Showing posts sorted by date for query AFRICA. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query AFRICA. Sort by relevance Show all posts

Wednesday, July 15, 2026

Calls Grow to Boycott ‘The Odyssey,’ Filmed in Moroccan-Occupied Western Sahara

One critic noted that Sahrawis “are beaten, arbitrarily arrested, and have their equipment confiscated for trying to make their own films of life under occupation.”


People carry a banner reading, “Trump, You Asshole, the Sahara Isn’t Yours” during a November 15, 2025 demonstration in Madrid against Morocco’s illegal occupation of Western Sahara and Western complicity.
(Photo by Marcos del Mazo/LightRocket via Getty Images)


Brett Wilkins
Jul 15, 2026
COMMON DREAMS


Sahrawi activists and filmmakers are leading renewed calls to boycott the big-screen adaptation of Homer’s ancient Greek epic The Odyssey over filmmaker Christopher Nolan’s decision to shoot the film in the Western Sahara, whose people have suffered Moroccan occupation for over half a century.

“It is deeply disturbing that while Sahrawi journalists are imprisoned for exposing abuses, an international film production can use our homeland as a cinematic backdrop without addressing the reality of the occupation,” Sahrawi journalist and filmmaker Mamine Hachimi told Middle East Eye (MEE) in an interview published on Wednesday.

Hachimi, who co-directed the short documentary Three Stolen Cameras about the oppression of people who document human rights crimes committed by Moroccan occupiers, told MEE’s Alex MacDonald that calls to boycott The Odyssey—which was filmed in the Western Saharan city of Dakhla and opens on Friday—“is not a campaign against cinema or artistic freedom, it is a call for ethical responsibility.”

“Two of my colleagues, Abdallah Lhafaouni, who is serving a life sentence, and Bachir Khadda, who is serving a 20-year sentence, are political prisoners simply because they documented human rights violations in occupied Western Sahara,” Hachimi said.



Another Sahrawi filmmaker, Mohamedsalem Werad, told MEE that “choosing to film in occupied Western Sahara was not a politically neutral production decision—it meant operating with the permission of the occupying power in a territory where the Sahrawi people have long been denied the opportunity to exercise their right to self-determination.”

“A boycott sends a clear message that filmmakers cannot expect audiences to overlook decisions that risk legitimizing an occupation,” he added.

Sarah Yerkes, a senior fellow in the Middle East Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote last week that The Odyssey “has a colonialism problem.”

“For Morocco, the territories that make up Western Sahara are referred to as the ‘southern provinces’ and are an indisputable part of the kingdom,” Yerkes noted. “But... Dakhla is part of what is considered the occupied and non-self-governing Western Sahara under existing international law.”

“The Sahrawi people, who are indigenous to the region and currently have no meaningful self-determination, have not consented to the film’s production—and the Moroccan government is reaping the rewards at their expense,” she added.



The renewed calls to boycott The Odyssey follow last year’s appeal, led by the Western Sahara International Film Festival and signed by hundreds of artists, journalists, activists, and other human rights defenders, urging Nolan, Universal Pictures, and producers of the film “to break their silence and cease to be accomplices to Morocco’s 50-year illegal occupation.”

The government of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, which claims sovereignty over Western Sahara but is not recognized by the United Nations, has also condemned what it called “an attempt to film a cinematic work in occupied Dakhla, considering it a violation of international legitimacy and the ethics of cultural and artistic work.”

Morocco has occupied Western Sahara since 1975, when Spanish forces withdrew from their former colony in the dying days of longtime dictator Francisco Franco’s regime. Moroccan warplanes bombed Sahrawis, many of whom fled into neighboring Algeria as the government under King Hassan II orchestrated a “Green March” of hundreds of thousands of Moroccan civilians into the phosphate- and fishery-rich territory.

Western Sahara is today known among locals and human rights advocates as “Africa’s last colony.” Moroccan forces have brutally oppressed the Sahrawi people under their rule, severely restricting freedom of expression, movement, association, and the press, and utilizing arbitrary arrest and torture as tools of repression, according to human rights groups.

