When hurricanes hit, online chatter drowns out safety messaging

Social-media buzz during severe weather events often focuses on politics and pets, Stevens research shows

Stevens Institute of Technology

Hoboken, N.J. October 17, 2024 – When natural disasters strike, social networks like Facebook and X (formerly known as Twitter) can be powerful tools for public communication—but often, rescue workers and government officials struggle to make themselves heard above the general hubbub. 

In fact, new research from the Stevens Institute of Technology shows, during four recent major hurricanes, important public safety messaging was drowned out by more trivial social content—including people tweeting about pets, sharing human-interest stories, or bickering about politics. That’s a big problem for officials working to understand where help is needed and to communicate effectively with people impacted by disasters, says Dr. Jose Ramirez-Marquez of the Stevens School of Systems and Enterprises. 

“It’s like being at a crowded party—if everyone’s arguing loudly about politics, it’s hard to make yourself heard over the noise,” he explains. 

Working with Stevens PhD candidate Yefang Liang, Dr. Ramirez-Marquez analyzed messages posted on X during each of four recent hurricanes—Harvey, Imelda, Laura, and Florence—and identified the clusters of tweets that attracted the most attention and engagement before, during, and after the storms. Their findings, published this week in the International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, show that in many cases the topics that generated the most intense online interest were completely unrelated to safety messaging or rescue work. 

During Hurricane Harvey, for instance, 24 of the 50 most active topics involved discussion of dogs affected by flooding. By contrast, just seven of the 50 most active topics involved public safety messages. “That’s obviously a problem if you’re a public official trying to ensure people know how to keep themselves safe during a storm,” Dr. Ramirez-Marquez says.

Similar patterns played out during other storms, too. During Hurricane Florence, more than half of high-engagement topics involved either animal-related chatter or political arguments, while just 19 out of the top 50 topics involved rescue or public safety messages. During Hurricane Imelda, meanwhile, debates about climate change accounted for almost one-quarter of all high-engagement topics, drowning out higher-stakes safety messages.

“This really is zero-sum: if conversations about animals or politics are taking up all the oxygen, it’s that much harder for other, potentially more important messages to break through,” Dr. Ramirez-Marquez warns.

The team’s research does suggest some ways that officials can maximize the chances of safety messages reaching a broad audience. Descriptive messaging about storms tends to outperform safety messages, for instance—so combining the two, and weaving public safety notifications or warnings into more descriptive social-media posts, might help to boost the reach of such messages. “It’s also important that officials stay focused during disasters, and don’t inadvertently get drawn into political conversations that could distract from their core messaging,” Dr. Ramirez-Marquez adds.

The reality, though, is that using social media to support safety and recovery efforts in the wake of natural disasters will remain challenging, because many users enjoy engaging with content that doesn’t serve a public safety function. To overcome that, social networks themselves would likely need to step in. Actively amplifying official disaster-related messaging for users in affected communities, for instance, might help ensure that such people get the information they need while still allowing users in other areas to chat freely about unrelated topics. 

More broadly, the study highlights the fragility of social-media communities. While the current study focused on the impact of harmless chatter, Dr. Ramirez-Marquez notes, bad actors can also deliberately hijack or distort online conversations by spreading enticing but false information. “As we’ve seen in recent weeks, with the misinformation surrounding natural disasters in Florida, Georgia, and North Carolina, social networks remain highly vulnerable to misinformation,” Dr. Ramirez-Marquez says.

To remedy that, social networks could potentially work to create mechanisms that help users determine who to trust online, or that make it easier to filter out distracting or false information during disasters. “The key here is that the networks themselves will need to take the lead on rebuilding trust online,” Dr. Ramirez-Marquez says. “This isn’t a problem that government officials can solve on their own.” 

 

---

Journal

International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction

Article Title

Harnessing text information for enhanced hurricane resilience and public engagement: Unveiling disaster perspectives through social media

Christian nationalism is growing among US Hispanics. Scholars explain why.

(RNS) — At a gathering at Princeton, scholars suggested Hispanic Protestants are connected to transnational apostolic networks that seek to advance Christian power in each society.

Scholars gathered at Princeton Theology Seminary for the Herencia Lectures event titled, "Christian Nationalism: A Dangerous Threat to Democracy." Video Screengrab

Aleja Hertzler-McCain

RNS
October 18, 2024

(RNS) — Over the last year and a half, surveys have tracked a significant rise in support for Christian nationalism among U.S. Hispanic Protestants, even as support for the ideology has remained fairly stable among other racial and ethnic Christian groups.

Among Hispanic Protestants, strong and moderate support for a group of ideas that include “U.S. laws should be based on Christian values” and “God has called Christians to exercise dominion over all areas of American society” have inched up from 43% in 2022 to 55% in 2023 and 59% in June 2024, according to Public Religion Research Institute surveys. That brings Hispanic Protestant support for Christian nationalism close to white evangelical support.

Hispanic Protestants make up under a quarter of U.S. Hispanics (23% in PRRI’s latest census). Among Hispanic Catholics, a larger group that makes up about half (48%) of U.S. Hispanics, support for Christian nationalism remains low, with less than a quarter (22%) expressing strong or moderate support.

While academics have long studied a version of U.S. Christian nationalism that privileges white, native-born Christians, a group of scholars gathered at Princeton Theological Seminary on Monday (Oct. 14) to consider the rise in U.S. Hispanic Christian nationalism. Scholars at the evening symposium, part of the Herencia (“Heritage”) Lectures, said that U.S. Hispanic Protestants participate in a strand of Christian nationalism connected to transnational apostolic networks that seek to advance Christian power in nations across the globe.

