Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Markus Wagner, Professor of Law and Director of the UOW Transnational Law and Policy Centre, University of Wollongong
The renewed campaign by United States President Donald Trump to acquire Greenland has escalated, with tariff threats against European allies. Asked on Tuesday how far he is willing to go to “acquire” Greenland, Trump replied: “You’ll find out”.
This is the latest episode in a long-running effort under Trump 2.0 to remake the international order with major geopolitical implications:
the potential rupture of NATO
further pressure on transatlantic trade
a shock to stock and bond markets.
There is a chance of both escalation and de-escalation when Trump holds meetings this week on Greenland with European leaders at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
US–Greenland relations and the ownership question
Trump first floated the idea of acquiring Greenland during his first presidency, which at the time was dismissed as “absurd” and a diplomatic curiosity.
Greenland, while part of the Danish realm, is a self-governing territory with its own parliament and a right to self-determination under international law. Under a 1951 agreement, the US already has extensive rights to install and operate military bases in Greenland.
Trump’s arguments around Greenland have shifted from access to resources to defence arguments.
Trump has now explicitly linked the acquisition of Greenland to trade sanctions against eight – ostensibly allied – European countries unless they cooperate in facilitating a deal. He is using trade as a weapon.
Tariffs as foreign policy coercion
Trump announced tariffs of 10% on imports from Denmark, Norway, Sweden, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and Finland beginning February 1, rising to 25% by June 1, until the “Complete and Total purchase of Greenland” has been achieved.
These tariffs are in addition to the so-called Liberation Day tariffs announced in April 2025. The legality of these tariffs under US law is currently under scrutiny by the US Supreme Court. The outcome is important: if Trump loses, he would not be able to impose tariffs over Greenland without Congressional involvement.
This is not regular trade policy. Tariffs are traditionally imposed as remedies against trade measures by other governments. Here, they are being used outside any international legal constraints as leverage to extract unrelated territorial concessions from allies. While national security exceptions exist, its use against close allies – and in pursuit of territorial objectives – pushes that exception well beyond its limits.
What is the EU’s trade ‘bazooka’?
European leaders are forced to choose between multiple unattractive options.
They strongly rejected this latest round of US coercion, emphasising Greenland’s sovereignty and self-determination.
French President Emmanuel Macron, speaking in Davos, said the “endless accumulation of new tariffs […] are fundamentally unacceptable, even more so when they are used as leverage against territorial sovereignty”.
“We do prefer respect to bullies. And we do prefer rule of law to brutality,” Macron said. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz was more conciliatory.
European leaders warned of a “dangerous downward spiral” in transatlantic ties and possible retaliatory measures. Such counter tariffs had already been drafted up in response to Trump’s 2025 tariff threats, up to a value of €93 billion (A$162 billion).
While such tit-for-tat trade measures are already concerning, the EU has another measure at its disposal: its Anti-Coercion Instrument or ACI, sometimes referred to as its “trade bazooka”. This was initially designed to deter economic coercion by China.
Macron has raised the spectre of using the Anti-Coercion Instrument against the US. This would allow the EU to select from a range of measures, including:
the imposition of tariffs on US goods
restrictions on imports and exports of good and services such as banking or insurance
investment screening, such as preventing US investors from buying companies in the defence or energy sectors
restrictions on intellectual property rights, which would put pressure on US tech giants.
The decision over whether to impose such measures has to be taken by EU member governments in the Council of the European Union.
In addition to the time it takes to reach such a decision (officials indicated it could take up to six months), it would also test the ability of EU leaders to resist opposition from within. Hungary’s Victor Orban, a close Trump ally, could try to play the role of spoiler. Although even for him, Trump’s power play over Greenland may be a step too far into unknown waters.
In financial markets, Europeans are also large holders of US government bonds. One Danish pension fund on Tuesday announced plans to sell off its holdings of US Treasuries worth US$100 million (A$148 million). Any broader sell-downs could put pressure on the US bond market.
For the time being, European leaders appear to want to keep the EU trade bazooka dry, indicating a path of de-escalation bordering on appeasement rather than outright confrontation despite Trump’s tactics.
If the EU retaliates, it is likely Trump will respond in kind, possibly resulting in a ratcheting up of trade measures on both sides of the Atlantic. This would have devastating consequences for consumers and exporters alike.
NATO’s greatest test
Trump’s antagonism is not just an odd foreign policy episode, but a test of the strength and depth of the NATO alliance, international legal norms, and trade governance.
The outcome of this conflict – which is entirely of Trump’s making – will signal whether the post-Cold War order can withstand transactional geopolitics cloaked as national security.
Trump has had multiple off-ramps, none of which he appears to be willing to take. His actions will determine whether the US can retain its status as a reliable superpower or will be seen as a pariah in international relations.
Markus Wagner receives funding from the Australian Department of Defence as principal investigator for the Weaponised Trade project.
US cybersecurity company Palantir has received a high-level Australian government security assessment despite concerns about its surveillance and complicity in the Gaza genocide in occupied Palestine.
In November 2025, Palantir Technologies was assessed as meeting the protected level under the Australian Information Security Registered Assessors Programme (IRAP). This protection is a key requirement for companies seeking to handle sensitive government information.
The assessment enables a broader range of Australian government agencies and commercial organisations to use Palantir’s Foundry and artificial intelligence platform, AIP.
In a statement, Palantir said the assessment was conducted by an independent third party assessor in line with requirements set by the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD), and demonstrated its ability to meet “stringent national security and privacy standards”.
The company described Australia as an “important market”, saying the clearance would open “new opportunities” across the public and private sectors.
Palantir’s CEO Alex Karp . . . experts warn that the company’s technology enables mass surveillance and data collection with limited accountability. Image: palantir.com/MWM
Mass surveillance without accountability Palantir has been mired in controversy internationally over how its data analysis and AI tools are deployed by government and military clients, with experts warning that the company’s technology enables mass surveillance and data collection with limited accountability.
An ASD spokesperson stated that IRAP status should
not be interpreted as government approval or endorsement of a company’s broader conduct or use of data.
“IRAP assessments are third-party commercial arrangements between IRAP assessors (or companies offering ‘IRAP assessment’ services) and assessed entities,” an ASD spokesperson said.
“ASD does not sign off or approve IRAP assessments.”
Journalist Stephanie Tran . . . Palantir has quietly built a substantial footprint in Australia. Image: Michael West Media
Lobbying push amid political pressure Palantir’s expanded access to Australian government work comes amid growing political scrutiny. According to reporting by Capital Brief, in July 2025, the company hired lobbying firm CMAX Advisory, after the Greens called for an immediate freeze on government contracts with the company.
I want to talk to you about Palantir and its expanding footprint in Australia. TLDR: You should be worried.
This US surveillance tech company has secured multiple Defence contracts worth over $11 million. We need transparency about what data they’re accessing & why. 🧵
— David Shoebridge (@DavidShoebridge) July 7, 2025
CMAX Advisory was founded by Christian Taubenschlag, a former chief of staff to Labor Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon, who is a special counsel at the lobby firm. CMAX Advisory represents a number of major defence contractors, including EOS and Raytheon.
Gaza, ICE and Coles Palantir has faced sustained criticism globally over how its software is used by government clients.
In April 2025, CEO Alex Karp dismissed accusations that Palantir’s technology had been used to target and kill Palestinians in Gaza, saying those killed were “mostly terrorists”.
The UN Special Rapporteur on the Occupied Palestinian Territories, Francesca Albanese, has said there were “reasonable grounds” to believe Palantir had “provided automatic predictive policing technology, core defence infrastructure for rapid and scaled-up construction and deployment of military software, and its Artificial Intelligence Platform, which allows real-time battlefield data integration for automated decision-making”.
In the United States, Palantir has long worked with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). An investigation by 404 Media revealed that the company was developing a tool that generated detailed dossiers on potential deportation targets, mapped their locations and assigned “confidence scores” to their likely whereabouts.
The company has also attracted attention in Australia for its work with private sector clients, including Coles, where they were hired to cut costs and “optimise” the company’s workforce.
‘We kill enemies’ Karp has been blunt about Palantir’s mission. Speaking to shareholders and investors last week, he described the company’s purpose as helping the West “scare enemies” and, “on occasion, kill them”.
Karp also joked about “getting a drone and having light fentanyl-laced urine spraying on analysts that tried to screw us”.
Millions in government contracts Despite the controversy, Palantir has quietly built a substantial footprint in Australia.
According to Austender data, the company has secured more than $50 million in Australian government contracts since 2013, largely across defence and national security-related agencies.
The 2024 financial report of its Australian subsidiary, Palantir Technologies Australia Pty Ltd, show $25.5 million in revenue from customer contracts in 2024, though the company’s local financial reports are not audited.
In 2020, Palantir recommended that the Australian government consider “expanding the exemption from public access to disclosure documents”, arguing that filing financial reports with ASIC “is expensive” and “gives competitors access to confidential information”.
Stephanie Tran is a journalist with a background in both law and journalism. She has worked at The Guardian and as a paralegal, where she assisted Crikey’s defence team in the high-profile defamation case brought by Lachlan Murdoch. Her reporting has been recognised nationally, earning her the 2021 Democracy’s Watchdogs Award for Student Investigative Reporting and a nomination for the 2021 Walkley Student Journalist of the Year Award.This article was first published by Michael West Media and is republished with permission.
In an otherwise mixed month for the Pacific Regional Environmental Programme (SPREP), its leadership is hailing a win for Pacific conservation efforts with the UN Treaty on the High Seas coming into effect.
The legally binding UN High Seas Treaty officially received more than 60 ratifications, and following years of negotiations, has this month become international law.
It is a welcome positive development for Pacific conservation in a month when the US announced it was going to leave SPREP.
SPREP’s Director-General Sefanaia Nawadra described the treaty coming into effect as a testament to the long-running work by Pacific Island countries on ocean governance.
The treaty will give Pacific Island countries the ability to better manage high seas pockets in between their national waters, he said.
“The Pacific is peculiar in that within the national jurisdictions of countries in the Pacific, in between, there are what I call donut type spaces, international waters,” he said.
“So this [treaty] allows us to implement management measures beyond our national jurisdictions into these areas that are of particular concern to countries within our region.”
“So it’s a very important agreement for us, and is the continuation of the global leadership that Pacific Island countries have shown on oceans throughout the history of global oceans management, starting off with UNCLOS [United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea], which is the primary instrument that governs oceans.”
A Pacific Ocean marine ecosystem . . . Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument is an area spanning more than 1.2 million sq km of ocean. Image: USFWS
Asked whether the treaty might make it easier for deep sea mining to take place in the Pacific, Nawadra said: “Primarily it’s meant to be a conservation or sustainable management instrument. So you would allow conservation and protection in some cases, but in other cases, you would allow for managed activities”.
He said the onus would be on Pacific countries to work together in groups or sub-groups to settle on what activity is allowed.
The US retreat Nawadra was philosophical about the US withdrawal from SPREP, but uncertainty lingers over what it means for the various programmes which the Pacific community cooperates with the US on.
Greater impact than withdrawal of US funding is likely to be on the work SPREP does with various US government agencies. Image: RNZ/Johnny Blades
He said he was not worried about the removal of US funding, but indicated the greater impact is likely to be on the work SPREP does with various US government agencies.
“We do a lot of joint activities with NOAA [National Oceanic and Atmoshperic Administration], with US CPA, US Department of Agriculture, Geological Service,” Nawadra explained.
“Those are joint activities that benefit the US as much as it benefits the Pacific. I’m not sure how that will pan out going forward over technical cooperation. That’s something that we have to work through with the US.”
Meanwhile, the director-general denied media reports that China’s latest funding offer to SPREP was about filling the gap left by the US.
Shortly after the US announcement, China, which is not a member of SPREP, announced a donation to the organisation of US$200,000 — which is approximately the amount of the funding shortfall created by the US departure.
The timing and amount of China’s donation was merely coincidental, Nawadra said.
“They didn’t step in because of the US. We’ve received funding from China for almost 10 years now,” he said.
“So it’s just a continuation of the annual contribution that they voluntarily give to SPREP. So it wasn’t additional to what they normally donate.”
He said the US retreat was not because of anything outside SPREP’s mandate that the organisation had done.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Truth in world affairs is not a single expert-narrated story.