Moroccan occupation forces also built a 1,700-mile mostly sand wall to keep Algerian-backed Sahrawi militants led by the Polisario Front out of the territory, while denying people inside their occupied homeland a United Nations-backed referendum they’ve been awaiting for decades.

During his first term, US President Donald Trump recognized Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, essentially in exchange for Morocco’s decision to normalize relations with Israel under the Abraham Accords.


Social media decries colonial plunder after Zendaya wears ancient Iranian earrings to promote The Odyssey

The earrings were made from 3,000-year-old medallions.



Images Staff
15 Jul, 2026
DAWN

The Odyssey is an ancient text, believed to have been first composed around 2,800 years ago, but do you know what’s even older than that? The earrings American actor Zendaya wore to promote the movie at a photo-call in London on July 5.

The pieces were made from a pair of gold medallions discovered in Iran in 1947, which are estimated to be 3,000 years old. They were part of the Ziwiye hoard, a large collection of jewellery, ceramics and other artefacts, parts of which are housed in major museums across the globe.

As with anything over a century old from the region, quite a few questions arose.

Days after the pictures were first shared, people wanted to know how the pieces had made it to a private collection in London. Were they taken out of Iran in a less-than-proper way? Did the people whose culture they represented agree with how they were being used?

And perhaps most importantly, wasn’t it a bit on the nose for Zendaya to be using Iranian cultural heritage to promote an American film about a Greek legend at a time when the US and Iran were on opposite ends of the battlefield?

Some users on X said Zendaya was a repeat offender when it came to insensitivity in fashion after her outfit for another event promoting the film — a white gown from Italian fashion house Schiaparelli — was flown to London via private jet right after it had been shown on the runway at Paris Fashion Week.

Unfortunately, Zendaya is not the first celebrity to appropriate jewellery that mysteriously wound up in Western hands. In January, Margot Robbie promoted her film Wuthering Heights in Los Angeles while wearing the Taj Mahal diamond around her neck.

The diamond had little to do with the film, or its 18th-century setting, but it had everything to do with Mughal emperor Shah Jahan, who had it made for his wife Nur Jahan.

That’s not even the worst case, which might be Cartier’s lending decisions surrounding the Patiala necklace, originally belonging to Maharaja Bhupinder Singh.

As per a report from India Today, the French jewellery house let Emma Chamberlain wear a part of the ornate necklace to the 2022 Met Gala, but refused a request from Diljit Dosanjh to wear it in 2026.

It’s bad enough that they didn’t let an Indian celebrity wear an Indian necklace, but it gets even worse when you realise Dosanjh’s Met Gala look was inspired by the Maharaja who owned it.


Zendaya wearing stolen ancient artifacts from a country and region that's being bombed, where women and girls are being murdered and disabled by the gov't and military of her country, at a film premiere is vile and tasteless. Zendaya, Law, and the thief who made these are gross.
os brincos lindos que a Zendaya usou tem 3 MIL anos e são do Irã e de uma coleção super rara… quem lembra do surto no MetGala quando a Kim usou um arquivo da Marilyn Monroe? acho que agora a moda dos ícones fashions vai ser antiguidades mesmo

 

‘Energy’, the New Currency of Power: Who’ll Shape Next Global Order?


Anusreeta Dutta |






The battle for energy supremacy is entering a new phase, and may shape the international order as deeply as oil did in the last century.

The rise and fall of great powers in history has been partly due to controlling energy. Coal was the bedrock of Britain's industrial supremacy. In the 20th century, the United States became a superpower because of its vast oil reserves, technological superiority, and control of world energy markets. As the world depended on their hydrocarbons, oil-rich Gulf monarchies became geopolitical heavyweights. But today the concept of energy power is being transformed by global energy transition.

Decades from now, countries with the biggest oil or gas reserves won’t be in charge. Instead, those countries that dominate the entire energy ecosystem – critical minerals, renewable energy technology, power grids, battery manufacturing, green hydrogen, and the supply chains that bind them – will gain more geopolitical clout. The battle for energy supremacy is entering a new phase, and may shape the international order as deeply as oil did in the last century.