Matthew Taylor, a scholar at The Institute for Jewish, Christian and Muslim Studies in Baltimore, said that apostolic and prophetic Christian nationalists believe they must exert power to convert and Christianize whole nations.
RELATED: New survey points to correlation between Christian nationalism and authoritarian views

These apostolic and prophetic circles have a “natural sense of alliance” with authoritarian political leaders because they have “at least in their own mind, moved beyond democracy in the governance of their own coalition” and instead “installed these charismatic individuals, the apostles and prophets, as the quasi-authoritarian leaders within their networks,” Taylor said.

Prominent U.S. Latino Protestant pastors, including some who have advised former President Donald Trump and who mobilized Christians for the insurrection on Jan. 6, 2021, are involved with these loose international networks within what is called either the apostolic and prophetic movement or the Five-Fold Ministry movement, explained Taylor. His new book, “The Violent Take It by Force,” explores the charismatic Christians who have supported Trump and their role on Jan. 6.

The movement, where Pentecostal theology and nondenominational governance are combined, extends across continents, and different leaders voluntarily submit to the spiritual authority of other leaders, sometimes in other countries.

“You have to be part of a chain of authority in order for your prophetic acts to have authority in the spiritual world,” Raimundo Barreto, Jr., associate professor of world Christianity at Princeton Theological Seminary, explained to RNS after the event.



Before the lecture, attendees gathered for a lively worship service, which featured readings and music in Spanish and Portuguese. Video Screengrab

In contrast to the model of sending missionaries, “apostolic networks transcend national borders, so that ideas and leaders and resources flow in every direction,” Taylor said.

João Chaves, assistant professor of the history of religion in the Américas at Baylor University in Waco, Texas, said that “the overlaps in the transnational influences” on the Christian far right have been very clear as he and Barreto write a book about the political movement in Brazil and its international connections.

Chaves and Barreto have followed the political influence of the growing population of Pentecostals in Brazil. Chaves said that in the 2022 elections, more than 500 candidates for political office used classic evangelical terms, like missionary, pastor, reverend and bishop, as they campaigned.

Both scholars emphasized the links between the U.S. and Brazil, with Barreto referencing sociologist David Hess’ description that the two countries are “slightly distorted mirror-images of each other.”
RELATED: Brazilians march for Eshu, an Afro-Brazilian deity, to protest Christian intolerance

Chaves noted that former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro’s son, Eduardo, was in Washington, D.C., just before the Jan. 6 insurrection. Two years later, on Jan. 8, 2023, Bolsonaro’s supporters, including many evangelicals, invaded government buildings and called for a military coup following their leader’s defeat in the 2022 Brazilian general election to Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.

Several speakers noted that Zionism is a common feature in worship and politics among charismatic Pentecostals who also advance Christian nationalism. Chaves said, “When Trump was trying to move the embassy (to Jerusalem), you could see them pushing in Brazil also.”

Barreto said that, while televangelist Paula White has connected Trump to apostolic networks, Silas Malafaia, a Brazilian Pentecostal televangelist, has played the same role for Bolsonaro, a Catholic who appeals to Brazil’s right-wing evangelicals.

Malafaia “is not a thinking head of that movement,” Barreto said in his lecture. “He is repeating the same discourse that we are hearing from other apostolic voices,” including that “Brazil belongs to Jesus Christ” and that cultural Marxism, feminism, abortion, the LGBTQ+ community and the whole left are enemies to be fought, Barreto said.

The rise of Christian nationalism in Brazil is pushing some people out of the church, but others are forming a resistance, Barreto told RNS.

Vozes Marias, or Maria Voices and Novas Narrativas Evangélicas, or New Evangelical Narratives, are among the groups led by young people “from the peripheries, the favelas,” that have both stepped up, Barreto said.

Miranda Zapor Cruz, a professor of historical theology at Indiana Wesleyan University, says the rise of Hispanic Christian nationalism is replaying some debates about new prophecy in the early church

“Those who are part of these movements affirm a version of modern-day Gnosticism and Montanism that rejects the authority of creedal Christianity in favor of new revelation that has authority,” Cruz said.

(This story was reported with support from the Stiefel Freethought Foundation.)

Canada-India rift over Khalistani activists raises stakes for Sikh and Hindu Americans

(RNS) — When India and Canada expelled each other’s diplomats in the past few days, the exchange escalated a tussle over a rash of attacks on Sikhs living in Canada in recent years and spurred headlines around the globe.

A cyclist pedals past the Canadian High Commission in New Delhi, India, Tuesday, Oct. 15, 2024, after India and Canada expelled each other’s top diplomats over an ongoing dispute about the killing of a Sikh activist in Canada. (AP Photo/Manish Swarup)

Richa Karmarkar
October 18, 2024

(RNS) — In early October, the Sikh temple in Fremont, California, released a statement on its Facebook page, speaking out against what it calls a “new wave of Indian propaganda,” referring to recent allegations by Hindu American groups that the temple, a spiritual home to Sikhs in the Bay Area since 1978, was involved in “organized crime.”

The Facebook post accused organizations “aligned with the Indian government” of labeling Sikhs as extremists in a grassroots fight going on in northern India to establish an independent Sikh state called Khalistan. “Such efforts to stigmatize Sikhs are both unfounded and harmful,” the statement read. The leaders of the gurdwara, as Sikh temples are called, protested that their advocacy for an independent Sikh state have been “legitimate and peaceful.”

When India and Canada expelled each other’s diplomats in the past few days, the exchange escalated a tussle over a rash of attacks on Sikhs living in Canada in recent years and spurred headlines around the globe, many of them attempting to demystify the fight over a non-existent state of Khalistan involving shadowy intelligence operatives and accusations of government-sponsored murder, in the United States as well as Canada.