National Politics
Keith Rankin, trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
In our ‘official’ ‘United Nations’ world – the world referenced by the expression the international rules-based order – there are about 200 sovereign nation states (ie ‘countries’) which are equal members of the global community of nations. We mean equal in a juridical sense, not an economic or demographic sense; as recognised by ‘one nation, one vote’ in the United Nations General Assembly. Further, in this sanctioned and sanctified view – using the verb ‘sanction’ in its original old-fashioned sense – neither history nor geographical proximity matter; Mexico is as independent of the United States as it is of India.
Before moving on to geopolitics, there are four exceptions allowed within this official view. First is that there are numerous pieces of territory which are understood as too small – in population and/or land area – to be viable independent sovereign nation states. Second, some sovereign nation states – usually neighbours – may form a voluntary Union, whereby certain aspects of their sovereignty are ceded to centralised institutions. Third is that many citizens do not reside in the territories associated with their nationalities. And three exceptions not allowed for, but acknowledged to varying extents: countries that don’t exist but do exist; territories subject to internationally tolerated military occupation; and territories within recognised nation-states pushing for secession, though falling well short of either self-government or union with similarly-placed neighbouring territories.
An example of the first type of exception is Greenland, accounted for as a ‘realm’ territory of Denmark. (Other familiar realm territories are: Cook Islands [in the realm of New Zealand], American Samoa, and New Zealand’s closest foreign neighbour [Norfolk Island, in the realm of Australia].) The second exception is the European Union (noting that, in some circumstances – consider FIFA – the United Kingdom is also a Union of [four] nations). Might Canada join the European Union this century?
The third exception – the diaspora exception – applies to a degree to all nation states; and it applies particularly to New Zealand. New Zealand possibly has more citizens resident outside of New Zealand relative to citizens resident inside New Zealand; at least if we only consider countries with resident populations in excess of one million. Is New Zealand its citizenry or its territory? Given the realities of dual-citizenship, it is probably better defined as its territory along with its residentcitizens and denizens.
The fourth generally accepted exception is territories that are formally non-sovereign. Our example here is Antarctica. We may add the Moon.
Re the unsanctioned exceptions, Taiwan is the obvious example of the first type (other examples include Abkhazia and Somaliland) and Palestine is the obvious example of the second type. For the third (secessionist) type, I would cite Eastern Congo in which substantial domestic forces are in reality more aligned to nearby Kigali than faraway Kinshasa; I would also mention Myanmar’s Rakhine state, home to the Rohingya people.
Geopolitics
While the above ‘national politics’ narrative is real and contains a legal structure satisfying to its liberal architects, it is overlaid by an equally real (and quite different) geopolitical layer. Conflicts of big ego and big ideology can neither be understood nor resolved without substantial reference to geopolitics. Geopolitics is tied to both contested histories and geographical proximity. More than anything geopolitics is about empire (formal and informal), the unequal coalitions and powerplays among and between identities of people beyond and within territorial boundaries.
Geopolitics is about the centres of political power – the ‘great powers’ to use an expression from World War One – and their rival claims over the planet and its people. Geopolitical texts commonly refer to cities that are power centres, such as Washington and Berlin, rather than the countries in which those cities are located. Most conflict in the world can only be understood with recourse to geopolitics, which is largely the sociopathic politics of power masquerading as a set of struggles of ‘Good versus Evil’.
At least the president of the United States, DJT, is in a sense more honest than most ‘democratic’ leaders of powerful countries, in that he frames his acquisitive sentiments in the name of America rather than in the name of Good or in the name of God. Coveted Greenland looms larger in geopolitics than in national politics; in national politics it successfully hides in plain sight, as a large appendage of a semi-sovereign nation with a population barely larger than New Zealand.
Greenland: History
Greenland presently – at least formally – lies within the realm of Denmark, noting that ‘realm’ is itself a sanctioned rules-based exception. Denmark, as a member of the European Union, has delegated aspects of its sovereignty; from Copenhagen to Brussels and Paris and Berlin.
The first question to ask about Greenland is: why is it in the possession of the Kingdom of Denmark? Greenland was never conquered or colonised by Danes or by Denmark. Over 1,000 years ago, Greenland was colonised by Norse (ie Norwegian) Vikings. Greenland’s first people were Inuit, and the present population is substantially an Inuit/Norse mix. Around 500 years ago, Norway and Denmark formed a political union – a kingdom in which Denmark was the dominant partner – which lasted around 300 years. In that age of imperialism, Greenland became formally subject to that kingdom. This was a marriage between Denmark and Norway during the constrained period of the Little Ice Age. Greenland was ‘matrimonial property’ in this Union.
In 1814, Norway was passed on to Sweden through the Treaty of Kiel, in an era in which the wife was regarded as the property of the husband. Thus, Denmark formally gained Greenland as part of the divorce settlement. That remains the historical basis for Denmark’s claim over Greenland today. Though we remind ourselves that today’s reality is that Denmark is a somewhat junior partner in the polyamorous European Union. (Would Denmark get to keep Greenland if Denmark was to do a ‘Dexit’? Or would Greenland be passed on to the other husbands and wives?)
Greenland: Geography
Functionally, at least in geo-environmental terms, Greenland is the northern land-analogue of Antarctica. Arctica. While it doesn’t literally cover the North Pole (except that a large sheet of sea-ice extends from northern Greenland), it is near enough; and its land ice-sheet is certainly the northern analogue of the West Antarctica ice sheet. Based on this analogy, Greenland could become subject to a similar extranationalism to that which governs Antarctica. The difference of course is that Antarctica has no formally resident population; almost nobody was born there. The model could be adapted, with authentic Greenlanders becoming limited-power-landlords over an essentially international territory.
When I was a child, it was very common for families to have a globe in their living rooms, somewhere between the mantlepiece and the piano. About 15 years ago, I was lucky enough to have acquired a 3D jigsaw puzzle of the world; indeed, a small self-assembly globe. To see Greenland in perspective, it’s necessary to look at a globe. Short of that, see this satellite picture of North America from the Turtle Island page on Wikipedia.
(I was privileged to learn about Turtle Island when I visited Winnipeg in May 2019. When I walked through the Peace Park at The Forks, I learned for the first time about Turtle Island. See on YouTube: Winnipeg – the heart of Turtle Island. [And note this 16 December 2025 BBC story FBI foils New Year’s Eve terror plot across southern California, officials say relating to the Turtle Island Liberation Front.] I have a personal story about Greenland. While never having set foot there, I remember having a window seat flying from London to Los Angeles one October day. I saw the sun set somewhere northwest of Scotland; then a couple of hours later I saw it rise again, from the west, over Greenland. This was only possible because at such polar latitudes, an east-west flight is fast enough to be able to reverse the sunset.)
The map, in correct perspective, very much shows Greenland as a not-very-green part of North America. Its closest neighbour is of course Canada; indeed since 2022 Greenland has shared a land border with Greenland, on Hans Island in the Kennedy Channel, following the resolution of the Whisky War between Canada and Denmark. (It is unknown whether the Kennedy Channel was named after a Canadian fur-trader and politician, or the guy who was United States Secretary of the Navy in 1852 and 1853. If the latter, this might give false credence to DJT’s claim on Greenland for the United States.)
Greenland certainly looks to be geographically American – just as Norfolk Island geographically connects to New Zealand (on the Zealandia continent). But a geographical argument must also based on the connectivity between population centres. The flight distances from Nuuk, Greenland’s capital, to other capital cities are: Reykjavik, Iceland (1,430 km); Ottawa, Canada (2,560km); Dublin, Ireland (2,800km); Oslo, Norway (3,150km); London, UK (3,250km); Washington DC, US (3,260km); Brussels, EU (3,520km); Copenhagen, Denmark (3,530); Berlin, Germany (3,820); Moscow, Russia (4,630km); Beijing, China (8,400km).
Washington is closer to Nuuk than is Copenhagen. Dublin is the closest EU capital city to Nuuk, and is a more economically connected city to the North Atlantic than is Copenhagen. Brussels, formal capital of the EU is the same distance from Nuuk as is Copenhagen. Berlin, the geopolitical capital of the EU, is nearly 4,000 km from Nuuk (whereas New York, the power capital of the US is less than 3,000km from Nuuk). Moscow and Beijing are both much further from Greenland, have had no geopolitical influence there, and constitute no plausible geopolitical threat; future security issues in Greenland are more likely to emanate from piracy than from power centres in Asia.
While there is no argument in favour of the United States annexing or otherwise acquiring Greenland, the case for European Union control of Greenland is even weaker than that of the United States. The only European countries with credible claims to form a Union with Greenland are Norway and Iceland, on the basis of shared history and shared maritime geography.
Greenland: Demography
Greenland’s population of just under 60,000 is only slightly higher than the populations of the American realm territories of American Samoa and the Northern Marianas Islands. Guam has three times more people than Greenland. The American Virgin Islands, with 100,000 people, is more populated than Greenland. The largest American realm territory, Puerto Rico, has 300 times as many people as Greenland. Of these ‘countries’, only Puerto Rico is a serious candidate to become the 51st state of the United States. The Virgin Islanders don’t even drive on the same side of the road as the rest of the United States.
I suspect that the DJT vision for Greenland is for it to become something like the former Panama Canal Zone; a former American territory that existed when I sailed through the Panama Canal in 1974. Of course we are aware that DJT would like to re-acquire that Panamanian territory for the United States.
Greenland is different though, in the same way that Antarctica is. It has many potentially valuable mining resources; and it lies on economically significant sea channels which are becoming more navigable thanks to climate change. And it has global environmental values. A collapse of the Greenland Ice Sheet would drown all of Manhattan and most of the rest of New York; as well as much of other cities mentioned above such as Dublin, London and Copenhagen.
Greenland as Arctica
Greenland’s people can become landlords – but not landlords with monopoly power – able to procure citizens’ royalties (public property rights) from both extractive industries and the use of its sea-lanes. Greenland requires a Treaty of Nuuk, with a limited concession of sovereignty in return for those benefits; but a concession that leaves property rights in Greenland essentially the same as property rights in Antarctica.
The Greenland question needs to be addressed. It is not sufficient for it to become a de facto territory of Europe – which eventually means Berlin. And it is too large a landmass to be independent in the way that Iceland is.
Warning
By understanding Greenland essentially as an inhabited Anti-Antarctica – as Arctica – we have to realise that the present United States regime may seek to undermine (literally and metaphorically) current arrangements for Antarctica. And when DJT turns his gaze southwards, he may look upon independent sovereign countries in the South Pacific as parts of his growing fiefdom. The South Pacific is America’s gateway to McMurdo Sound, in Antarctica. A number of ‘independent’ and proud countries in the South Pacific – Tonga, for example – already dutifully vote largely according to the United States’ say-so in the United Nations.
If Antarctica becomes a template for Greenland, that’s a definite improvement on the present accidental and unsustainable arrangement; but only if Antarctica’s present governance arrangements are preserved.
Watch what happens if Nasa’s Artemis Program successfully re-lands American men on the Moon. The Washington regime may lay claim to privileged property rights over the Moon – much as Wentworth acquired New Zealand’s South Island in 1839, requiring a treaty (Treaty of Waitangi) to repudiate that claim. If the United States believes it owns the Moon, it may stake a similar claim on Antarctica; and also seek to extend its Pacific realm. Citing America’s security! And breaking the Seventh and Tenth Commandments.
While current American-led geopolitics poses a deeply problematic story for resource-rich and low-populated territories, the expert-led official story of international politics is problematic too. The status-quo is not necessarily the best solution.
*******
Keith Rankin (keith at rankin dot nz), trained as an economic historian, is a retired lecturer in Economics and Statistics. He lives in Auckland, New Zealand.
ER Report: Here is a summary of significant articles published on EveningReport.nz on January 21, 2026.
Jeremy Rose: Mexico – the revolution isn’t being televised Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum’s support for resettling Palestinian children orphaned by Israel’s genocide in Gaza barely rates a mention, reports Towards Democracy. COMMENTARY: By Jeremy Rose At the beginning of last month, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum stood in front of an estimated 600,000 supporters in Zócalo Square and reflected on the achievements of her first
Period pain and heavy bleeding cost the Australian economy billions every year in lost productivity: study Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle O’Shea, Senior Lecturer, School of Business, Western Sydney University Photo by Karola G/Pexels While period pain and heavy menstrual bleeding are common, they’re often dealt with privately. Yet they take a profound toll on a person’s health – and finances. Now, our new study has calculated
We interviewed Australian women who sexually abused children. This is what we learnt Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bricklyn Priebe, Associate Lecturer in Criminology and Justice, School of Law and Society, University of the Sunshine Coast Hoi An and Da Nang Photographer/Unsplash Child sexual abuse cases involving female perpetrators are confronting and distressing. When these cases make the news, they often provoke shock and outrage.
