport fees in Santiago but quickly evolved to cover the
increased cost of living, privatisation and inequality that had been building since the Constitution
of Liberty was created. Protesters remarked that the demonstrations are “not just about the metro…
[they are] a cumulation of situations and the crisis of the economic model since we returned to
democracy” in 1990. As resentment towards the ruling-class’ grip on wealth and power built, more
than one million protestors across all generations took to the streets in Santiago to demand
sweeping economic and social reform, including replacing the Pinochet-era constitution.

These demands were met ruthlessly by Chile’s
President Sebastián Piñera, responding with a
swift and brutal military presence to suppress
demonstrators. Whilst the severity of Piñera’s
response has not reached the scale of brutality
displayed by Pinochet years before him, Piñera
has relied upon military power to shore up the
current government and control dissidents, with
new legislation being introduced to expand the
powers of armed forces. Water cannons and tear
gas filled the streets of Santiago as forces clashed
with anti-neoliberal protestors refusing to accept
a continuation of Pinochet’s legacy.
Reflecting upon the 2019-20 Chilean protests in a
vacuum, it is easy to simply equate the violence
and destruction we have seen to incensed
citizens who have grown frustrated with rising
costs of living and inequality. However, looking
back and joining the dots from that fateful day in
1973 to now, we can analyse the context and
historical significance of these protests in Chile’s
constantly evolving political landscape.
With the magnitude and diversity of the
protestors’ demands and demonstrations, what
exactly is on the line may be obscured to some. At
its core, the 2019-20 Chilean protests are a war of
ideals. Two forces have met amid a melee of
sirens and destruction; one seeking to protect and
further entrench a social and economic system of
the past and the other fighting for a different
future for Chile. Although Pinochet is now long
gone, his prevailing legacy which was
strategically codified into Chile’s constitution
continues to affect the country’s political
discourse over three decades later. Now with 36
people having died and 28,000 arrested due to the
protests, the struggle between these two sides is
unambiguous.
In October this year, protestors secured a
significant victory for their cause, as Piñera’s
government capitulated and held a referendum
asking whether Chileans want the country’s
constitution to be rewritten. The response was
emphatic, with 78.12 per cent of voters demanding
a new constitution to be drawn up by a body
which will be entirely elected by a popular vote
instead of one which would have been made up by
50 per cent of members of Congress. Although
Chileans will not be able to vote on the new
constitution until 2022, this marked a considerable
step in the pursuit to move on from Pinochet’s
legacy.
It may seem paradoxical, but Chile’s 2020
referendum was not really about Pinochet — more
than half of eligible Chilean voters were younger
than 20 when he left office in 1990, and about 1 in 5
hadn’t been born by then. Rather, the debate
targeted his charter’s lack of protection against
economic inequalities, as well as problems with
welfare and environmental degradation. The
‘Constitution of Liberty’ is an instrument of
neoliberal ideology that Pinochet, with the help of
advisors and foreign support, implemented to
establish an economic and social system that
would benefit the few. What we’ve seen in 2019
and 2020 is not a fight against Pinochet, but rather
a fight against ‘Pinochet’s Chile’ which began
decades before the first protestor set foot in the
streets of Santiago.
Whilst Pinochet has since passed, with only his
ashes left in Chile, his legacy has undeniably
shaped the country's contemporary politics and
the issues it attempts to grapple with. The Chilean
protests of the last 18 months are a timely
reminder of the significance history and context
plays in the events that change the world today.
With each decision and machination made by
those who wield considerable power, the lives of
not only those immediately affected, but also
generations to come, will be shaped. As the world
experiences unprecedented and consequential
changes in the 21st century, it behoves us all to
analyse and question current iterations of political
change and how they will affect future
generations.
DYLAN GAYMER

Uruguay ’s President Luis L acalle Pou’s COVID-19 resp onse highlights
the e ssentiality of a unite d le adership during times of extreme
turbulenc e. L acalle Pou’s resp onse emb o dies the imp or tanc e of
“to getherness” in preserving national c ohesion, promoting
c ompassion, and in incre asing the sp e e d of governmental resp onse.
The c ountry's suc c e ss has b e en attribute d to e arly and de cisive action
- including the closure of international b orders, and the re quirement
for older citizens to remain in quarantine.
Most critically in April 2020, the p olitical par ties unifie d and dire ctly
c o ordinate d with he alth exp er ts and businesses - enabling a
c ollab orative resp onse that was c onfident, and absent of par tisan
disagre ements. While the c ountry’s e c onomy is exp e cte d to c ontract by
4% over 2020, the effe ctiveness of its pandemic resp onse has
p ositione d Uruguay for strong e c onomic re c overy, with a proje cte d
expansion of 4% over 2021. L acalle Pou’s resp onse has suc c e ssfully
achieve d a balanc e b etwe en public he alth and e c onomic sustainability
- one which many other c ountries, e sp e cially in L atin America, have
struggle d to attain.
M E L I S S A KEARNEY - THE GOLDILO CKS PRINCIPLE (NOV 27)
WHAT BIDEN
MIGHT MEAN FOR
LATIN AMERICA
As the dust begi
what a Biden pr
are high that the
Trump Adminis
empowering the
in the region to
President-Elect
exists, there is n
With a new lead
states.
DYLAN GAYMER