From Oil Politics to Energy Politics

The 20th century was a story of fossil fuels. Oil access was often a motivating factor behind wars, alliances and diplomatic strategies. The 1973 oil embargo illustrated the power of energy-exporting countries to affect the world economy. Hydrocarbons also contributed to military conflicts in West Asia, maritime security in the Persian Gulf and the formation of strategic petroleum reserves. But today the equation is changing.

Climate change, the progress of technology and falling costs of renewable energy are all reducing our reliance on fossil fuels. Solar and wind are now some of the cheapest ways to make electricity in much of the world. Electric vehicles are changing the future of transportation. Governments are investing heavily in hydrogen and battery storage and smart power systems. Energy security is not only about oil imports, it is also about resilient, affordable and low-carbon energy systems. The change doesn’t end geopolitics. It changes it.

Critical Minerals: A New Strategic Resource

Minerals such as lithium, cobalt, nickel, graphite, copper and rare earth elements are used for making solar panels, wind turbines, electric vehicles and batteries. These resources are sought after by governments as they try to reduce their carbon footprint. This has created a new global contest for mining rights, processing capacity and supply chains. China already controls processing and refining of several critical minerals. It is also a major player in manufacturing batteries and dominates a large part of the global supply chain for solar panels. That manufacturing edge gives Beijing strategic power well beyond ownership of resources.

At the same time, countries like the United States, India, Australia, Japan and the European Union are seeking to diversify supply chains through new mining agreements and industrial regulations. Many of these mineral riches are found in Africa and Latin America, which have become more important as geopolitical battlegrounds. So, the new energy race is not simply about who controls the resources, but who controls the companies that turn resources into technology.

Electricity is Becoming a Strategic Infrastructure

Renewable energy does not depend on oil but on the infrastructure that connects producers and consumers in real time. The exchange of electricity across borders is booming in Europe, South Asia and parts of Africa. High-voltage transmission lines allow countries to share electricity generated by solar, wind and hydropower, while improving system stability and reducing costs. The growing interconnection is giving rise to new forms of diplomacy. Developing regional power markets earns countries economic influence through long-term infrastructure deals, not just resource exports.

The energy link can promote regional integration even with weak political cooperation, as witnessed in India’s trade in electricity with Nepal, Bhutan and Bangladesh. Power grids could be as strategic as pipelines one day. Technology will select the winners.

Geopolitical Power is no Longer Guaranteed by Natural Resources

The Democratic Republic of Congo has the world’s largest reserves of cobalt but reaps only a fraction of the economic value because most processing is done outside its borders. Likewise, lithium-rich nations are increasingly focusing on domestic refining sectors rather than exporting raw materials. Technology is the most valuable thing of today. Battery manufacturing, hydrogen electrolyzers, advanced semiconductors, smart grids, artificial intelligence for energy management and clean-energy innovation are building the foundation for economic competitiveness.

The countries that are leading in these technologies will set global standards, attract investment and influence global marketplaces.

Climate Policy is Re-Shaping Geopolitics.

Governments are increasingly coming to see climate policy as industrial policy. The US has deployed significant domestic clean energy manufacturing incentives. The European Union is bringing in carbon border controls and green industrial plans to improve its competitiveness. China continues to invest heavily in the renewable energy value chain and is also increasing its international energy investments.

Developing countries have a special problem. Several people have large quantities of renewable resources but do not have the financial and technological capacity to use them properly. They risk falling back into exporting raw materials and importing expensive technologies without investing in local manufacturing.

So the energy transition raises major questions of equity, development and technological sovereignty.

India’s Opportunities

India has a special place in this changing world. It has grand aspirations for one of the fastest growing electricity markets in the world, renewable energy, and is ramping up its investment in green hydrogen, battery development and domestic manufacturing. Attempts to broaden critical mineral partnerships with countries like Australia and Argentina reflect an increasing awareness that resource security must be paired with industrial development. However, substantial obstacles remain.