Rob Hirst was not the figurehead of Midnight Oil – but he was its backbone Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By David Nichols, Professor of Urban Planning, The University of Melbourne The death of Rob Hirst from pancreatic cancer at the age of 70 is the close of a long and, in many ways, surprising career. Hirst was the drummer and songwriter who, though far from the figurehead
Morgan poll has One Nation surging at Coalition’s expense; Trump’s net approval in negative double digits Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne One Nation continues to surge after the Bondi terror attack, as a Morgan poll has them gaining six points at the Coalition’s expense. A national Australian Morgan
New study sheds light on the threat of ‘marine darkwaves’ to ocean life Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By François Thoral, Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Marine Ecology, University of Waikato Surfers caught in a marine darkwave. Jean Thoral, CC BY-NC-SA Life in the ocean runs on light. It fuels photosynthesis, shapes food webs and determines where many marine species can live. Gradually, that light is fading.
4.87 tonnes of cocaine seized in French Polynesian waters – bound for Australia RNZ Pacific France’s High Commission in French Polynesia has reported the seizure of 4.87 tonnes of cocaine in its maritime zone. The armed forces in French Polynesia (FAPF), the national gendarmerie and the local branch of the anti-narcotics office (OFAST) were involved in the intercept. A statement from the Australian Federal Police (AFP) have congratulated
A stronger focus on prevention could help governments rein in health care and social spending Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angela Jackson, Social Policy Commissioner, Productivity Commission, and Adjunct Associate Professor, University of Tasmania Deb Cohn-Orbach/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images At the start of the new year, many of us will commit to joining a gym, eating healthier or cutting back on drinking and smoking. We
How to cut down on trans fats if cooking from scratch isn’t an option Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Emma Beckett, Senior Lecturer, Nutrition and Food Science, Australian Catholic University RDNE Stock project/Pexels Work is finished, and you’re tired and hungry. Maybe you’re rushing home or to daycare pickup. You know you should be cooking dinner from scratch for the healthiest choice but that isn’t going
A stronger focus on prevention could help governments rein in healthcare and social spending Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angela Jackson, Social Policy Commissioner, Productivity Commission, and Adjunct Associate Professor, University of Tasmania Deb Cohn-Orbach/UCG/Universal Images Group via Getty Images At the start of the new year, many of us will commit to joining a gym, eating healthier or cutting back on drinking and smoking. We
What Evil Influencer: The Jodi Hildebrandt Story tells us about Mormonism Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brenton Griffin, Academic Status in the College of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences, Flinders University Netflix The new Netflix documentary Evil Influencer: The Jodi Hildebrandt Story, directed by Skye Borgman, seeks to understand the shocking crimes of both Hildebrandt and business partner Ruby Franke. In 2023, Hildebrandt
How NZ can survive – and even thrive – in Trump’s new world of great-power rivalry Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Ross Smith, Senior Research Fellow, National Centre for Research on Europe, University of Canterbury Sean Gallup/Getty Images In the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela and Donald Trump’s repeated threats towards Greenland, a wave of pessimism has swept the western world. For countries wedded
How NZ can survive – and even thrive – in Trump’s new world of great-power rivalry Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Ross Smith, Senior Research Fellow, National Centre for Research on Europe, University of Canterbury Sean Gallup/Getty Images In the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela and Donald Trump’s repeated threats towards Greenland, a wave of pessimism has swept the western world. For countries wedded
How NZ can survive – and even thrive – in Trump’s new world of great-power rivalry Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Ross Smith, Senior Research Fellow, National Centre for Research on Europe, University of Canterbury Sean Gallup/Getty Images In the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela and Donald Trump’s repeated threats towards Greenland, a wave of pessimism has swept the western world. For countries wedded
How NZ can survive – and even thrive – in Trump’s new world of great-power rivalry Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Ross Smith, Senior Research Fellow, National Centre for Research on Europe, University of Canterbury Sean Gallup/Getty Images In the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela and Donald Trump’s repeated threats towards Greenland, a wave of pessimism has swept the western world. For countries wedded
The world is in water bankruptcy, UN scientists report – here’s what that means Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kaveh Madani, Director of the Institute for Water, Environment and Health, United Nations University The world is now using so much fresh water amid the consequences of climate change that it has entered an era of water bankruptcy, with many regions no longer able to bounce back
The world is in water bankruptcy, UN scientists report – here’s what that means Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kaveh Madani, Director of the Institute for Water, Environment and Health, United Nations University The world is now using so much fresh water amid the consequences of climate change that it has entered an era of water bankruptcy, with many regions no longer able to bounce back
The world is in water bankruptcy, UN scientists report – here’s what that means Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kaveh Madani, Director of the Institute for Water, Environment and Health, United Nations University The world is now using so much fresh water amid the consequences of climate change that it has entered an era of water bankruptcy, with many regions no longer able to bounce back
The world is in water bankruptcy, UN scientists report – here’s what that means Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Kaveh Madani, Director of the Institute for Water, Environment and Health, United Nations University The world is now using so much fresh water amid the consequences of climate change that it has entered an era of water bankruptcy, with many regions no longer able to bounce back
View from The Hill: defiant Nationals break with Liberals over hate bill, putting strain on Coalition Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Michelle Grattan, Professorial Fellow, University of Canberra The Nationals have defied shadow cabinet solidarity, voting in the Senate against the government’s hate crime legislation, which passed late Tuesday night with the support of the Liberals. The Nationals’ action puts new strain on Coalition relations, and is destabilising
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum’s support for resettling Palestinian children orphaned by Israel’s genocide in Gaza barely rates a mention, reports Towards Democracy.
COMMENTARY:By Jeremy Rose
At the beginning of last month, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum stood in front of an estimated 600,000 supporters in Zócalo Square and reflected on the achievements of her first year in office and the seven years since the Morena Party, which she heads, came to power.
It was quite a list: 13 million people lifted out of poverty; the minimum wage increased by 125 percent; Indigenous and Afro-Mexican communities allocated budgets to run their own affairs; a locally produced people’s electric car about to roll off production lines; a new fast rail system crossing the country; a national park spanning 5.7 million hectares across Mexico, Belize, and Guatemala; a 37 percent drop in homicides — and on it went.
Sheinbaum is Mexico’s first woman president, its first Jewish president, and a climate scientist who was part of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize–winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change team.
In short, she has a story to tell, but it’s not one our media pays enough attention to.
That speech — where she declared the end of neoliberalism in Mexico — barely rated a mention in the world’s English-language press.
The grope that trumped the anti-Trump In fact, Sheinbaum’s extraordinarily popular first year in office — El Paísreports she has an approval rating of over 70% — has been largely ignored by the English-language media, with three notable exceptions: when she was groped by a man on the streets of Mexico City last November, it made front-page news around the globe; a much-hyped series of “Gen Z” protests; and her dignified, and at times witty, responses to bellicose threats to Mexico’s sovereignty from the US president — which have seen her labelled the anti-Trump.
So why the lack of interest? Some possibilities, none of them edifying, spring to mind: if it doesn’t involve violence, Latin America rarely rates a mention in the media; Sheinbaum is a woman; and she’s leftwing.
But for each of those, there’s at least one counter-example that suggests this isn’t always the case.
Argentina’s right-wing libertarian president, Javier Milei, is widely reported on despite coming from a country with little over a third of Mexico’s population and GDP. Milei is a poster boy for right-leaning pundits from Auckland to London.
Former New Zealand prime minister Jacinda Ardern — leader of a country of just five million people compared to Mexico’s 130 million — was widely reported on while in office, and with the recent publication of her memoir has been the subject of more feature articles in recent months than Sheinbaum has generated in a year in office.
And finally, and perhaps most interestingly, there was the saturation coverage of Zoran Mamdani’s run and eventual victory in the New York mayoral election.
Sheinbaum’s successful campaign to become the equivalent of mayor of Mexico City — with a population significantly larger than New York’s — in 2018 was barely reported, despite running on a similarly leftwing, if notably more ambitious, platform.
Mamdani’s campaign and victory were newsworthy but, on any metric, less significant than Sheinbaum’s time in office.
World’s most popular leader She is arguably the world’s most popular leader, delivering on promises more far-reaching and consequential than anything on offer in the Big Apple.
A promise by Mamdani to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should he visit New York — something he almost certainly cannot deliver on — was widely reported, while Sheinbaum’s support for resettling Palestinian children orphaned by Israel’s genocide in Gaza barely rated a mention. (Mexico has also joined South Africa’s International Court of Justice genocide case against Israel.)
The contrast between the saturation coverage of Mamdani and the paucity of coverage of Sheinbaum holds true for both conservative and liberal media.
The Wall Street Journal ran 50-plus editorials and op-eds criticising Mamdani in the run-up to his election but just three or four on Sheinbaum in her first year in office, all focusing on her alleged failure to tackle violence and the cartels. (In fact, homicides are down, though still extremely high.)
Even Jacobin magazine, one of the few US outlets to provide in-depth coverage of Mexico’s so-called “Fourth Transformation,” has given far more coverage to Mamdani, with a recent podcast declaring New York the epicentre of global socialism.
Whatever the explanation for the scant coverage of Sheinbaum, the achievements and popularity of the Morena movement are worth talking about.
The Donroe Doctrine’s threat to Mexico There’s little doubt we’ll be hearing more about Mexico over the coming months, but the focus will almost certainly be on the threat from the north, not the achievements and promise of the Fourth Transformation.
After the illegal abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro on January 3, President Trump turned his sights on Mexico, declaring Sheinbaum to be a “tremendous woman, she’s a very brave woman, but Mexico is run by the cartels”.
Having designated the Sinaloa and Jalisco New Generation cartels as terrorist organisations at the beginning of his second term in office, Trump had already signalled the possibility of military intervention in Mexico.
Sheinbaum’s response to both the Venezuelan intervention and the implied threat to Mexican sovereignty was resolute and principled:
“We categorically reject intervention in the internal affairs of other countries. The history of Latin America is clear and compelling: intervention has never brought democracy, never generated well-being, nor lasting stability.
“Only the people can build their own future, decide their path, exercise sovereignty over their natural resources, and freely define their form of government.”
Trump has other ideas, recently declaring that the US military could attack the cartels without congressional approval.
“I don’t think we’re necessarily going to ask for a declaration of war,” he said. “I think we’re just gonna kill people that are bringing drugs into our country. We’re going to kill them. They’re going to be, like, dead.”
Trump has dubbed the new era the Donroe Doctrine — a reference to his regime’s embrace of the Monroe Doctrine, named for President James Monroe, who declared the Western Hemisphere an area of US influence in the 1820s.
200 years of brutal interventions It was the beginning of more than 200 years of brutal interventions by the US state, including a war on Mexico that resulted in the US taking over approximately 1.36 million sq km of Mexican territory — about 55 percent of the country.
Last year Trump hung a portrait of the country’s 11th president James Polk in the White House. Polk was responsible for the Mexican-American war of 1846-1848 which ended with the ceding of California, Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado and Wyoming to the USA, in exchange for $15 million.
Trump has pointed to the portrait and told visitors: “He got a lot of land.”
His play on words with the Donroe Doctrine is characteristically narcissistic but also painfully accurate. It is the geopolitics of a gangster state.
In a world reeling from the criminal actions of that gangster state — from its continued bankrolling of genocide, to the extrajudicial killing of alleged drug smugglers, to SS-like round-ups of “foreigners” on its city streets, to threats to take over the sovereign territory of an ally — Mexico and its president, Claudia Sheinbaum, are a beacon of hope.
There is plenty I haven’t even touched on:
The election of an Indigenous lawyer, Hugo Aguilar Ortiz, as head of the Supreme Court;
The construction of 1.1 million affordable homes over the next six years, generating hundreds of thousands of jobs;
The launch of SaberesMX, a free national online platform designed to democratise access to knowledge and provide lifelong learning opportunities across Mexico; and
Sheinbaum’s daily morning press conferences, where she speaks directly to the nation.