But for Sikhs in the two countries, there is nothing murky about the controversy. The Khalistan movement — a campaign to establish an independent homeland for Sikhs in Punjab, a region split between northern India and Pakistan — has long been on the minds of Sikh Americans. In 2023, thousands of Sikhs in San Francisco turned out to vote in a symbolic referendum on Khalistan, and the Khalistani cause, these Sikhs say, pushes back against age-old discrimination to claim self-determination and sovereignty.

The movement has been associated with violent rhetoric and action. In 1985, pro-Khalistan extremists planted a bomb aboard an Air India flight, killing all 329 people on the plane, one of the deadliest terrorist attacks in Canadian history.

More recently Hindu temples in the U.S. have seen statues toppled and walls marred by pro-Khalistani and anti-Indian graffiti. Anti-Hindu hate crimes, say many Hindu Americans, ratcheted up after a spat between a Sikh with a map of Khalistan on his arm was videoed by a Hindu customer at a Fremont Taco Bell and went viral in 2021.

The current diplomatic conflict stems from alleged assassination plots targeting two activists belonging to a group called Sikhs for Justice, Gurpatwant Singh Pannun and Hardeep Singh Nijjar, the latter of whom had been accused of helping to train others to carry out terrorist acts against India. After Nijjar, who was a 45-year-old Canadian citizen, was killed in a drive-by shooting at his gurdwara in Vancouver in June 2023, Canada Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said there were “credible allegations” that Indian government agents were involved.

People walk past banners inviting students to study in Canada and other places abroad at a market in Amritsar, in the northern Indian state of Punjab, Tuesday, Oct. 15, 2024. (AP Photo/Prabhjot Gill)

In August this year, another Sikhs for Justice leader, Satinder Pal Singh Raju, said he, too, was targeted while driving on a freeway near Sacramento, California. On Thursday (Oct. 17), an Indian national, Vikash Yadav, was indicted of a murder-for-hire scheme against Pannun.

The revelations have been “breathtaking” for Harman Singh, the executive director of advocacy organization Sikh Coalition. “In the past year and a half, what we’ve obviously recognized is that there’s a new threat to members of the Sikh community here in the United States,” he said. “Those are threats that are emerging from the Government of India targeting Sikhs who are here on U.S. soil.

RELATED: Sikh Americans, citing ‘transnational repression,’ vote for an independent homeland

“We’ve heard from Sikh houses of worship, Sikh academics, Sikh journalists and individual members of the community who have all told us that in some form or another they are concerned about the issue of transnational repression,” he said. “Our position is that anyone within any religious community should have the freedom and the ability to talk about their political and religious views in a lawful way without being targeted by a foreign government.”

The Sikh Coalition, founded after the 9/11 attacks in response to “individual and institutional discrimination” of the Sikh American diaspora, has never taken an official stance on Khalistan, in part, Singh said, because Sikhs disagree on how it would be created. But when “all Sikhs are conflated with Khalistanis, and all Khalistanis are seen as terrorists,” he said, all Sikhs are threatened.

Raising tensions further is the 40th anniversary of Operation Blue Star, the bloody 1984 storming of the Golden Temple in Amritsar by Indian troops in pursuit of Sikh militants. Months later, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi was assassinated in retaliation.

Harjeet Singh, a Sikh who lives in Seattle, said he feels a “sense of relief,” despite the violence, that the Western world is now paying attention to these dynamics. For years, he says, Sikhs have been questioned at the customs line on entering his home country of India.

“Anybody who says anything that the Indian government doesn’t like, whether you’re supporting a farmer’s protest or you’re supporting just basic human rights, they’ll put the label of “Khalistani” on that person and then try to kind of go after them as an extremist,” said Singh, the host of a podcast called “Finding Truth with Harjeet.

Although the movement is made up mostly of Sikhs, Singh sees the movement as not religious but a push for “decentralization of power from the hands of an overbearing government.” Advocates hope for control of laws, taxation and resources for the large Punjabi-speaking community. (Not all, he adds, belong to or trust the leadership of Sikhs for Justice.)

Some Sikhs are wary of Khalistani activism of any kind. Puneet Sahani is an anti-Khalistani social media activist who works to raise awareness of the dangers of Khalistani ideology. In speaking with other Sikhs, Sahani said, he has heard growing discouragement about the politicization of Sikh houses of worship. Many in the diaspora are being “brainwashed,” he said, with the idea of “revenge for 1984” or “hatred for Hindus and India.”

Sahani stopped attending his local gurdwara for similar reasons four years ago. “Of course, I miss the congregation, because like, you’re supposed to participate in the community,” he said. “But what the gurus are basically saying is you fight for dharma (religious duty). I am taking inspiration from my gurus, doing my dharma and fighting a dharma-yuddha (holy war). Our gurus inspire us to be the first in line to defend Bharat,” using a Hindu word for India.

Mat McDermott, senior communications director of the Hindu American Foundation, said in a statement that Hindu and Sikh American communities have historically lived in harmony and that recent events are not representative.

Canada Deputy High Commissioner to India Stewart Wheeler speaks to media personnel after meeting with officials at the Indian government’s Ministry of External Affairs, in New Delhi, India, Monday, Oct. 14, 2024. (AP Photo)

McDermott said he was surprised by “the degree this has become a highly public and politicized spectacle,” even as questions about India’s intentions remain unanswered. “This information vacuum,” he said, “combined with the sheer intensity of the allegations, and the differing approaches the U.S. government has employed with various South Asian communities, have naturally created a perfect storm for fear, suspicion and ultimately tensions between communities.

“The DOJ cannot expect to maintain a comprehensive investigative and enforcement capacity to handle such issues if it is disconnected from a community or is perceived to be dismissive of a community’s concerns,” said McDermott. “They must also consider their power to bring communities together, or tear them apart through their actions. That will ultimately make more of a difference to the various Dharmic communities here than anything else.”