India still imports a lot of oil, gas, solar panels and parts for batteries. The ability to develop domestic manufacturing, invest in R&D, modernise electrical infrastructure and deepen regional energy cooperation will determine whether India will be a clean-energy leader or a consumer of foreign technology.

A New Definition for Power

The 21st century will be no world of energy-rich nations. It will go to those who can combine natural resources, technology, manufacturing, finance, infrastructure and diplomacy. Control of power grids may be as important as control of oil fields. Battery plants are as strategically important as refineries. The processing facilities for critical minerals may be more geopolitically important than the mines. The emerging global economy is increasingly organised around energy.

Countries that embrace this transition and invest appropriately will not only shape the future of energy, but the global balance of power as well. The contest is already in progress. This is no longer just a competition for petroleum, but a struggle for the architecture of the international order of the 21st century.

The writer is a columnist and climate researcher with experience in political research analysis, ESG research and energy policy. The views are personal.

Sen. Graham’s Legacy: He Helped Israel Get Away With Genocide

Lindsey Graham is part of the answer to the question of how a genocide could be pursued in plain sight with impunity.


US Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) speaks during a press conference on August 28, 2025 in Tel Aviv, Israel.
(Photo by Amir Levy/Getty Images)

Juan Cole
Jul 15, 2026
Informed Comment

The sudden death of South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, 71, has been greeted with the full spectrum of reactions. Many of them were personal in character. I never met or testified before Sen. Graham, and I’m not under the illusion that the persona politicians project on television gives much insight into them as persons. This maxim is especially true for a politician, who typically tacks with the wind, as Graham often did. Nor is my interest here personal. People depict him as a nice guy to colleagues who was capable of praising rivals such as Joe Biden. That sort of senatorial bonhomie is irrelevant to the issue I want to address.

Genocides in the past 50 years have not always been easy to recognize in real time. The Khmer Rouge polished off a fifth of Cambodia’s population, but isolated journalistic reports of what was going on were dismissed in Washington. Likewise, the Clinton administration was slow to understand the mass killings in Rwanda.

It was not until April 23, 2005, that the first video was successfully posted to the World Wide Web. It was that breakthrough that made the Gaza genocide that began in October 2023 the first televised such mass atrocity. The Israeli policy of systematic killing of innocent noncombatants was live-streamed on smartphones on a daily basis throughout the world. There was no doubt about what we were seeing.

And yet, the Israeli leadership has suffered almost no repercussions for having disregarded the value of civilian life, adopting a monstrous Rules of Engagement allowing for as many as a hundred women, children, and noncombatant men to be killed for each militant targeted. NATO has ceased joint military exercises with Israel because its army violated its RoE so egregiously.

We have to revise the old saying. If you have neither the law nor the facts on your side, pound racist superiority and inherent lack of accountability.

Lindsey Graham is part of the answer to the question of how a genocide could be pursued in plain sight with impunity.

When the prosecutor for the International Criminal Court, Karim Khan, prepared in April 2024 to apply for arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity, former Prime Minister David Cameron shouted angrily at him that Britain would withdraw from and defund the ICC if the indictment went forward. Cameron was not in office at that time, and may have been used by the Tory government to express its displeasure without intervening officially. Labour promised to do better when it came back to power. It didn’t.

There is an old adage among lawyers: “If you have the facts on your side, pound the facts. If you have the law on your side, pound the law. If you have neither, pound the table.”

Israel’s lawyers, like Cameron and the Conservative Party in general, had neither the facts nor the law on their side, so they pounded the table. In fact, they threatened to dismantle the judge’s bench, strip his clothing off, and shoot him in the head.

Sen. Graham then joined a conference call with Khan in April, 2024, in which he lambasted the prosecutor, saying that ICC indictments are for “Africa and thugs like Putin,” not for the United States and its allies such as Israel.

If Khan’s report of this conversation is correct, it casts the late senator in an extremely poor light. It is hard to see the reference to Africa as anything but racism.