If past experience is anything to go by, the mainstream media’s ignoring of Morena’s successes is unlikely to end any time soon.
The good news is that there are alternatives. Mexico Solidarity Media is a great source of original articles, translations from local media, and podcasts, and Substack writer and former Boston Globe and LA Times journalist Alisa Valdes-Rodriguez regularly writes about Mexico from a progressive perspective.
Jeremy Rose is a Wellington-based journalist and broadcaster and his Towards Democracy blog is at Substack. This article was first published at Towards Democracy and is republished with permission.
While period pain and heavy menstrual bleeding are common, they’re often dealt with privately. Yet they take a profound toll on a person’s health – and finances.
Now, our new study has calculated how much these menstrual symptoms cost the broader Australian economy.
Our study was based on a survey of 1,796 Australian working women and is published today in The Australian Journal of Social Issues. We found period pain and heavy bleeding costs the Australian economy about A$14 billion every year in lost productivity.
Women aged 35–44 reported significantly higher lost productivity than their younger counterparts.
Our findings highlight the substantial economic rationale for government and workplace policies to help people manage menstrual symptoms.
Periods can be debilitating
In Australia, girls experience their first period (menarche) around 12 years of age.
Periods (menstruation) typically happen every 21–34 days. Most women (and those who menstruate) have regular periods until around 45–55 years of age. Then, menstrual cycles become less regular before stopping altogether at menopause.
Most women will experience around 400–600 periods over their lifetime, unless their menstrual cycles are suppressed by hormonal contraception.
Two common causes of problematic periods are dysmenorrhea (period pain) and heavy menstrual bleeding.
The most common type of period pain (primary dysmenorrhea) affects around 90% of young women under 25 in Australia.
This type of period pain is often worst during the first two days of bleeding. It is primarily caused by high levels of prostaglandin hormones, which are responsible for cramps. Many women also feel fatigue, dizziness, back pain and headaches.
The stigma and taboo associated with menstruation means many women feel they must work very hard to conceal period problems at work. This labour is usually invisible and exhausting. Some women quit work altogether.
Pain inquiry finds gender bias.
What we did and what we found
Our research aimed to investigate:
how common period pain and other menstrual symptoms are for Australian women in paid employment over 18 years and
the impact of menstruation on work productivity (via presenteeism and absenteeism).
Presenteeism accounts for productivity losses at work while an employee is present but not working at full capacity. It’s like going to work with a migraine: you might be physically present but you aren’t doing your best work.
Absenteeism is being away from work on paid or unpaid sick leave.
We collected data via an online survey of 1,796 Australian working women.
Survey participants were over 18, currently living in Australia and had had at least one period in the last three months. They were in paid employment (including self-employment) and/or volunteering for at least three months.
Our study found that 97% of women who responded had period pain in the last three months, and 75% said they always have period pain when menstruating. Previous research in Australia has found that over 90% of young women report period pain and around 71% worldwide.
Because of this we used more conservative estimates of 90% of women experiencing period pain (high) and 70% experiencing period pain (low) to calculate our range of economic figures for the population.
We estimated lost productivity in Australia associated with menstrual symptoms at A$7,176 per person annually, with an estimated total annual economic burden of $14.005 billion.
Together, presenteeism and absenteeism accounted for 46% of total productivity loss.
And remember, our study only looked at paid employment among full‑time and part‑time workers. The implications for unpaid labour, particularly women’s unpaid care work and its profound economic and social importance, demands further study (which we are progressing).
We also note that the impact of menstruation on the Australian economy is more complex than is established through our current data set, which doesn’t account for things such as the economy-wide costs of medical care and treatment.
In other words, our estimate is conservative.
Why does this matter?
Given the substantive economic impacts demonstrated through our study, menstrual symptom management in the workplace is not a private concern to be managed by individual workers.
Menstrual symptoms affect the broader economy and society. Workplace policies and guidelines are needed to support employees experiencing period pain, fatigue and associated symptoms.
At the workplace level, employers have an opportunity to start a dialogue with staff about changes to workplace conditions that could enhance employee productivity, health and wellbeing.
This could, for instance, include things such as reproductive leave (on top of the usual sick leave provisions), remote and hybrid work arrangements and flexible time management policies (including rest periods).
Our study findings also highlight the significant economic rationale for government to address this workplace issue with laws and policies.
Enshrining minimum standards for workplaces to support employees impacted by menstrual symptoms reduces the burden on individual workplaces to formulate policies and eliminates reliance on senior management’s interest.
If governments and employers want to increase productivity, our research shows the answer could be hiding in plain sight.
Mike Armour receives funding from the MRFF for projects related to menstrual health literacy outside this work.
Michelle O’Shea does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Bricklyn Priebe, Associate Lecturer in Criminology and Justice, School of Law and Society, University of the Sunshine Coast
Child sexual abuse cases involving female perpetrators are confronting and distressing. When these cases make the news, they often provoke shock and outrage.
Yet, in the United States, approximately 7.6% of confirmed cases are perpetrated by women or girls, though some US states report it to be as high as 36%.
In Australia, recorded sexual assault offences involving women and girls have increased from 222 offenders in 2008–09 to 678 in 2023–24: a 205% rise.
Public attention has long focused on male perpetrators and on what happens after abuse is uncovered (including prosecution and punishment or cases not proceeding to court).
Prevention, however, requires us to act earlier and to ask a different question: what might have prevented these women from sexually abusing a child in the first place?
We spoke directly with 18 women convicted of child sexual abuse offences in three states/territories in Australia.
These conversations were not about minimising or excuse-making, but about uncovering missed opportunities for support and intervention throughout their lives that they believe may have prevented them from sexual offending.
Many of these women described needing help long before they abused a child. Many had grown up experiencing their own abuse or neglect.
They talked about wanting counselling, mental health support, guidance around relationships and practical help with parenting.
For some, these unresolved needs and vulnerabilities were closely tied to their experiences in intimate relationships.
One participant who co-offended with her male partner reflected on how early support might have changed her situation:
It would have been good just to have the opportunity to get out of the relationship earlier […] so having resources or counselling or anything really. It got to a point where it was just too late. I was stuck.
Others spoke about repeated attempts to get help from support services, only to encounter barriers that left them feeling dismissed, unsupported and their concerns minimised. As one participant explained:
I really was trying to engage and get help […] they just turned [me] away, it’s like they didn’t want to help me.
Some women did not know what services existed to help them at different times in their lives. Others faced long waitlists and cost barriers.
Several women also described how shame and fear fuelled their silence, including fear of judgement or legal consequences. One woman said:
I should have opened up […] but I didn’t know how to. It’s not that I needed more people to talk to, it’s that I needed to know how to talk to them.
Together, these accounts highlight a key limitation in current prevention and early intervention efforts.
Availability of services alone is not enough; accessibility matters. If people cannot find, afford or safely connect to support then prevention efforts will likely fail.
It’s not just prevention that’s needed
We also acknowledge that while accessibility matters, not everyone will seek support.
In fact, a minority of women in our study admitted nothing would have prevented their offending.
Some felt they weren’t aware they needed help until it was too late, or they would not have accepted it at the time anyway.
This reinforces the necessity for both effective prevention and response.
The women’s accounts in our study reinforce growing calls for gender-responsive strategies.
While risk factors such as trauma, isolation and substance use are not exclusive to girls and women, they often intersect differently with gendered social roles and expectations compared with men.
For example, parenting stress, relationship toxicity and financial insecurity disproportionately affect women and can compound vulnerability.
By no means do these factors minimise or excuse offending, nor do they fully explain it.
Rather, it is about recognising that prevention and early intervention efforts need to address these gendered risks in order to better protect children from harm.
Importantly, these findings support much of the broader prevention work already underway in Australia, such as:
These are all designed to intervene earlier, reduce isolation and support people as ways to prevent harm and safeguard children.
Our findings align with a growing body of evidence suggesting prevention works best when it is practical and embedded from childhood through adulthood.
The challenge that remains is ensuring services are not only available but visible, accessible, nonjudgmental and clearly inclusive of girls and women.
The National Sexual Assault, Family and Domestic Violence Counselling Line – 1800 RESPECT (1800 737 732) – is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week for any Australian who has experienced, or is at risk of, family and domestic violence and/or sexual assault.
If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call Lifeline on 13 11 14.
Larissa Christensen is affiliated with the Daniel Morcombe Foundation.
Bricklyn Priebe, Nadine McKillop, and Susan Rayment-McHugh do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The death of Rob Hirst from pancreatic cancer at the age of 70 is the close of a long and, in many ways, surprising career.
Hirst was the drummer and songwriter who, though far from the figurehead of Midnight Oil, was nonetheless an integral part – perhaps the backbone – of one of the most consistently adventurous and principled groups of the last half-century.
For most, Midnight Oil means Peter Garrett. But it was Garrett who answered an ad to join Farm, Hirst’s band with Jim Moginie and Andrew James, in 1972. Were it not for his arrival, the group might not have gone far beyond the northern beaches of Sydney: Garrett was striking as a performer and his singing was distinctive (though, like Jimmy Barnes, he did not sing all the great songs his band was famous for).
While Midnight Oil’s members recognised a common purpose and achieved an extraordinary amount on a range of fronts, Hirst’s memoir of their early 21st century United States tour shows there was always some measure of tension between them.
In 1980, Hirst told Toby Creswell of Rolling Stone he didn’t like Garrett’s taste, “and he doesn’t like mine […] You’re really putting together people who don’t get on socially or musically.”
Not there to compromise
Midnight Oil’s records were exceptionally high quality from the outset.
Their self-titled first album was what you’d expect from a group which took pleasure in Australian surfing “head” music bands like Tully and Kahvas Jute.
Their second, Head Injuries, was brash and stark: they had emerged, for better or worse, at the time of punk/new wave but fitted as uneasily with X or The Saints as with blunter, more traditional rock groups like AC/DC.
Their 12″ EP Bird Noises was as fine a summation of their approach as could be imagined. The Hirst/Garrett cowrite No Time for Games has a social message, a distinctive vocal from Garrett and of course, extraordinary drums, restrained when they had to be but ever servicing the song’s dynamics.
From the very beginning, they made it clear that they were not available to undertake the usual compromises the record industry expected for career furtherance.
Famously, they refused to play Countdown. In hindsight, they would have been severely out of place there.
Nevertheless, they gave the major groups of the 70s their due; Hirst praised Skyhooks’ Greg Macainsh, for instance, for his use of Australian places and scenes, making it “possible for you to write about, in his case, Carlton and Balwyn […] [now] we’ve got this whole palette of Australian places we can use without a cringe factor.”
On their own terms
Sales and impact of subsequent Midnight Oil albums trace the rise of a group attaining international prominence on its own terms through hard work and consistent attention to detail.
The commercial peak came with the 1987 single Beds are Burning (a cowrite between Garrett, Hirst and Moginie): top ten in France, the US, the Netherlands, Australia and Belgium – and number one in Canada, New Zealand and South Africa.
That it was a song on the world stage highlighting Australian Aboriginal dispossession was perhaps an even greater achievement.
Hirst’s memoir Willie’s Bar and Grill gives a good sense of a group finding the very common way down from the top: the trajectory of the one-hit wonder, in this case experienced while touring post-9/11 US.
They disbanded soon afterwards, not for this reason but because Garrett had been picked by Mark Latham to stand as Labor candidate for Kingsford-Smith in the 2004 federal election. They reunited 13 years later.
A varied career
Hirst had other irons in the fire as early as 1991 when he formed Ghostwriters with Rick Grossman. Perhaps the band’s name signalled a frisson of bitterness about the concentration of attention Garrett garnered in Midnight Oil, but paradoxically its first album was essentially an anonymous release.
Two others followed, and Hirst was also involved in the Backsliders and the Angry Tradesmen.
In 2020 he recorded an album with his daughter, Jay O’Shea, who he had put up for adoption in 1974. In 2025 he released the second of two albums recorded with noted songwriter Sean Sennett.
A 50-year career is almost impossible to sum up briefly, but one song speaks volumes about Hirst. Power and the Passion, the 1983 Midnight Oil hit, features a simple (if infectious) drum machine and what might almost pass for a rap from Garrett, listing a host of demons besetting the citizen at the end of the 20th century, not least from Americanisation and corporatisation.