Harman Singh pointed out that Bay Area Sikhs helped clean spray paint from a vandalized Hindu temple. “We’ve seen the pain that comes when houses of worship are targeted,” he said, “in Punjab in 1984 and in Oak Creek, Wisconsin, in 2012,” the site of a mass shooting by a white assailant. “This is personal to us.”

Michael Rubin, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute who studies South Asia and the Middle East, said American lawmakers have a responsibility to “recognize, chart and map” how pro-Khalistan extremists in the Sikh community “risk perhaps eviscerating or taking over the infrastructure and the organizations of the largely peaceful and successful American Sikh community.”

“I suspect that your ordinary Sikh has more to fear from the Khalistani extremists within their community than from the government of India,” he said.

RELATED: India has to be held accountable in Sikh’s death in Canada

Classroom change

Neda Mulji 

Published October 21, 2024 

AS the world gets smaller, with knowledge-sharing across borders, the growth of AI and easy access to free learning platforms, teachers find newer ways of teaching. Many schools have addressed the need for change, collaborating within their teams to design better lesson plans, cater to students’ changing learning styles and keep up with new trends.

Recent curriculum reforms have introduced student-centred pedagogy focused on inquiry-based approaches. However, the real question is whether the changes are implemented in a structured, school-wide framework, with results that are continuously monitored. Schools that have been prioritising this transformation may benefit from working backwards from their goals.

One way of doing this is to trace impact through timelines: teachers can note the list of changes they wish to prioritise and track their implementation each month. At the end of the academic year, a reflective exercise will show the results they have achieved in bringing about concrete change in their teaching approaches.

An effective way to track successful implementation of new methods would be through teaching ‘mind maps’ that jot down what is usually done against the new tools that teachers have introduced. The real task would be to execute the change in an ongoing, sustainable way — and not as a one-off experiment. Most teachers who try out something new also inevitably tend to fall back on tried and tested ways and ‘give up’ before putting in hard work to produce different or improved results. Reflection on the change and its impact is as valuable as the change itself.

The old models of teaching are no longer sustainable.

The impact of embracing new ways of teaching is massive. Students start to respond with greater motivation, engage more readily with course content, and gradually learn to study more independently, thinking for themselves rather than relying on the teacher’s explanations. They develop what Carol Dweck introduced as the ‘growth mindset’ in 2006.

The idea of the growth mindset is a change in student belief that ability and intelligence are malleable and not fixed. They can grow to infinite possibilities if nurtured with motivation and the passion to learn, with practice, reinforcement and positive feedback. Tracking progress does not merely entail monitoring grades, but also the level of effort and involvement that a student demonstrates through the school term.

Any kind of change is hard; sustaining it is even harder. However, growth lies in transformation, not in resistance to change. With an information overload and technological integration in learning, teachers are now called to action more relentlessly than ever before. Upskilling their skills calls for much more subject expertise alongside digital capability. Upgrading teaching involves keeping up with what students already know. Often this may mean they are more digitally savvy than their teachers.

Change involves not just upgrading, but diversifying the strategies and activities used to engage students in learning. The 21st century teaching calls for curating lessons to offer students new challenges, enabling them to work in collaboration, discover, analyse and communicate ideas. Students enjoy agency no matter what their age, and will often have unique perspectives to share.

This would imply keeping explanations short and crisp, while allocating sufficient time for students to work and discuss, evaluate and apply what they are taught. Most lesson plans tend to focus on one stream of work and fail to offer a ‘package’ of structured learning that allows them to engage, explore and explain what they know.

Learners also need ongoing appreciation and acknowledgement of their efforts. When they get a chance to show­case their work or present ideas in class, the level of motivation improves dramatically. The te-acher’s work becomes easier when stude­n­­ts take ownership of their learning and real change begins to surface.

Exasperated teachers, working hard to nudge students to study more, complain that students have changed massively and that they do not follow instructions like the students of yesteryear. Students have changed, both in their ways and their expectations, and the old models of teaching are no longer sustainable. Traditional teaching is being applied to students who are programmed differently, respond to vastly different stimuli, and many teachers are not yet ready to adapt.

But they can meet their students at least halfway by adapting to change, however cautiously. Often, change can start by reflecting on simple questions — what will help my students thrive? What can I do to involve them in learning? The answers are not complex for those ready for change.

The writer is a teacher, educator, author and Fellow of the Higher Education Academy, UK. The views expressed are her own and do not reflect those of her employer.

neda.mulji@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, October 21st, 2024

A death foretold

In death, Yahya  Sinwar exposed many Israeli lies.

Zarrar Khuhro Published October 21, 2024

DAWN

LIKE his life, Yahya Sinwar’s death was an act of resistance against seemingly unsurmountable odds. Born in 1962, in a refugee camp in Khan Younis to which his family had fled after being forced from their home in Ashkelon amidst the murders and massacres of the Nakba, Sinwar joined Hamas soon after its formation in 1987 and rose to lead its internal security wing.

It was a position in which he excelled, rooting out spies and collaborators, whom he disposed of with often brutal efficiency. It is perhaps a testament to the efficacy of the systems he set up that, despite the devastation of Gaza and the desperation of its people, Israel was unable to uncover any meaningful intelligence on his movements, or the movements of any other prominent Hamas leader in the Gaza Strip, for an entire year. When they did kill Sinwar it was, as per Israel’s own account, quite by chance.

Arrested in 1982 and then in 1988, he was to spend 23 years in an Israeli jail before being released, along with 1,046 other Palestinian detainees, in exchange for the freedom of Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. It was likely that this experience provided at least part of the motivation for launching the Oct 7 attacks, in which some 250 Israelis were taken captive and moved to Gaza.

Prison also served as a training ground; years later Sinwar would remark to his supporters: “They wanted prison to be a grave for us, a mill to grind our will, determination and bodies … we turned the prison into sanctuaries of worship and academies for study.”