South Carolina had for centuries had one law for white people and another one for African Americans, who were kidnapped in Africa and brought to the lowcountry. Until 1863 they were held as chattel, property rather than persons. After a brief period of emancipation, they were gradually denied the right to vote or hold office, until the mid-1960s Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights Act. The point of the Trump administration, of which Graham became a pillar, is to repeal those laws and to again disenfranchise African Americans, with outrageous racial gerrymanders and measures such as limiting the number of polling stations in heavily African American districts.

While it is controversial whether Graham was personally a racist, what he said about the ICC being for Africans was certainly a racist comment, and it unfortunately replicated the long history of white sentiment in South Carolina that some laws do not pertain to white people, which is a way of saying that whites have impunity. He clearly coded Israelis as “white.” Such categorizations are worthless and arbitrary, however. Whiteness has no stable meaning. Most Israelis couldn’t have gotten served at a diner in South Carolina in the 1950s, though. What is important is that Graham so categorized them, and the significance he attached to that categorization.

That he threw Putin (and who could be more pasty?) into the mix might tell against this analysis. Yet obviously even under slavery and Jim Crow there were white criminals who harmed propertied white gentry and who did not share in impunity as a result. An example was Ian Gale, the cat burglar who robbed a hundred homes of valuables totaling as much as half a million dollars. Putin became a “thug” by attacking other white people in Ukraine, and so deserves to be dealt with as though he were an African.

It is still a racist comment.

Graham’s angry attack on Khan showed the Nixonian logic of genocide denial. It isn’t a crime if the United States or Israel does it.

Ironically, Graham was a law school graduate and served in the US Air Force Judge Advocate General’s (JAG) Corps for more than 30 years while in the Air National Guard and Reserves. He rose to hold the rank of colonel.

The JAG Corps of the Air Force admitted in 2020, “The statistics show that black male Airmen under the age of 25 and with less than 5 years of service receive NJP [nonjudicial punishment] and courts-martial actions at a higher rate than similarly situated white male Airmen.”

You give the white guy a break but throw the book at the Black guy. That was how Graham’s second institution often behaved during the decades he served in it. While for some JAG officers, this outcome may have resulted from an unconscious prejudice, Sen. Graham made his invidious view explicit in the conference call with Khan.

He also once said that it would be “terrible” if he took a DNA test and it showed he had Iranian ancestry. In retrospect I think he may have meant that such a bloodline might have made him partially brown and so would have denied him the benefits of being above the law enjoyed by white people. (Persian is an Indo-European language and Iran comes from the same root as “Aryan,” and a lot of Iranian Americans identify as white, but Graham was too incurious to have known all that.)

We have to revise the old saying. If you have neither the law nor the facts on your side, pound racist superiority and inherent lack of accountability.

And that is how Graham, in his guise as master prestidigitator, made the elephant of genocide disappear.


© 2023 Juan Cole


Juan Cole

Juan Cole teaches Middle Eastern and South Asian history at the University of Michigan. His newest book, "Muhammad: Prophet of Peace Amid the Clash of Empires" was published in 2020. He is also the author of "The New Arabs: How the Millennial Generation Is Changing the Middle East" (2015) and "Napoleon's Egypt: Invading the Middle East" (2008). He has appeared widely on television, radio, and on op-ed pages as a commentator on Middle East affairs, and has a regular column at Salon.com. He has written, edited, or translated 14 books and has authored 60 journal articles.
Full Bio >




 

‘AI sovereignty doesn’t mean doing it alone,’ says Microsoft's AI responsibility chief

ILE - The Microsoft company logo is displayed at their offices in Sydney, Australia, on Wednesday, Feb. 3, 2021.
Copyright AP Photo/Rick Rycroft, File


By Pascale Davies
Published on

Microsoft's chief AI responsibility officer, Natasha Crampton, tells Euronews about data centres, bridging the digital divide and her definition of AI sovereignty.

The digital divide in artificial intelligence adoption between the Global North and Global South is widening, Microsoft’s chief responsible AI officer told Euronews Next.

“We cannot let the digital divide become an even greater AI divide,” warned Natasha Crampton, who is also a former member of the UN's High-Level Advisory Body on AI.