L
I
T
T
L
E
"The p e ople will so on se e that they were tricke d by these
governors and by the large par t of the me dia when it comes
to c oronavirus...It is a shamele ss c ampaign, a c olossal and
absurd c ampaign against the he ad of state … They want to
forc e me out however p ossible" - JAIR BOLSONARO (23
MAR)
F
L
U
ns to settle on what has been a tumultuous U.S. election, Latin America looks north in anticipation of
esidency may mean for the geopolitics of the region and the 650 million people who inhabit it. Hopes
foreign policy agenda put forward by President-Elect Biden will be a welcome change from the
tration, which saw the revival of the Monroe Doctrine. This doctrine dates back to 1823, originally
U.S. to combat European interference in the Americas, but now resurging to allow U.S. intervention
subdue Russian and Chinese influence.
Biden’s rhetoric on Latin America appears optimistic, stating in a 2015 op-ed that “if the political will
o reason Central America cannot become the next great success story of the Western Hemisphere”.
er at the helm, we may see a distinct shift in the way the superpower deals with key Latin American

2
MEXICO
Despite President Trump running a campaign on a
platform of demonising Mexican immigrants and
advocating for a border wall, he has shared what has
been described as an “odd bromance” with Mexico’s
populist president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador.
However, there is uncertainty as to whether this
cordial treatment will continue under a Biden
administration. President López Obrador has joined
Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro in not
congratulating Biden on his election win, instead
waiting for the conclusion of President Trump’s legal
proceedings.
Although the future of President-Elect Biden’s personal
relationship with López Obrador remains ambiguous,
there is general confidence that we will see a shift
back towards a diplomatic relationship reminiscent of
pre-Trump administrations. Former Mexican deputy
foreign minister for North America, Andrés Rozental,
has stated that a Biden presidency will bring “a more
normal relationship. With problems and disputes on
trade and other things…but they’ll be dealt with the
way they were in the past.”
BRAZIL
Dubbed the “Trump of the Tropics”, President
Bolsonaro has remained a strong ally of President
Trump throughout his term. Having already lashed
out at President-Elect Biden over comments he made
regarding the Amazon Rainforest during a
presidential debate, President Bolsonaro’s disposition
may prove a challenge to the Biden administration
when seeking to re-establish U.S. preeminence in the
region.
The U.S. is Brazil’s second-largest trading partner in
collective goods and services. This economic
dependence will be key to President-Elect Biden’s
engagement with President Bolsonaro. Despite
Bolsonaro publicly endorsing Trump over Biden in the
election, the economic realities of Brazil’s reliance on
the U.S. may supersede his partisanship.
Washington’s relationship with President Bolsonaro
will likely be one of necessity, as well-functioning
diplomatic and economic ties with the United States
remain vital for Brazil’s economy, irrespective of the
personal sentiments Bolsonaro may hold towards
President-Elect Biden.
Time will tell the impact a Biden administration will
be able to have in Latin America. With a continent
eager for a change after years of erratic diplomacy,
there is general optimism about what a new
administration will achieve as it seeks to revitalise
the United States’ standing in the region.
VENEZUELA
The 21st century has seen Venezuela’s petroleumdependent
economy spiral into crisis and millions
of Venezuelans flee during the country’s political
and economic collapse. As the situation worsens,
eyes will be on President-Elect Biden as he
attempts to navigate diplomatic relations with a
country in turmoil. Reflecting on his time as Vice-
President during the Obama administration, U.S.
foreign policy on Venezuela was characterised by a
softer tone that focused on multilateral
cooperation. Contrastingly, President Trump’s
approach has been somewhat more haphazard,
remaining relatively uninvolved in the social and
economic crisis while denying claims of
orchestrating a foiled invasion attempt to remove
socialist President Nicolás Maduro from office. At
the same time, the Trump administration had
publicly endorsed Juan Guaidó as Venezuela’s
legitimate president.
With the ability to leverage existing relationships
forged during his tenure in the Obama
administration, a Biden presidency will likely see a
focus on multilateralism to cement American
primacy in the region.
However, a key development in the Democratic
Party with its Hispanic support base may prove
decisive in how Biden deals with the United
Socialist Party of Venezuela.
The 2020 U.S. election saw Hispanic voters,
including the crucial Cuban constituency which is
pivotal in the swing state of Florida, move further
away from the Democratic Party. This is largely
due to fears among Cuban voters that Democrats
are more likely to bolster Cuban-style communism
in the United States. This narrative has been
weaponised by Republicans, playing well with
Venezuelan, Cuban and Colombian immigrants
who are wary of socialism.
Whether this shift will influence the manner in
which President-Elect Biden deals with Venezuela
remains to be seen. However, with Republicans
continuing to capitalise on the ‘socialist
sympathiser’ narrative, Biden’s approach must be
tempered by the realities of the popular vote and
partisan politics.