In death, Sinwar exposed many Israeli lies.

It was no idle boast: Sinwar spent his term studying Hebrew, a language he became fluent in, and also studying how Israeli security forces, and in particular the notorious internal security wing Shin Bet, worked. It was knowledge he was to put to deadly effect. On Israel’s hit list for years, Sinwar remained in the Gaza Strip, cementing his status as a fighter who remains with his people by posing in an armchair amidst the rubble of his house, which had been bombed in an attempt to assassinate him.

Ironically, the video of his last moments also shows him sitting in an armchair. Having engaged with, or been engaged by Israeli forces while moving above ground, Sinwar and his three bodyguards holed out in a building as Israeli forces approached. As per the Israeli account, Sinwar targeted the approaching troops with hand grenades, managing to seriously injure at least one of them. Unwilling to enter and engage, Israeli forces then called in a tank which fired at the building, seriously injuring Sinwar and shredding his right arm. Then they called in a drone strike. His bodyguards now dead, a critically injured Sinwar sat in an armchair with his face wrapped in a keffiyeh, as the Israeli drone video shows. With his one functioning arm, he threw a piece of wood at the approaching quadcopter in a last act of defiance, a singularly human act of resistance in the face of a tech-driven holocaust. Even then, it took a sniper shot at long range to finally kill him.

In death, he also exposed many Israeli lies: for over a year, Israeli media has dutifully reported every claim of Israeli intelligence as to Sinwar’s whereabouts as fact. We were told he had fled Gaza and was hiding in another country while his compatriots suffered. We were told that he was sheltering among Palestinian civilians in a refugee camp dressed as a woman, a fabrication that was also used to obliquely justify Israeli massacres. We were told that Israel had not targeted him yet because he was sheltering in a tunnel using Israeli hostages as human shie­lds while wearing a suicide vest.

Instead, Sinwar was found on the front lines just a few met­res away from the Israeli army’s operational area in Rafah, and by releasing the video of his final moments, Israel has done more to ensure that the legend of Sinwar survives than he could ever have imagined. Even those with Zionist sympathies have wondered why that decision was made, but to me it stems from the fundamental Israeli inability to understand the people they have been oppressing and decimating for nearly a century. If the Israeli intention was to show Sinwar’s helplessness and, by extension, the hopelessness of resistance, then they have achieved the exact opposite. If they thought that eliminating Sinwar would eliminate his movement, then that shows that they have not understood that resistance is not a function of leadership as much as it is a function of oppression; so long as the one exists, so too will the other.

As for Sinwar, this is the ending he wanted. In an interview, he once remarked “The greatest gift Israel can give me is to assassinate me … I prefer to die a martyr from an F-16 than to die of coronavirus or a stroke or a heart attack.”

Sinwar got what he desired, it remains to be seen if Israel will.

The writer is a journalist.
X: @zarrarkhuhro

Published in Dawn, October 21st, 2024

A tired superpower?

Woodward’s book reveals Biden’s advice was repeatedly ignored, yet US support for Israel remained firm

Maleeha Lodhi

Published October 21, 2024

DAWN

BOB Woodward writes the ultimate ‘insider’ accounts about American presidents, politics and foreign policy. He is one of the duo of journalists who exposed the Watergate scandal that led to president Richard Nixon’s downfall.

Woodward has long enjoyed unique access to America’s top political and military leaders. Which is why he is sometimes unflatteringly described as an ’“access journalist” who shows undue deference to his main, often anonymous sources.

His latest book, War, belongs to the same genre as earlier works and is based on scores of interviews offering insights into the highest levels of decision-making during Joe Biden’s presidency. What gives this book added significance is its publication on the eve of the American presidential election, as he draws comparisons between Donald Trump and Biden in how they dealt with international crises.

Woodward considers Trump as “the most reckless and impulsive president in American history”, who “is demonstrating the very same character as a presidential candidate in 2024”. He, therefore, deems Trump to be unfit for a second term in office. These views are no different from what Woodward previously wrote in his trilogy of books on the Trump presidency. The first two, titled Fear and Rage, were about the chaos in the Trump White House and depicted the former president as a self-obsessed, ill-informed and impetuous leader.

The principal focus of his new book is on how the Biden administration handled the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, although Woodward’s disclosures about Trump’s relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin — sending him Covid test kits when they were scarce at home — attracted greater pre-publication publicity for the book. War covers all these international engagements, but perhaps it is how the American exit from Afghanistan was botched up that might interest readers most in Pakistan.

For Biden, the 20-year US military presence in Afghanistan was “a classic case of mission creep” that he pledged in his election campaign to end. The mission had lost its purpose and direction and as vice president he warned president Barack Obama that he was being fed “bullshit” by military generals who were taking advantage of his inexperience. When Biden became president, he inherited the 2020 Doha agreement Trump concluded with the Taliban, which committed the US to withdraw from Afghanistan by May 2021.

Woodward’s book reveals Biden’s advice was repeatedly ignored, yet US support for Israel remained firm.

Three options were presented to Biden: stay on indefinitely, undertake a slower, “gated” withdrawal, or pull out quickly and safely. Like Trump, he wanted an expeditious out, and accordingly announced that in April 2021. Criticism followed from former military officials, and even ex-president George Bush. Biden remained undeterred. His administration, however, “failed to anticipate contingencies and plan for worst-case scenarios”, says Woodward. It was taken by surprise by how swiftly the country fell to the Taliban without a fight

Blaming the Afghan government and military for the debacle, Biden, however, stood by his decision while also passing the buck to Trump, saying he forged the original deal with the Taliban. None of this obscured the monumental intelligence failure that produced the chaotic exit, which had echoes of the US scramble from Vietnam. This inevitably damaged America’s global standing and credibility.