Speaking on the sidelines of last week’s UN AI for Good Summit in Geneva, she laid out a vision for bridging the gap.

Calls for AI sovereignty have swept the floors of tech conferences, particularly since the Trump administration forced Anthropic to exclude non-US citizens from using its most powerful AI models, Mythos and Fable, a month ago. The ban has since been partially reversed.

But for Crampton, AI sovereignty does not merely mean “local solutions in opposition to globally provided technologies”.

Natasha Crampton, Microsoft’s chief responsible AI officer
Natasha Crampton, Microsoft’s chief responsible AI officer Microsoft

Instead, she said, “It’s about making sure that local impact, local cultures, values, and norms are prioritised in these systems, while taking advantage of global technology where possible."

To bridge the digital gap, she pointed to multilingual initiatives, such as the Lingua project in Europe, which has since expanded to Africa in partnership with the Gates Foundation. LINGUA Africa is a joint effort between Microsoft's AI for Good Lab, the Gates Foundation, Google.org and the Masakhane African Languages Hub.

The project aims to collect local-language data so foundational AI models can comprehend idiomatic phrasing and cultural nuances, ensuring communities have the autonomy and technical skills to control their own AI-driven futures.

Crampton also highlighted the importance of connecting to the private sector and government to ensure a safer AI that reaches everyone. The UN held its first Global Dialogue on AI Governance in early July, which aims to ensure that governance reflects the priorities of all nations and that the benefits of AI are shared by all.

“One really important thing to bed down in the course of the next year is really the connective tissue between these different mechanisms,” she said, referring to the new UN mechanisms, the dialogue on AI and the panel.

“Creating this connectivity between the different pieces of this infrastructure and understanding what everyone's unique role is so that we can make faster progress that's not sort of duplicative or redundant is, I think, one key objective for the year ahead,” she said.

One of the key examples of this connectivity is the “digital emblem,” a partnership between Microsoft, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and the International Telecommunications Union, a UN agency.

The emblem aims to work as a legal shield to protect hospitals and aid workers from cyberattacks, as communication tools, logistics platforms, patient care systems and cloud and data centre infrastructure are increasingly under attack.

Microsoft is calling on governments to back the emblem in policy, on humanitarian and medical organisations to help shape its implementation against the operational reality, and on fellow technology companies to help build it into the tools and workflows defenders already use.

‘Being a good neighbour’

Addressing growing public backlash over the environmental and economic footprint of AI infrastructure, Crampton emphasised that Microsoft is shifting toward a "community-first" approach.

“We want to be good neighbours. We want to be good members of the community when we're building this infrastructure, and so we have been taking steps ahead of many other companies actually to offer a community-first set of commitments,” she said.

Rather than demanding traditional corporate tax breaks to build massive data centers, Microsoft is actively working to expand local tax bases to fund public services such as schools and infrastructure.

Crampton also said that the company is tightly managing resource consumption to prevent its heavy computing demands from driving up local household electricity rates or draining regional water supplies, utilising advanced technology such as closed-loop cooling systems.

What is Europe getting right?

As for Europe, she pointed to the European AI Office's efforts to connect with counterparts abroad, including AI safety and testing institutes in the United States, United Kingdom and Canada.

That kind of cross-border coordination, she highlighted, is essential given how quickly the science of AI testing and evaluation is evolving.

She also urged humility from regulators everywhere, noting that rules written a few years ago based on the best available information may need to adapt as the technology and understanding of its risks change.

Reducing the lag between what society expects, where the technology stands, and where regulation actually sits, she said, should be a shared priority.

“I do think that type of international connectivity, which I do see the AI office really investing in, is a really important thing to do because while we are rapidly maturing, the state of the art on testing science, having that international signal and being prepared to sort of mature an approach, given new information, given new techniques, is really important,” she said.

But she also urged flexibility from regulators, noting that rules written a few years ago based on the best available information may need to adapt as the technology and understanding of its risks change.

“We need regulatory regimes to adapt alongside and with that change and ideally reduce the lag that we sometimes see between what society expects of regulators, where the technology is at and where the regulation is sitting,” she said.