Hirst plays along with the beat then engages it in an epic battle, executing a remarkable solo which enhances the song while making a statement about working with and against the pernicious machine.
In a career of great work, it’s one highlight that speaks louder than words.
David Nichols does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Adrian Beaumont, Election Analyst (Psephologist) at The Conversation; and Honorary Associate, School of Mathematics and Statistics, The University of Melbourne
One Nation continues to surge after the Bondi terror attack, as a Morgan poll has them gaining six points at the Coalition’s expense.
A national Australian Morgan poll, conducted January 12–18 from a sample of 1,630, gave Labor a 53.5–46.5 lead by respondent preferences, a 1.5-point gain for Labor since the January 5–11 Morgan poll.
Primary votes were 28.5% Labor (down 1.5), 24% Coalition (down 6.5), 21% One Nation (up six), 13.5% Greens (steady) and 13% for all Others (up two). By 2025 election preference flows, Labor led by 53–47, a one-point gain for Labor.
It’s very unlikely One Nation actually surged six points in one week, and much more likely the previous poll was a pro-Coalition outlier. Resolve is now the only poll that gives the Coalition a clear lead over One Nation (ten points), with all other recent polls now between a one-point lead for One Nation (Newspoll) and four-point Coalition lead (Fox & Hedgehog).
Morgan also had a special SMS poll on Australia Day that was conducted January 14–16 from a sample of 1,311. By 72–28, respondents thought January 26 should be known as “Australia Day”, not “Invasion Day” (68.5–31.5 two years ago). By 60.5–39.5, they thought Australia Day should not be moved from January 26 (58.5–41.5 previously).
Further results from Resolve poll
I covered the Australian national Newspoll and Resolve poll on Monday. In further questions from the Resolve poll for Nine newspapers, supported a royal commission following Bondi by 61-10 (change from 48–17 in late December). By 37–35, respondents thought social cohesion was good rather than poor (37–30 in late December).
On gun laws, 66% wanted them toughened (down ten since late December), 21% kept as they are (up 11) and 7% wanted gun laws relaxed (up one). A big majority still wants tougher gun laws, but right-wing voters are now more opposed than in late December. The Coalition’s opposition to Labor’s gun control laws has probably contributed to increased public opposition.
NSW Resolve poll has strong support for post-Bondi measures
The New South Wales Resolve poll would normally have combined results from the early December and January federal Resolve polls. But the early December poll was pre-Bondi, and it appears The Sydney Morning Herald wants to wait for a complete post-Bondi poll before giving voting intentions.
What we have are questions from the January NSW sample of 550. By 49–19, respondents thought Labor Premier Chris Minns and the state government had had a strong rather than weak response to Bondi. By 67–16, they supported the state government’s gun reforms.
Trump’s ratings in negative double digits after one year
Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump’s US net approval has been in negative double digits since late October. Trump became United States president for a second time on January 20, 2025. A year into his second four-year term, Trump’s net approval in Nate Silver’s aggregate of US national polls is -13.0, with 55.0% disapproving and 42.0% approving.
Trump recorded a positive net approval in Silver’s aggregate at the start of his term, but his net approval went negative last March. Since late October, Trump’s net approval has been in negative double digits, with a low of -15.0 in November.
Silver has ratings for past presidents since Harry Truman. At this point in their presidencies, Trump’s net approval is ahead of only his own first term, with Joe Biden the next worst at -12.0 net approval.
On four issues tracked by Silver, Trump’s net approval is -9.5 on immigration, -15.6 on trade, -15.9 on the economy and -25.2 on inflation. Recently, Trump’s net approval on immigration has dropped while his net approval on the other three issues has risen.
Trump’s ratings on immigration may have fallen because of the fatal shooting of Renee Good by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent on January 7. On other issues, Trump’s ratings may have risen due to the continued strong stock market.
The benchmark S&P 500 stock market index has risen 7.8% in the last six months, hitting a new peak on January 12, although it slumped 2.1% in last night’s session owing to Trump’s threats of tariffs over Greenland. Trump’s ratings are unlikely to become very poor unless either the stock market or the broader US economy deteriorates markedly.
In a recent Ipsos poll for Reuters, by 47–17 Americans disapproved of US efforts to acquire Greenland, and by 71–4 they thought it was not a good idea to take Greenland using military force.
At midterm elections this November, all 435 members of the House of Representatives and 35 of the 100 senators will be up for election. In Fiftyplusone’s aggregate of the national generic ballot, Democrats lead Republicans by 43.6–39.8.
I wrote on January 7 that if Democrats win the national popular vote by the 3.8 points they lead by in current polls, they would be very likely to gain control of the House, but not the Senate. The two senators per state rule skews Senate elections towards low-population, rural states.
Adrian Beaumont does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Alarming as this picture is, focusing only on gradual darkening may miss the most ecologically damaging part of the story.
Our newly published study introduces the phenomenon of “marine darkwaves”: sudden, intense episodes of underwater darkness that can last from days to months and push marine ecosystems into acute stress.
Darkness events are often triggered by storms, floods, sediment plumes or algal blooms. As with marine heatwaves, these short, intense episodes can be just as ecologically disruptive as slow, long-term trends.
Unusual underwater darkness is harmful for a range of marine ecosystems, yet the phenomenon did not have a name and definition until the marine darkwave framework was developed. Artwork of a darkened algal forest by Cassandre Villautreix, underwater picture by Leigh Tait.
Why light matters underwater
When light within the ocean drops suddenly, even for a few days, marine ecosystems can suffer. Prolonged darkness can slow growth, reduce energy reserves and in severe cases lead to dieback or mortality.
Fish, sharks and marine mammals can also change their behaviour when visibility drops, altering feeding and movement patterns.
Until now, scientists have examined ways to track long-term coastal darkening but have lacked a consistent way to identify, measure and compare extreme short-term light-loss events across regions and depths.
In other words, we have known this phenomenon exists – but we haven’t had a shared language to define and describe it. With marine darkwaves, we now have an event-based framework for extreme underwater darkness.
Darkwaves occur when underwater light falls below a depth-specific threshold for a minimum duration, relative to what is normally expected at that location. This allows scientists to identify when conditions shift from merely dim to unusually dark.
Importantly, this framework works across different depths, where light conditions naturally vary; across local to regional scales, from coastal reefs to entire coastlines; and across multiple data sources, including light sensors and satellite observations.
Its consistency enables meaningful comparison of events that were previously difficult to place into broader contexts.
What our research revealed
Our study used long-term datasets from both hemispheres in markedly different coastal regions.
In California, 16 years of underwater light measurements revealed repeated darkwave events, some lasting several weeks. In Aotearoa New Zealand, ten years of monitoring data from Auckland’s Hauraki Gulf showed rapid drops in underwater light during storms, at depths of seven and 20 metres.
Satellite data extending back 21 years revealed a broader pattern. Along New Zealand’s East Cape coast, up to 80 marine darkwaves have occurred since 2002, most linked to storms and river-driven sediment plumes.
Cyclone Gabrielle in 2023 provided a stark example. The storm delivered vast amounts of sediment to coastal waters, smothering many reefs and creating prolonged underwater darkness over large areas.
In some places, the seabed received almost no light for several weeks.
Heavy sediment runoff around Waihau Bay, in New Zealand’s Eastern Bay of Plenty. This was observed following Cyclone Gabrielle on February 14, 2023 – an event that created marine darkwaves for several weeks, with continuing ecological impacts. Copernicus Sentinel data (2023), CC BY-NC-SA
Long-term averages are important, but they can smooth over the very events that cause the greatest ecological damage.
Just as a single marine heatwave can devastate kelp forests and coral reefs, a single marine darkwave can sharply reduce photosynthesis and disrupt ecosystems already stressed by warming, acidification and nutrient pollution.
Climate change is likely to increase the frequency and intensity of these events. Heavier rainfall, stronger storms and intensified land use all increase sediment and organic matter flowing into coastal waters, reducing water clarity and light availability.
Our framework allows identification of discrete periods when light thresholds critical for ecosystem function are crossed.
By focusing on extremes, it provides clearer insights into acute stress on coastal ecosystems. In New Zealand particularly, this information is increasingly important for iwi (tribes) and hapū (sub-tribes), coastal communities, conservation groups and environmental managers making decisions about land use, restoration and marine protection.
Related monitoring work is already underway in parts of New Zealand, where expanded sensor networks aid in linking land-based processes to changes in underwater light, and linking these to ecological changes on coastal reefs.
Ultimately, marine darkwaves remind us that the ocean doesn’t always change slowly. Sometimes, it changes abruptly and quietly if we don’t pay attention.
There is also reason for cautious optimism. Many marine darkwaves are driven by land–sea connections, so their frequency and intensity are not inevitable.
Reducing sediment runoff through nature-based solutions, such as restoring wetlands, stabilising riverbanks, improving harvest techniques of exotic forests, and replanting native forests in vulnerable catchments can directly increase water clarity and underwater light.
Understanding marine darkwaves is not only about detecting change, but also about identifying practical pathways to protect coastal ecosystems before further darkness descends.
The authors acknowledge the contribution of Rahera Ohia, Ngāti Pūkenga, Jean Thoral, Leigh Tait and Cassandre Villautreix.
François Thoral receives funding from the NZ Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment MBIE (Endeavour Fund Tau Ki Ākau UOWX2206). He is affiliated with the University of Waikato, University of Canterbury and Earth Sciences New Zealand.
Christopher Battershill receives funding from the NZ Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment MBIE (Endeavour Fund Tau Ki Ākau UOWX2206 is relevant to this project). He is employed with the University of Waikato and also receives contestable grant funding from other agencies (eg Regional Councils and Department of Conservation).
David R Schiel receives funding from the New Zealand government public good research fund (via the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment; Endeavour Fund Tau Ki Ākau UOWX2206).
Shinae Montie receives funding from The Australian Research Council and the Winifred Violet Scott Charitable Trust. She is associated with the University of Western Australia.
France’s High Commission in French Polynesia has reported the seizure of 4.87 tonnes of cocaine in its maritime zone.
The armed forces in French Polynesia (FAPF), the national gendarmerie and the local branch of the anti-narcotics office (OFAST) were involved in the intercept.
A statement from the Australian Federal Police (AFP) have congratulated authorities in French Polynesia over the reported seizure, with the drugs reportedly bound for Australia.
Gulf News reported the cocaine was being transported on a ship sailing under Togo’s flag, according to a source close to the investigation.
AFP commander Stephen Jay said police staff posted in the Pacific, and members of Taskforce Thunder, would seek to work with French Polynesia authorities to identify people linked to the seizure.
Taskforce Thunder, launched in October, targets illicit commodities and the forced movement of people through the Pacific.
Jay said the AFP was committed to working closely with its law enforcement partners to deliver maximum impact against transnational criminal syndicates targeting Australia, the Pacific and throughout Europe.
‘Exceptional work’ “I would like to thank the exceptional work of our partners in French Polynesia, who have prevented a significant amount of illicit drugs from reaching Australia,” Jay said.
“The harm caused by organised crime syndicates attempting to import illicit drugs into Australia is significant, and extends beyond individual users to a myriad of violent and exploitative crimes.”
Australian Border Force acting commander Linda Cappello said Australia’s strongest defence against transnational organised crime was the depth of its relationships across the Pacific and beyond.
“For those seeking to exploit maritime and supply chains to move illicit drugs the message is clear: coordinated vigilance across the region significantly increases the risk of detection and disruption.”
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angela Jackson, Social Policy Commissioner, Productivity Commission, and Adjunct Associate Professor, University of Tasmania
At the start of the new year, many of us will commit to joining a gym, eating healthier or cutting back on drinking and smoking. We do this knowing that investing in our health today will pay off into to the future – that prevention is better (and cheaper) than the cure.
It’s advice the Productivity Commission thinks federal and state governments should also follow to improve Australia’s finances and productivity.
Late last year, my co-authors and I gave the federal government the final report of our inquiry on delivering quality care more efficiently.
We found preventative investments could save taxpayers billions of dollars in health and social care costs. But to achieve these gains, the way we think about investing in prevention needs to change.
Investing in early intervention
Australia’s spending on health and social care is growing as a share of the economy and now makes up five of the top seven fiscal pressures
facing the federal budget. The care sector is also absorbing more of our workforce – close to one-third of new jobs since the pandemic have been in the care sector.