The chapters on the war in Gaza portray a frustrated US president, angry with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his constant lies about his intention to escalate the conflict, which Biden saw as inextricably linked to his political survival. “Defined by distrust”, their tense relationship is described in graphic detail. Woodward cites several occasions when Washington’s advice was willfully ignored, including on a ceasefire deal, Israel’s invasion of Rafah, siege of Gaza, air strikes on Beirut, and on avoiding civilian casualties. He quotes Biden as telling Netanyahu that “the perception of Israel around the world increasingly is that you’re a rogue state, a rogue actor”. He cites Biden’s frequent use of four-letter words for the Israeli leader.

Biden wanted to contain the war to Gaza and, according to Woodward, told Netanyahu that the US is “not on board” on any preemptive attack on Hezbollah. He also told him Washington would not participate in any Israeli offensive action against Iran. He was concerned that 45,000 US military personnel and contractors stationed across the Middle East would become targets of attack. The book details heated arguments between Biden and Netanyahu over humanitarian assistance for Gaza. The Israeli leader repeatedly responded to this by saying he will not allow “a drop or ounce to go into Gaza to help the people”. Netanyahu’s refusal to listen to Biden and unwillingness to provide urgent access for aid meant Washington failed to avert a humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza.

Despite their many disagreements on the conduct of the war, Biden remained steadfast in his support of Israel. Whatever Woodward’s explanation of his inability to prevent Israel from escalating and broadening the war, this failure was a reflection of Washington’s strategic compulsion to avoid a rupture with Tel Aviv as well as the limits of a tired superpower’s eroding leverage, with a manipulative Netanyahu getting the better of a lame-duck Biden.

The role of key Arab states is highlighted in anecdotes of several meetings. For example, King Abdullah of Jordan tells US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, “We want Israel to defeat Hamas.” Similarly, the UAE ruler conveys to the Americans that “Hamas must be eliminated”. Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman says to Blinken in discussions on a future Palestinian state “Do I want it? It doesn’t matter that much. Do I need it? Absolutely”. Significantly, though, he added he would never betray the Arab or Muslim world on this issue.

The war in Ukraine also receives detailed treatment. The most striking disclosure concerns US intelligence information in September 2022 that Putin was considering using tactical nuclear weapons, and efforts by the Biden national security team to stop him. Direct US warnings to Russian officials are claimed by the book to have averted the danger of nuclear escalation.

Whether or not one agrees with many of Woodward’s assessments and conclusions, this is a compelling, must-read book for its rich detail and insights into decision-making at the top echelons of the US government in times of war and crisis.

The writer is a former ambassador to the US, UK and UN.

Published in Dawn, October 21st, 2024

Greek Shipowners Make Big Bet on LNG Vessels

By Cyril Widdershoven - Oct 18, 2024

Veson Nautical’s latest report, VesselsValue, indicates that Greek shipowners have invested 2021 around $13.8 billion in 59 new-built LNG vessels.

The Veson Nautical report has identified a $4 billion investment in 41 LPG vessels, one of the most undervalued shipping classes in the world.

VesselsValue also reports that new-build prices have reached their highest level since the 2008 financial crisis.





Global LNG markets are poised for growth, with demand continuing to rise and Greek ownership expanding. According to a recent report by maritime consultancy Veson Nautical, VesselsValue, Greek shipowners invested approximately $13.8 billion in 59 newly built LNG vessels in 2021. Additionally, Greek owners have invested around $18 billion in new gas vessels, diversifying their fleets beyond traditional tanker, bulker, and container asset classes to include LNG and gas. The Veson Nautical report has identified a $4 billion investment in 41 LPG vessels, one of the most undervalued shipping classes in the world. LPG is still one of the main fuel drivers in the developing world. Since Greek owners have also invested $12.2 billion in 167 tanker vessels, $4.1 billion in 109 bulkers, and $3.1 billion in 39 containerships, the end of the “Onasis” Greek rule of shipping is far from over. As Dan Nash, director at Vessels Value, stated, “Greek shipowners have taken bold investment stances that could shape the future of global trade”. He also indicated that Greek shipowners see a major opportunity coming.

The report states that Piraeus-based Capital Ship Management is the largest investor at present, with a bet on 15 large LNG vessels, two very large ammonia carriers (VLAC), eight medium gas carriers (MGC), and four carbon dioxide (CO2) vessels for a combined spend of about $4.7 billion. Second place is Athens-based Maran Gas Maritime, spending around $3.3 billion, including 15 large LNG carriers. Third place is held by Athens-based Evalend Shipping, spending $3 billion on 12 very large gas carriers (VLGC), two MGCs, two VLACs, and six large LNG vessels.

VesselsValue also reports that new-build prices have reached their highest level since the 2008 financial crisis, with the most recent upward pressure starting in 2021. Due to the boom in orders, global shipyard capacity and construction periods are under major pressure.







At the same time, in its Q4 2024 forecast, VesselsValue reports that there is a mixed outlook across different vessel types until 2027. The consultancy indicates an upsurge globally in orders for Bulkers and Tankers to be expected, while demand for Containers and LNG/LPG vessels will decline. Geopolitical risks, such as the Houthi attacks in the Red Sea and Bab Al Mandeb Strait, are seen not only as risks but also as an opportunity overall for shipping. Increased geopolitical risks, especially in Middle East-North Africa, offer an upside potential. There are still some clouds on the horizon, such as the diffuse Chinese economy recovery, which is a major factor in international (maritime) trade, and still high interest rates in the OECD countries.

As tanker ordering activity continues at a relatively strong pace in 2024, some constraints are building up. VesselsValue stated that the delivery schedule for 2024 is low, but is expected to gain pace in 2025 and onwards. The total Tanker order book to fleet ratio, currently at 12%, has increased through 2023 and 2024.