0 2 0
DOCUMENTARY REVIEW: David Attenborough: A Life On Our Planet (David Attenborough)
R E V I E W S
David Attenborough has certainly lived an extraordinary life on our planet. His 80-minute documentary acts as his
“witness statement”, calling to arms every human being to protect our wild. This colourful film pulls no punches in
exhibiting the negative changes of our planet over the course of Attenborough’s lifetime, and the role humanity has to
play in effecting these changes.
The documentary emphasises the critical role of balance in Earth’s biodiversity - a balance which is present within the
film itself through a journey of despair and hope, beauty and destruction. The first half of the film brings the viewer
through an expedition of Attenborough’s life and work, operating in parallel to the increasing destruction of the natural
world. Its climax of future doom hits the emotional notes perfectly, as one can’t help but want to panic buy metal straws
and look up the nearest farmers market.
Anxieties ease, however, as Attenborough has it all figured out. Coupled with inspirational case studies from around the
world, the second half explains concrete steps that need to be taken to preserve the beautiful wildlife on screen. It is
evident the film has accounted for previous complications surrounding the communication of climate change, and
attempts to overcome them with clear, apolitical and achievable instructions.
Overall, it is an easy, educational yet emotional watch, with classic Attenborough shots of diverse wildlife, and accessible
explanations of natural history and the potential sixth mass extinction event in our future. At the age of 93, Attenborough
will not stop his lifetime fight for our planet, and we are all welcome to join him.
MELISSA KEARNEY
A culmination of extraordinary stories from women in politics makes this book a must read for budding politicians. Julia
Gillard and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala interviewed revolutionary women in politics from all stages of careers and authored a
book which reflects the many challenges, struggles and successes of females in leadership positions.
Mixed with hard facts and statistics, each chapter introduces a hypothesis about women in politics which the authors
prove or disprove through interviews with female leaders. These female leaders come from around the world, including:
Jacinda Ardern, Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Michelle Bachelet, Erna Solberg, Hillary Clinton, Theresa May, Joyce Banda and
Christine Lagarde. This book is not just an inspirational guide written to empower young female leaders; It is a book
which presents hard truths to readers about our own role and preconceptions, which contribute to a system that makes it
harder for women to reach executive leadership positions. Gillard and Ngozi pose the strongest questions from the book:
“our choice is between having the world crawl towards the dawn of political gender equality in the year 2115, or acting
more dramatically now”.
So not only is this an informative and inspiring read, it is also a timely reminder for everyone, no matter their gender, to
act now to help achieve a gender equal world.
ELLE GREAVES
BOOK REVIEW: Women and Leadership (Julia Gillard and Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala)

C O N T R I B U T O R S
REGIONAL
CORRESPONDENTS
Eliza Archer
Rhiannon Arthur
Holly-Rose Biskup Harwig
Declan Curtin
Louis Devine
Samuel Garrett
Dylan Gaymer
Cassius Hynam
Iain D. Johnson
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Victoria Cooper
SENIOR EDITOR: Nathaniel Sgambellone
SENIOR CORRESPONDENT: Anet McClintock
EDITORS
Sanjay Balakumar
Kelsey Buchanan
Sandy Gamaralalage
Elle Greaves
Hamah Hosen
Jonathan Lim
Nimaya Mallikahewa
YDS WRITERS
Kate Backshall
Sanjay Balakumar
Erica Bell
Jennifer Chance
Monique Currie
Isha Desai
Noah Diamantopoulos
Darcy French
Liep Gatwech
Olivia Green
Elle Greaves
Faseeha Hashmi
Hamah Hosen
Melissa Kearney
Sarah Knight
Jonathan Lim
Gen Marcocci
Hugh McFarlane
Timothy Pinzone
Kelly Phan
Samuel Radford
GUEST EDITORS
Kate Backshall
Isabella Currie
Noah Diamantopoulos
Brodie McLaughlin
Kelly Phan
Samuel Radford
Jessie Wen
For a full list of image credits, or in-ar ticle citations, email:
editor@theyoungdiplomats.com