In many respects this reflects changing preferences. As the nation has become wealthier, we care more about our health and wellbeing. But making the most of this spending is one of Australia’s key productivity challenges.
That means investing early to save costs later. Take for example the SunSmart skin cancer awareness campaign, which is estimated to have prevented more than 43,000 skin cancers from 1988 to 2010.
Investments like this save lives and money. We estimate that an investment of A$1.5 billion across all prevention programs over five years could be expected to save governments $2.7 billion over ten years. Factoring in the broader health, social and economic benefits, the total benefits would be about $5.4 billion.
Other countries are ahead of the game: Canada, the UK and Finland spend over twice as much of their health budgets on prevention as Australia.
Australia’s own health prevention strategy recommends that we increase spending on prevention from 2% to 5% of the health budget.
The big picture
Prevention goes beyond just health care. Investments in youth justice, out of home care and homelessness improve outcomes in a range of other areas, improving Australians’ quality of life and governments’ bottom lines.
For example, when people experiencing homelessness get stable housing, they tend to end up in hospital less often, make fewer trips to the emergency department, and in some cases, even avoid incarceration. It’s also easier to look for and hold down a job when you have a stable place to call home.
Such investments can also address systemic inequities in both access and quality of care.
One early childhood education program in outer Melbourne led to improved IQ and language development among socially disadvantaged Australian children, with participants reaching the same level of development as their peers within three years.
Evaluations of similar initiatives in the United States suggest that benefits can persist well into adulthood and even intergenerationally, through improved lifetime education attainment, employment and health, and reduced criminal behaviour.
A whole of government approach
Unfortunately, the way our government is structured can work against these investments. While it’s often one agency or level of government that needs to put up the money for these investments, they only enjoy part of the benefit.
The way governments think about and invest in prevention and early intervention needs to change. The Productivity Commission’s proposed solution is for a National Prevention and Early Intervention Framework to support strategic investments in programs that improve outcomes and reduce demand for future services.
The framework’s consistent approach to assessing interventions would bring all levels of government to the table, so that worthwhile investments no longer fall between the cracks.
It offers a practical way to put into operation the government’s Measuring What Matters framework. By directing funding towards outcomes and tracking progress against them, it would give federal and state governments confidence that they are investing in effective programs.
Like a person struggling with a new year’s resolution, policymakers often find it hard to delay gratification.
But given health and social care spending is only set to grow further, we need to start thinking long term to ensure we can afford to give future generations the standard of care we enjoy today. With a greater focus on prevention and early intervention, we can better care for future generations and put our care sector on a more sustainable path.
Angela Jackson is the Social Policy Commissioner at the Productivity Commission, as well as the chair of the Women in Economics Network. She has previously served on the board of Melbourne Health, which operates Royal Melbourne Hospital.
Work is finished, and you’re tired and hungry. Maybe you’re rushing home or to daycare pickup.
You know you should be cooking dinner from scratch for the healthiest choice but that isn’t going to happen for a variety of reasons. You just need something quick and easy.
Then, you remember those headlines about trans fats in some packaged convenience foods and you start to worry.
If this feels familiar, here’s what you need to know.
Unsaturated fats are liquid at room temperature. Saturated fats are solid at room temperature. It’s the saturated fats that are associated with health concerns as they can raise LDL (aka “bad”) cholesterol and increase inflammation.
Trans fats are technically unsaturated fats. But a slight difference in their molecular arrangement means they act more like saturated fats – in foods and the body.
Which foods have trans fats?
Small amounts of trans fats occur naturally in some animal foods, such as red meat and dairy. They can also be created when oils are heated to very high temperatures, such as with commercial deep-frying.
But most trans fats in our diets are “industrial” trans fats. These are made when unsaturated fats are deliberately turned into trans fats by a process called hydrogenation. This makes them act more like saturated fats – improving shelf life, taste and texture.
Industrial trans fats can be ingredients in pre-packaged foods such as shelf-stable cakes, pastries, fried savoury snacks and some frozen foods.
Why should we be cutting down on trans fats?
Initially, industrial trans fats were regarded as an innovation as they allowed manufacturers to replace expensive, unhealthy saturated fats.
But we now know trans fats don’t just act like saturated fats in foods. They also act like saturated fats in the body, raising LDL cholesterol and causing inflammation. This ultimately increases the risk of cardiovascular diseases (such as heart attacks and strokes) even if you don’t eat much of them.
The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends we keep trans fats to less than 1% of our total energy intake (which is about 2.2 grams per day if you are eating a standard 8,000 kilojoule diet). That means eating less than about four 300g serves of frozen lasagne a day.
Some countries have introduced regulations to limit the levels of trans fats allowed in foods. The WHO recommends foods contain no more than 2g of trans fats per 100g of total fats. This hasn’t happened in Australia despite some calls for it.
Because “industrial” trans fats are typically found in prepackaged discretionary foods (such as shelf-stable pastries, cakes and biscuits) and convenience foods (such as frozen meals), it’s tempting to revert to the simplified “just eat fresh whole foods and cook from scratch” style of recommendation.
But cooking from scratch may not be realistic
However, for many people, cooking every meal from scratch isn’t practical, affordable or enjoyable. But there are practical and meaningful ways to eat less trans fats even when eating convenience and discretionary foods, without changing your whole lifestyle or becoming a chef.
When shopping for snacks, frozen or other pre-packaged convenience products, check the labels for trans fats. But this can be a bit tricky as they’re not always mentioned, or may be called something else.
In Australia, it’s not mandatory to include trans fats on food labels, unless a manufacturer makes nutrition or health claim about fats or cholesterol. If this is the case, trans fat needs to be listed on the nutrition information panel.
The rest of the time, the trans fat content does not have to be listed, but manufacturers might declare it voluntarily.
You can also look for “hydrogenated” or “partially hydrogenated” in the ingredients list.
However, manufacturers only have to declare hydrogenation if a specific vegetable oil is listed. If the ingredient is generic “vegetable oil”, the manufacturer doesn’t have to specify whether that oil has been hydrogenated.
So, for certainty, look for products that specifically list the unsaturated fats they use as ingredients (for instance, canola oil, sunflower oil or olive oil), as these would have to include the extra detail.
Don’t stress about cooking with oils at home, as they don’t get hot enough to produce a meaningful amount of trans fats. Most margarines and shortenings in Australia have now been reformulated to have little to no trans fats.
If you are ordering takeaways or fast foods, deep frying at high temperatures can lead to a modest increase in trans fats. Choosing outlets that use liquid vegetable oils reduces this risk. Most fast-food chains in Australia use high-oleic canola oils or blends that don’t contain trans fats.
We don’t need to turn into chefs overnight
At the end of the day, trans fats are not necessary, nor are they health-promoting.
But we don’t need to overhaul our lives, cook every meal from scratch or track every gram of fat we eat.
With a little bit of label-reading, a few simple swaps, and a general pattern of choosing foods made with plant-based oils instead of solid fats can give you the confidence you are minimising your exposure to trans fats.
Emma Beckett has in past years received funding for research or payment for consulting from Mars Foods, Nutrition Research Australia, FOODiQ Global, NHMRC, ARC, AMP Foundation, Kelloggs, Hort Innovation, and the a2 milk company. She is the author of ‘You Are More Than What You Eat’. She is a member of committees/working groups related to nutrition and food, including with the Australian Academy of Science and the National Health and Medical Research Council. She is a Registered Nutritionist, and a member of the Nutrition Society of Australia and the Australian Institute of Food Science and Technology.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Angela Jackson, Social Policy Commissioner, Productivity Commission, and Adjunct Associate Professor, University of Tasmania
At the start of the new year, many of us will commit to joining a gym, eating healthier or cutting back on drinking and smoking. We do this knowing that investing in our health today will pay off into to the future – that prevention is better (and cheaper) than the cure.
It’s advice the Productivity Commission thinks federal and state governments should also follow to improve Australia’s finances and productivity.
Late last year, my co-authors and I gave the federal government the final report of our inquiry on delivering quality care more efficiently.
We found preventative investments could save taxpayers billions of dollars in health and social care costs. But to achieve these gains, the way we think about investing in prevention needs to change.
Investing in early intervention
Australia’s spending on health and social care is growing as a share of the economy and now makes up five of the top seven fiscal pressures
facing the federal budget. The care sector is also absorbing more of our workforce – close to one-third of new jobs since the pandemic have been in the care sector.
In many respects this reflects changing preferences. As the nation has become wealthier, we care more about our health and wellbeing. But making the most of this spending is one of Australia’s key productivity challenges.
That means investing early to save costs later. Take for example the SunSmart skin cancer awareness campaign, which is estimated to have prevented more than 43,000 skin cancers from 1988 to 2010.
Investments like this save lives and money. We estimate that an investment of A$1.5 billion across all prevention programs over five years could be expected to save governments $2.7 billion over ten years. Factoring in the broader health, social and economic benefits, the total benefits would be about $5.4 billion.
Other countries are ahead of the game: Canada, the UK and Finland spend over twice as much of their health budgets on prevention as Australia.
Australia’s own health prevention strategy recommends that we increase spending on prevention from 2% to 5% of the health budget.
The big picture
Prevention goes beyond just health care. Investments in youth justice, out of home care and homelessness improve outcomes in a range of other areas, improving Australians’ quality of life and governments’ bottom lines.
For example, when people experiencing homelessness get stable housing, they tend to end up in hospital less often, make fewer trips to the emergency department, and in some cases, even avoid incarceration. It’s also easier to look for and hold down a job when you have a stable place to call home.
Such investments can also address systemic inequities in both access and quality of care.
One early childhood education program in outer Melbourne led to improved IQ and language development among socially disadvantaged Australian children, with participants reaching the same level of development as their peers within three years.
Evaluations of similar initiatives in the United States suggest that benefits can persist well into adulthood and even intergenerationally, through improved lifetime education attainment, employment and health, and reduced criminal behaviour.
A whole of government approach
Unfortunately, the way our government is structured can work against these investments. While it’s often one agency or level of government that needs to put up the money for these investments, they only enjoy part of the benefit.
The way governments think about and invest in prevention and early intervention needs to change. The Productivity Commission’s proposed solution is for a National Prevention and Early Intervention Framework to support strategic investments in programs that improve outcomes and reduce demand for future services.
The framework’s consistent approach to assessing interventions would bring all levels of government to the table, so that worthwhile investments no longer fall between the cracks.
It offers a practical way to put into operation the government’s Measuring What Matters framework. By directing funding towards outcomes and tracking progress against them, it would give federal and state governments confidence that they are investing in effective programs.
Like a person struggling with a new year’s resolution, policymakers often find it hard to delay gratification.
But given health and social care spending is only set to grow further, we need to start thinking long term to ensure we can afford to give future generations the standard of care we enjoy today. With a greater focus on prevention and early intervention, we can better care for future generations and put our care sector on a more sustainable path.
Angela Jackson is the Social Policy Commissioner at the Productivity Commission, as well as the chair of the Women in Economics Network. She has previously served on the board of Melbourne Health, which operates Royal Melbourne Hospital.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Brenton Griffin, Academic Status in the College of Humanities, Arts, and Social Sciences, Flinders University
Netflix
The new Netflix documentary Evil Influencer: The Jodi Hildebrandt Story, directed by Skye Borgman, seeks to understand the shocking crimes of both Hildebrandt and business partner Ruby Franke.
In 2023, Hildebrandt and Franke became internationally known when they were arrested and plead guilty for aggravated child abuse. They were accused of the forceful restraint, torture and malnourishment of two of Franke’s children, aged 12 and 9 at the time.
Hildebrandt and Franke collaborated on various Mormon-focused self-improvement businesses, including the podcast Moms of Truth and workshop ConneXions.
The abuse became known when Franke’s son escaped Hildebrandt’s home in south-west Utah and sought assistance from neighbours. However, as the documentary makes clear, signs of abuse are evident in earlier 8 Passengers videos. For example, the oldest Franke son, 15 at the time, was forced to sleep on a bean bag for seven months as a form of discipline.
The documentary, including those who are interviewed, articulate that these crimes are Mormon-centric. This is a story of religious fanaticism.
The positioning of Mormonism within this documentary is essential to the documentary’s framing. Those who are the strongest to condemn Hildebrandt in the film – including therapists, police and legal professionals, as well as victims of Hildebrandt – are adamant to profess their more mainstream “Mormonness” in comparison to Hildenbrandt and Franke’s extremism.