Overall, current global market fundamentals, rerouting of maritime trade, and increased geopolitical instability don’t seem to be having a negative impact on maritime trade or investments. As seen by already major investment plans in ports and shipyards, especially by Arab parties, such as AD Ports and DP World, but also Saudi Arabia’s plans, the future looks bright. If new regions are also going to invest in shipyard capacity, especially UAE-Saudi Arabia, Egypt, or even North Sea littoral states, some of the building time pressure can be relieved. Extra competition is not only needed to thwart part of the almost cartel positions of Asian parties but also to increase availability for supply chain projects in energy and industry worldwide.

By Cyril Widdershoven for Oilprice.com

Russia’s Nuclear Energy Diplomacy, Explained

By RFE/RL staff - Oct 19, 2024

Kazakhstan's recent referendum approved the construction of a nuclear power plant, but the selection of the builder remains a complex geopolitical decision.

Russia's Rosatom is a leading contender, with a strong track record in building nuclear plants globally, but its involvement raises concerns about dependence and security risks.

Kazakhstan favors an international consortium to mitigate risks, but the feasibility and effectiveness of such an approach are uncertain.




With the result of Kazakhstan's controversial nuclear power referendum being a resounding "yes," attention now turns to which country will build the facility.

Kazakhstan's government has spoken in favor of an international consortium of nuclear energy companies taking up the task while noting that a final decision will not be made until next year.

But if Kazakhstan were to ignore Russia's Rosatom completely, it would be bucking a global trend.

Amid the war in Ukraine, and Moscow's increased diplomatic isolation, nuclear energy projects in foreign countries have become an even more important part of Russia's efforts to retain clout on the international stage.

Indeed, in a paper on Russian "nuclear energy diplomacy" published last year, scholars from the Norwegian Institute of International Affairs argued that nuclear energy could be "Russia's overlooked trump card in a decarbonizing world."

With the stakes high, the Kremlin will no doubt be expecting its energy-strapped partners in Central Asia to play ball, with Uzbekistan already signed up for a small Rosatom-built nuclear power plant and Kyrgyzstan mulling a facility that would be even smaller.

But at what cost -- financial or otherwise -- might Rosatom's growing outreach in the neighborhood come?

"Central Asia has a special place in Russian nuclear energy diplomacy because of the post-Soviet heritage, meaning that Rosatom's operations in the region are easier and smoother than elsewhere -- no language barrier, institutional and personal contacts going back to Soviet times," a co-author of the paper, Kacper Szulecki, told RFE/RL.

In this way "nuclear energy can be an element of [Russia's] maintaining visible economic and symbolic presence in the region," he said.

At the same time, nuclear power projects can create "hard dependencies" for host countries if their share of total power production becomes significant, while posing security risks that are unique to nuclear power, Szulecki argued.


"Some of the risks we examined [in the paper], like sabotage, are things which have a low likelihood of occurring, but potentially very destructive impacts," he said.

Globe-Trotting Rosatom

According to The World Nuclear Industry Status Report (WNISR) 2024, Rosatom "is the primary constructor and exporter of reactors, building 26 out of the 59 units under construction worldwide as of mid-2024."

At least 20 of those units are being built outside Russia, with Bangladesh, China, Egypt, India, and Turkey among the clients.

And while nuclear power as a whole has lost its share of global power production since the 2022 Fukushima accident, Russia remains "unashamedly nuclear" in the words of the World Nuclear Association, an advocate for the global industry, prioritizing new reactors over renewables for the most part.


It's not hard to see why.

The bills for nuclear power stations are large and seemingly growing.

The 4.8 gigawatt (GW) Akkuyu nuclear power plant that Rosatom began building in Turkey's Mersin Province in 2018 is commonly referred to in the media as a $20 billion facility.

But as recently as June, Rosatom Director-General Aleksei Likhachev put the price of the plant that will supply around 10 percent of Turkey's total power at $24 billion-$25 billion.

The 2.2 GW facility in Bangladesh is priced at $12.65 billion, with the vast majority of the financing coming via a Russian loan. The agreement for that facility was reached in 2011, with construction only beginning in 2017.

And Kazakh Deputy Prime Minister Roman Sklyar acknowledged -- once the results of the referendum were already in -- that the $10 billion to $12 billion price tag for the model his government is committing to might rise by as much as 50 percent over the next decade with inflation.

While Rosatom's aggressive search for clients is ongoing, it has also lost some as a result of the war.

In 2022, Finnish-led consortium Fennovoima announced that it was pulling out of its planned reactor project with the company, citing delays and increased risks due to the war in Ukraine.

Rosatom has not been directly targeted with sanctions, but some of its supply chains have been affected, delaying projects.

Those risks are seemingly on the minds of policymakers in Central Asia, too.


Tellingly, Skylar said Kazakhstan would include a "sanctions clause" in any agreement for the nuclear power plant, without naming Russia specifically.

Uzbekistan, meanwhile, has reined in its nuclear vision.

In 2018, when Russian President Vladimir Putin paid a visit to Tashkent, the two countries broke ground on building a nuclear facility with a projected 2.4 GW capacity, which would have accounted for around one-fifth of Uzbekistan's energy needs. It was to cost $11 billion.

The needle on that project never really moved after that, and when Putin and his counterpart Shavkat Mirziyoev confirmed a fresh deal for Rosatom to build a nuclear facility in the country of 35 million people earlier this year, it was for a facility that will feature six nuclear reactors with capacities of just 55 megawatts (MW) each.

Talking Consortiums

Central Asian neighbor Kyrgyzstan said in 2023 that it was also in talks with Rosatom for a relatively small nuclear facility with a reported 110 MW capacity.

But in May, Deputy Energy Minister Taalaibek Baygaziev said that just preparing specialists and laying the ground for such a project would take a full decade. By contrast, Rosatom is expected to complete its first foreign foray into wind power -- a 100-MW wind farm in Kyrgyzstan's Issyk-Kul Province -- in the next two years.

While power deficits in Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan are more severe, they are also becoming a problem in Kazakhstan, where authorities are adamant that nuclear energy is a big part of the solution.

This week, after the results of a tightly managed October 6 plebiscite showed that more than 70 percent of voters had backed a "yes" vote on the construction of a nuclear power plant, officials from President Qasym-Zhomart Toqaev downward reiterated their preference for an "international consortium" to build the plant.

Sklyar said that such a consortium would consist of "no more than five countries," a figure that presumably takes in China, France, Russia, and South Korea -- the countries that have already registered their interest in building the facility -- as well as Kazakhstan itself.

This idea of an international consortium is in keeping with Kazakhstan's desire to find common ground for partner countries amid sky-high geopolitical tensions.

But even ignoring the complications of getting rivals to work together, that isn't really how nuclear power plants get built, says Mycle Schneider, coordinator and publisher of the 2024 WNISR survey of the industry.

"Yes, nuclear power projects are international and often hundreds of companies can be involved," Schneider told RFE/RL.

"But the main question is always, ‘Who will be the responsible builder that takes on the investment risk?' Five companies with a 20 percent share each of the project? That doesn't happen."

And of those companies orbiting the project -- China's CNNC, France's EDF, South Korea's KEPCO, and Rosatom, "Rosatom is the only one that has been really successful winning foreign contracts to build reactors lately," the industry expert noted.

In a Kazakh government FAQ on the referendum, the government reassured those fearful that the facility might be manipulated by a foreign power. which could wield influence over the country, that the issue was "purely commercial, not political."

"The selected company or group of companies will only be involved in the construction -- not the operation -- of the station," officials insisted.

Again, Schneider argues it's not that simple.

"First, the acquisition of a nuclear power plant is a political issue in itself. Secondly, every power reactor design is highly specific and cannot be operated without technical assistance from the provider," Schneider told RFE/RL. "Operators are even trained for individual reactor models and cannot simply move from one to another. Training of autonomous operators takes years."

By RFE/RL

Aramco CEO Calls for Energy Transition Reset in Developing World

By Irina Slav - Oct 21, 2024



Saudi Aramco’s chief executive Amin Nasser has called for what he dubbed a reset in the transition plans for developing countries, citing strong projected growth in oil demand for the Global South.

Developing economies are growing and living standards are rising, Nasser said today at the Singapore International Energy Week, as cited by Reuters. This growth is driving higher oil demand, he added, noting this demand growth would extend over a long time. Even when growth slows down and eventually stops, Nasser added, demand for oil will remain at a plateau for another extended period.

“If so, more than 100 million barrels per day would realistically still be required by 2050,” Aramco’s chief executive said, adding that “This is a stark contrast with those predicting that oil will, or must, fall to just 25 million barrels per day by then. Being short 75 million barrels every day would be devastating for energy security and affordability.”

Because of all this, developing countries should decide on the best energy mix for themselves, Nasser suggested, as well as on a transition pace that is right for them. “Our main focus should be on the levers available now,” the executive said.

Nasser’s comments come on the heels of a new transition cost estimate for the Asia Pacific by BloombergNEF, which said last week that the region needs to triple what it is already spending on the transition to $2.3 trillion by 2030 in order to stay on course for meeting the Paris Agreement targets.

According to Nasser, Asia and other developing nations may need investments of up to $6 trillion annually to advance the transition. Meanwhile, Asia relies on hydrocarbons for 84% of its energy demand, Nasser said in its comments today. New sources of energy are covering new demand rather than displacing conventional sources of energy, he noted.

By Irina Slav for Oilprice.com

The UAE’s Renewable Energy Giant Plans Massive Global Expansion

By Tsvetana Paraskova - Oct 21, 2024, 5:01 AM CDT



Masdar, the renewables energy giant of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), wants to become one of the world’s biggest renewable companies targeting 100 gigawatts (GW) of solar and wind assets by 2030, CEO Mohamed Jameel Al Ramahi told the Financial Times in an interview published on Monday.

Masdar sees having up to a 35% market share of the renewables power capacity in the Middle East by the end of the decade, 20% of Europe’s clean energy capacity, and up to 25% of the U.S. capacity, Al Ramahi told FT.

Asia will also be a significant part of Masdar’s portfolio, the executive added.

The company’s shareholders are Abu Dhabi’s oil giant ADNOC, Abu Dhabi’s sovereign investment company Mubadala, and state utility giant TAQA.

Masdar is on an investment spree to buy renewable assets worldwide, and this spending drive will continue, Al Ramahi told FT.

Last month, Masdar said it would buy renewable power developer Saeta Yield from Brookfield in a deal valuing the target company at $1.4 billion. Saeta Yield develops, owns, and operates renewable power assets in Spain and Portugal.

The deal would be one of the biggest renewable energy transactions in Spain, one of Europe’s top markets for renewables.

Earlier this year, Masdar also announced an agreement with Spain’s power firm Endesa to become a partner for 2.5 GW of renewable energy assets in Spain.

Masdar also signed in June a $3.5 billion (3.2 billion euro) deal to buy Greece’s Terna Energy in the largest ever energy transaction on the Athens Stock Exchange, and one of largest in the EU renewables industry.

In early October, the UAE firm closed the acquisition of a 50% stake in Terra-Gen Power Holdings II, one of the largest independent renewable energy producers in the United States.

In another strategic market, Masdar is advancing, in partnership with RWE, the Dogger Bank South offshore wind project in the UK, part of the larger Dogger Bank, which will be the world’s biggest offshore wind farm when completed.

By Tsvetana Paraskova for Oilprice.com