What Evil Influencer does well
The Franke–Hildebrandt case captured international attention for several reasons explored during the documentary.
First, the abuse happened at the hands of Franke, the children’s mother, and Hildebrandt, a trusted businesswoman in the Mormon mental health community.
Before founding her business ConneXions, Hildebrandt was a licensed therapist, though her license had been put on probation for violating patient confidentiality.
Ruby Franke, with her husband Kevin, was an immensely popular family vlogger. Their 8 Passengers YouTube channel had millions of subscribers and over a billion views.
Second, the documentary explores the ever-present pressure on families, in particular mothers, within Mormon culture. Mothers are responsible for teaching children correct gospel principles, which ensures their salvation.
Mormon doctrine emphasises the role of both parents. But this responsibility usually rests on the mothers, who are encouraged to not work.
This pressure to perform a certain way under the constraints of a high-control, patriarchal religion is similarly expressed by the participants of The Secret Lives of Mormon Wives.
Third, the documentary places Hildebrandt’s actions in the context of Mormon sexual purity culture. The film claims she was part of an “approved” list of therapists Church leaders would contact when members of their congregation struggled with “sexual deviancy”.
Hilderbrandt’s aggressive tactics towards clients are discussed in detail by former victims. These included the removal of parents from children and separations.
Hildebrandt’s actions towards victims is spliced with footage of Church leaders denouncing pornography as of the devil, more addictive than cocaine, and as able to corrupt souls to lose their salvation.
Hildebrandt’s “life-coaching” was the reason Ruby Franke and her children were living with Hildebrandt. According to the documentary, Kevin had been instructed by Jodi to not be in contact with his family for over a year.
What Evil Influencer misses
As with other documentaries that have examined Mormon women who have abused their children – including another documentary on Ruby Franke, and one on Lori Vallow, who in 2019 murdered her children in rural Idaho – the filmmaker’s grounding in Mormon cosmology could be improved.
Crucial to both the Franke and Vallow cases is the belief demons can possess individuals, including children. This is a part of the foundational Mormon narrative, the “First Vision”, in which a 14-year-old Joseph Smith was “seized upon by some power which entirely overcame” him. In his words, Smith is only saved by the literal appearance of God and Jesus Christ.
In Mormon cosmology, children are free from sin until the age of eight, after which they are baptised. Ecclesiastical leaders interview children about their faith and understanding of gospel principles, and whether they are willing to uphold baptismal and confirmation “covenants”.
When the documentary quotes from Franke’s diary, in which she refers to her son “or rather his demon”, this is likely not metaphorical. Similarly, Hildebrandt states to police the boy should not be allowed near other children.
In Mormon thought, the closer to God a person becomes – as Hildebrandt claimed to be due to her visions – the harder Satan will attempt to destroy a person through temptation and/or possession, as in the case of Joseph Smith.
Towards the end of the documentary, Hildebrandt, through recorded prison phone calls, quotes scripture, claiming Jesus Christ had warned his followers they would be persecuted and imprisoned. Hilderbrandt sees her imprisonment as a mirror of the Church’s founder, who was repeatedly arrested.
Smith similarly saw mirrors of his treatment in that of Jesus Christ’s experience. This idea of religious persecution sits at the heart of Hildebrandt’s denial.
Evil Influencer does very well to ground Hildebrandt and Franke’s crimes in Mormon culture, especially in regards to sexuality, motherhood and family. However, more cosmological context, especially surrounding the way in which Mormonism views demonic possession, is just as crucial for understanding these crimes.
Evil Influencer: The Jodi Hildebrandt Story is on Netflix now.
Brenton Griffin was raised as a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, but is no longer a practising member of the church. His research is focused on the religion’s place in Australian and New Zealand popular culture, politics, and society from the 19th century to present.
Source: The Conversation (Au and NZ) – By Nicholas Ross Smith, Senior Research Fellow, National Centre for Research on Europe, University of Canterbury
In the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela and Donald Trump’s repeated threats towards Greenland, a wave of pessimism has swept the western world.
For countries wedded to a rules-based international order arbitrated by a mostly benevolent America, the emergence of what Trump has branded a “Donroe Doctrine” represents an existential crisis.
This is certainly true in New Zealand, which for 75 years has looked to the US as a security guarantor. What has been heralded as a new epoch of naked great-power politics will require what political theorists call a “realist” approach to a world of competing, self-interested powers.
When Winston Peters became foreign minister in 2024, he largely foreshadowed this, saying he would take “the world as it is” – a famous realist maxim.
But the problem with a realist outlook is that it can embed a pessimistic (even paranoid) view of world affairs. Through such a lens, for example, the threat of China can be exaggerated, along with what New Zealand needs to do to survive.
There is another way of looking at the world, however. The theory of “multiplexity” – pioneered by international relations scholar Amitav Acharya – offers such a vantage point.
Not a single global order
Multiplexity stems from observing that the current international environment lacks a truly dominant global power, or “hegemon”, such as the US arguably was after the Cold War.
At the same time, there is a proliferation of influential nations and a more open global political space. There is more cultural, ideological and political diversity as well as broader interdependence between countries.
In Acharya’s words: “a multiplex world is like a multiplex cinema” as it gives the audience – that is, countries – a choice of what they want. It is “not a singular global order, liberal or otherwise, but a complex of cross-cutting, if not competing, international orders”.
This is an era when international relations have moved from rigid bipolar and unipolar systems to a more complex, decentralised state of affairs. Traditionally silenced voices – particularly from the Global South – now have growing confidence and agency.
This may make little sense to the current US administration, with its “might makes right” attitude.
But China is more suited to a multiplex world because much of its engagement comes from a relational world view: unique and complex relationships, not the actors themselves or any overarching hierarchical structures, are the key element of international relations.
To this end, China has been effective in convincing Global South partners – including in the Pacific – that it is not beholden to colonial or Cold War mentalities and can offer important material support.
Of course, China is also self-interested, and the power asymmetries in these relationships naturally produce uneven outcomes. But so far, China has avoided pursuing an overt “strings attached” approach with other countries.
A new non-aligned movement
New Zealand could excel in a multiplex world, given it has already had success managing strong relationships with both China and the US.
This could be enhanced by drawing inspiration from te ao Māori (the Māori worldview), which mirrors the Confucian and Daoist thought underpinning China’s foreign policy, and offers a relational understanding of the world.
This would make most sense in the South Pacific region where New Zealand has real influence.
Drawing from Melanesian, Micronesian and Polynesian traditional knowledge, the Pacific Islands Forum released its 2050 strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent in 2022, as an alternative to the largely Western concept of the Indo-Pacific.
The strategy speaks of “our shared stewardship of the Blue Pacific Continent” and the “need for urgent action to combat climate change”.
Such sentiments may be easy to dismiss, coming from tiny island states with no real influence in the world of realist great power politics. But inspiration can be sought from the Non-Aligned Movement which emerged in the 1950s.
This galvanised a disparate collection of countries – spearheaded by Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia and Yugoslavia – to work together and push back against the great power politics of the Cold War.
The movement eventually lost steam, in part due to the deaths of key leaders, India’s Jawaharlal Nehru and Egypt’s Gamal Abdel Nasser. But for a time it demonstrated how smaller states could collectively resist great power encroachment.
Part of its success was a focus on issues that resonated widely among smaller states, such as the threat of nuclear annihilation and the need for equitable decolonisation. The Blue Pacific is also centred on an issue that resonates widely: climate change.
Furthermore, like the Non-Aligned Movement, the Blue Pacific is firmly against great power politics and warns against exaggerating the threat of China. As Tuvaluan politician Simon Kofe stated in 2022:
If we’re truly serious about world peace and addressing climate change, then there really is no good guys and bad guys […] We need China on board. We need the US on board.
Rather than retreating into pessimism, New Zealand could embrace multiplexity and chart its own course. Using its unique cultural perspectives and Pacific partnerships, it could demonstrate to other small powers an alternative to the prevailing realist vision of international relations.
Nicholas Ross Smith does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The world is now using so much fresh water amid the consequences of climate change that it has entered an era of water bankruptcy, with many regions no longer able to bounce back from frequent water shortages.
About 4 billion people – nearly half the global population – live with severe water scarcity for at least one month a year, without access to sufficient water to meet all of their needs. Many more people are seeing the consequences of water deficit: dry reservoirs, sinking cities, crop failures, water rationing and more frequent wildfires and dust storms in drying regions.
Water bankruptcy signs are everywhere, from Tehran, where droughts and unsustainable water use have depleted reservoirs the Iranian capital relies on, adding fuel to political tensions, to the U.S., where water demand has outstripped the supply in the Colorado River, a crucial source of drinking water and irrigation for seven states.
Droughts have made finding water for cattle more difficult and have led to widespread malnutrition in parts of Ethiopia in recent years. In 2022, UNICEF estimated that as many as 600,000 children would require treatment for severe malnutrition. Demissew Bizuwerk/UNICEF Ethiopia, CC BY
Water bankruptcy is not just a metaphor for water deficit. It is a chronic condition that develops when a place uses more water than nature can reliably replace, and when the damage to the natural assets that store and filter that water, such as aquifers and wetlands, becomes hard to reverse.
Kaveh Madani, director of the United Nations University Institute for Water, Environment and Health, explains the concept of “water bankruptcy.” TVRI World.
What water bankruptcy looks like in real life
In financial bankruptcy, the first warning signs often feel manageable: late payments, borrowed money and selling things you hoped to keep. Then the spiral tightens.
Water bankruptcy has similar stages.
At first, we pull a little more groundwater during dry years. We use bigger pumps and deeper wells. We transfer water from one basin to another. We drain wetlands and straighten rivers to make space for farms and cities.
How the Aral Sea shrank from 2000 to 2011. It was once closer to oval, covering the light-colored areas as recently as the 1980s, but overuse for agriculture by multiple countries drew it down. NASA
That last one, subsidence, often surprises people. But it’s a signature of water bankruptcy. When groundwater is overpumped, the underground structure, which holds water almost like a sponge, can collapse. In Mexico City, land is sinking by about 10 inches (25 centimeters) per year. Once the pores become compacted, they can’t simply be refilled.
The Global Water Bankruptcy report, published on Jan. 20, 2026, documents how widespread this is becoming. Groundwater extraction has contributed to significant land subsidence over more than 2.3 million square miles (6 million square kilometers), including urban areas where close to 2 billion people live. Jakarta, Bangkok and Ho Chi Minh City are among the well-known examples in Asia.
A sinkhole in Turkey’s agricultural heartland shows how the landscape can collapse when more groundwater is extracted than nature can replenish. Ekrem07, 2023, Wikimedia Commons, CC BY
About 3 billion people and more than half of global food production are concentrated in areas where water storage is already declining or unstable. More than 650,000 square miles (1.7 million square kilometers) of irrigated cropland are under high or very high water stress. That threatens the stability of food supplies around the world.
In California, a severe drought and water shortage forced some farmers in 2021 to remove crops that require lots of irrigation, including almond trees. Robyn Beck/AFP via Getty Images
Droughts are also increasing in duration, frequency and intensity as global temperatures rise. Over 1.8 billion people – nearly 1 in 4 humans – dealt with drought conditions at various times from 2022 to 2023.
Is the world ready to cope with water-related national security risks? CNN.
How did we get here?
Every year, nature gives each region a water income, depositing rain and snow. Think of this like a checking account. This is how much water we receive each year to spend and share with nature.
When demand rises, we might borrow from our savings account. We take out more groundwater than will be replaced. We steal the share of water needed by nature and drain wetlands in the process. That can work for a while, just as debt can finance a wasteful lifestyle for a while.
The exposed shoreline at Latyan Dam shows significantly low water levels near Tehran on Nov. 10, 2025. The reservoir, which supplies part of the capital’s drinking water, has seen a sharp decline due to prolonged drought and rising demand in the region. Bahram/Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images
Those long-term water sources are now disappearing. The world has lost more than 1.5 million square miles (4.1 million square kilometers) of natural wetlands over five decades. Wetlands don’t just hold water. They also clean it, buffer floods and support plants and wildlife.
Water quality is also declining. Pollution, saltwater intrusion and soil salinization can result in water that is too dirty and too salty to use, contributing to water bankruptcy.
Climate change is exacerbating the situation by reducing precipitation in many areas of the world. Warming increases the water demand of crops and the need for electricity to pump more water. It also melts glaciers that store fresh water.
Despite these problems, nations continue to increase water withdrawals to support the expansion of cities, farmland, industries and now data centers.
Not all water basins and nations are water bankrupt, but basins are interconnected through trade, migration, climate and other key elements of nature. Water bankruptcy in one area will put more pressure on others and can increase local and international tensions.
Stop the bleeding: The first step is admitting the balance sheet is broken. That means setting water use limits that reflect how much water is actually available, rather than just drilling deeper and shifting the burden to the future.
Protect natural capital – not just the water: Protecting wetlands, restoring rivers, rebuilding soil health and managing groundwater recharge are not just nice-to-haves. They are essential to maintaining healthy water supplies, as is a stable climate.
In small island states like the Maldives, sea-level rise threatens water supplies when salt water gets into underground aquifers, ruining wells. UNDP Maldives 2021, CC BY
Use less, but do it fairly: Managing water demand has become unavoidable in many places, but water bankruptcy plans that cut supplies to the poor while protecting the powerful will fail. Serious approaches include social protections, support for farmers to transition to less water-intensive crops and systems, and investment in water efficiency.
Measure what matters: Many countries still manage water with partial information. Satellite remote sensing can monitor water supplies and trends, and provide early warnings about groundwater depletion, land subsidence, wetland loss, glacier retreat and water quality decline.
Plan for less water: The hardest part of bankruptcy is psychological. It forces us to let go of old baselines. Water bankruptcy requires redesigning cities, food systems and economies to live within new limits before those limits tighten further.
With water, as with finance, bankruptcy can be a turning point. Humanity can keep spending as if nature offers unlimited credit, or it can learn to live within its hydrological means.
The Nationals have defied shadow cabinet solidarity, voting in the Senate against the government’s hate crime legislation, which passed late Tuesday night with the support of the Liberals.
The Nationals’ action puts new strain on Coalition relations, and is destabilising for Opposition Leader Sussan Ley, who did the deal with Anthony Albanese to support the legislation in return for concessions.
The four Nationals senators voting against the legislation were frontbenchers Bridget McKenzie, Ross Cadell and Susan McDonald, and backbencher Matt Canavan.
The Nationals’ vote against the bill came after the failure of the party’s amendments to refer the legislation to a committee and to insert more guardrails around the provision enabling hate-promoting organisations to be banned.
Nationals leader David Littleproud said in a statement before the vote, “The Nationals support the intent of the legislation, but we must get it right.
“The legislation needs amendments to guarantee greater protections against unintended consequences that limit the rights and freedom of speech of everyday Australians and the Jewish community,” he said.
“We cannot risk the consequences of getting this legislation wrong.
“If The Nationals’ amendments are not supported in the Senate, the Party will oppose the Bill.”
Littleproud insisted the Nationals’ position “does not reflect on the relationship within the Coalition.
“The Coalition has secured significant improvements to the legislation, but The Nationals’ Party Room has concluded that more time is required to more fully examine and test the Bill before it is finalised.”
How Ley reacts to the Nationals’ action will be a fresh test for her.
Liberal or Nationals backbenchers can vote as they choose without consequences. (Liberal Senate backbencher Alex Antic voted against his colleagues.) But it’s another matter for frontbenchers, who are bound to collective solidarity.
When the Coalition split briefly after the May 2025 election, one issue was the question of solidarity. Ley flagged to Littleproud she would not countenance defiance by Nationals frontbenchers. Littleproud said at the time he had accepted as “more than reasonable” Ley’s requirement for shadow cabinet solidarity.
The extraordinary agonising within the Nationals on Monday and Tuesday over the hate crime legislation underscored the uneasy relationship between the Liberals and their flaky minor partner.
On Sunday the shadow cabinet arrived at a position on the legislation: Ley negotiated changes with the government on Monday. The resulting agreement to support the bill was then endorsed by a Liberal Party meeting.
But the Nationals, internally split, could not make up their collective mind on whether to support or oppose the bill. In particular, they were unhappy about the breadth of the provision on banning extremist organisations, such as Hizb ut-Tahrir.
Canavan summed up this view when he told the ABC the measure gave the minister “way too much power to ban groups that go far and beyond organisations that would be encouraging or supporting violent acts”.
By lunchtime Tuesday the Nationals had had multiple meetings of their party room.
The back story to their division and dithering was One Nation’s surge, highlighted in two polls at the weekend. In Newspoll, One Nation was polling 22%, above the Coalition on 21%.
With Barnaby Joyce’s defection, the Nationals are increasingly seeing One Nation as an existential threat. They are worried both about the minor party’s support on the ground and the possibility of more defections.
Littleproud’s lack of authority over his party was shown by what happened in Tuesday’s vote on the legislation in the House of Representatives.
Littleproud issued a statement saying the Nationals hadn’t had time to deal with their concerns before the house vote. “Therefore The Nationals’ position is to abstain from voting in the House of Representatives, so that we can put forward amendments to the bill in the Senate to fix these issues.”
Despite this, two Nationals from Queensland, Colin Boyce and Llew O’Brien, voted against the legislation. Former leader Michael McCormack voted for it. In other words, the handful of Nationals in the house spread themselves across all possible positions.
McCormack said later this was the only legislation that would ban Hizb ut-Tahrir and neo-Nazi groups and “I couldn’t in all conscience vote against a bill that does that”.
The Senate early Tuesday evening passed the government’s gun reform legislation, with the Greens voting with the government and the Coalition voting against.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Donald Trump is a classic example of why you don’t let bullies prosper. “Trump is cutting the last threads of the tattered cloth of ‘the rules-based international order’ — the self-serving system that touted international law as long as it didn’t apply to the US and its allies.
The Canadians, the Danes, the Panamanians and the rest of us should wake up to reality and see we are objects, we are mere “things” to the Americans, not allies with some deeply shared “values”.
I wrote that in January 2025 in this article that I reproduce today. It provides a useful backgrounder, including historical precendents, to help us navigate through the times we are living through right now.
What do Panama, Canada and Greenland have in common? Could Trump be getting the US back to brass tacks, to a core strategy of dominating the Western hemisphere? Possibly, and he may be blowing away the fraudulent rhetoric about rules-based international order, territorial integrity, international law and the crusade to expand democracies.
Trump said this week that the US is prepared to use military force to assert control over Panama and Greenland.
“We need Greenland for national security purposes. People don’t even know if Denmark has any legal right to it but even if they do they should give it up because I’m talking about protecting the free world,” Trump said.
The world’s largest island is bigger than France, Germany, Spain, the United Kingdom, Italy, Greece, Switzerland, and Belgium combined. It’s literally bigger than Texas (300 percent bigger) — and the US wants it.
“The US may pose a greater risk to the territorial integrity of the European Union than the Russians do. If they get antsy with the US, Trump will ‘tariff them’. Image: www.solidarity.co.nz
A greater risk Think about that. The US may pose a greater risk to the territorial integrity of the European Union than the Russians do. If they get antsy with the US, Trump will “tariff them”.
The Danes, like the rest of Europe, are frightened of the US. In response to Trump’s Greenland gambit, Foreign Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen timidly said this week that Denmark was “open to a dialogue with the Americans on how we can cooperate, possibly even more closely than we already do, to ensure that American ambitions are fulfilled”.
To ensure American ambitions are fulfilled. And this was the country that gave us the Vikings. If Ragnar Lodbrok, Eric Bloodaxe or Bjorn Ironside had been around when Donald Trump Junior swooped into Nuuk for his photo op, his skull would have been used as a drinking tankard for a blót sumbl feast that same evening.
Top independent strategists have for years despaired of the strategic brainlessness of US foreign policy — the Midas Touch in reverse, as Professor Mearsheimer calls it. Wherever they went — from Vietnam to Iraq, Afghanistan, Ukraine and Gaza — Americans embroiled themselves in conflicts of little strategic worth and left behind piles of bodies, millions of implacable enemies and a litany of failures.
President Trump . . . His rough woo-ing of Canada to become the 51st state, and his threat to use military force to seize both Greenland and the Canal, speak to a back-to-basics focus for American imperialism. Image: RSF
Trump’s rough woo-ing of Canada to become the 51st state, and his threat to use military force to seize both Greenland and the Canal, speak to a back-to-basics focus for American imperialism — a shift in US policy that will bring it closer to its core strategic interests.
That’s quite appropriate for a man who counts President Teddy Roosevelt (1901-09) as a role model. There is a whiff of the Rough Rider (Roosevelt’s cavalry which kicked over the Spaniards in Cuba in 1898) about Trump’s recent utterances.
Outside the American Museum of Natural History in New York you could see a magnificent statue of Teddy Roosevelt, cowboy kerchief around his neck, six-shooter hanging off his hip, astride a proud steed with two bare-chested Noble Savages — an African and an American Indian — walking on either side of the Great White Man.
Punkish metal spikes I particularly like the slightly punkish metal spikes sticking out of his hair to stop birds crapping on his head. After 82 years, the City finally woke up to the fact that this was a racist, colonialist trope and took the statue down in 2021.
It is ironic that just four years after doing so an even bigger monument to Roosevelt is going up: Trump redux is lifting entire passages out of the Roosevelt playbook.
Roosevelt greatly increased the influence and interests of the United States, building on the recent seizures of the Philippines, Puerto Rico, Hawai’i, Cuba and Guam. He wanted to Make America Great and to do so he would,”speak softly and carry a big stick”.
Big stick diplomacy – the willingness to use the military – was increasingly unleashed to assert US hegemony and business interests.
General Smedley D Butler, author of War is a Racket, spent his entire 33-year career (1898-1931) enforcing the rules as defined by Theodore Roosevelt and his successors. Smedley eventually realised he was fighting as “a high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.”
Like thousands of Marines he fought for the US in countries up and down the Americas, Caribbean and Asia, including Cuba (1898), Venezuela, Panama, Dominican Republic, Mexico, the Philippines, Haiti, Honduras, Nicaragua and China.
President Roosevelt’s greatest legacy was the building of the Panama Canal. The US intervened militarily in Panama to drive out the Colombians and “liberate” Panama so the US could build the Canal.
‘Literally as one man’ He said that the people of Panama rebelled against Colombia “literally as one man” — to which a senator retorted, “Yes, and the one man was Roosevelt!”
Is history repeating itself – as tragedy or comedy? Image: www.solidarity.co.nz
Is history repeating itself — as tragedy or comedy? If Trump’s threats all sound either nuts or 19th century it’s because it is both those things — which doesn’t mean they won’t happen.
Here’s where it gets interesting. I think Trump has a very good point for a number of reasons (clue: none of them relate to international law or respect for the sovereignty of nations).
Greenland has a ton of energy, fishing and mineral resources the Americans would love to lay their hands on. The Arctic maritime routes are slowly opening and if you look at a map of the Arctic you’ll realise the USA has very little real estate, to use Trumpspeak, up there and Russia has a vast amount.
The third reason is equally important: incorporating Canada and Greenland into the US would give the country an enormous boost at a time when it is slipping behind China in all critical areas.
According to the IMF, the Chinese have already overtaken the US in share of global GDP based on purchasing power parity (19-15 percent). By 2035 this gap will likely explode out to 25 percent to 14 percent in Beijing’s favour.
How should the US respond? Its current China containment strategy of sanctions, tariffs and threats are failing as China’s manufacturing and tech sectors greatly outperform the US.
Losing its proxy war Military planners say the US would almost certainly lose a conventional war against China over Taiwan; the US is already losing its proxy war in Ukraine. A course correction seems inevitable.
Trump is cutting the last threads of the tattered cloth of “the rules-based international order” — the self-serving system that touted international law as long as it didn’t apply to the US and its allies.
The Canadians, the Danes, the Panamanians and the rest of us should wake up to reality and see we are “objects”, we are mere things to the Americans, not allies with some deeply shared “values”.
Trump is refreshingly candid: he wants stuff and he’s prepared to dispense with the preachy posturing that we got with Blinken and Biden. America is not your friend.
Eugene Doyle is a writer based in Wellington. He has written extensively on the Middle East, as well as peace and security issues in the Asia Pacific region, and he contributes to Asia Pacific Report. He hosts the public policy platform solidarity.co.nz
This article was first published at Solidarity on 11 January 2025 under the title “A man, a plan, a canal: Trump might be on to something”.
