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

Saturday, July 25, 2026

World Nuclear News


 IAEA's non-proliferation safeguards and industry's role


Friday, 24 July 2026

This year the International Atomic Energy Agency's Symposium on International Safeguards will have its own dedicated evening to showcase how the nuclear industry works with IAEA Safeguards. There will also be a training day on the application of safeguards to new nuclear reactor designs and technologies, writes Kristine Madden, IAEA Safeguards Evaluator.
 
(Image: IAEA)

What are nuclear safeguards?

Nuclear safeguards are technical measures applied to verify that nuclear material in peaceful activities is not diverted to nuclear weapons. Implemented in 192 States, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards are an essential component of the international nuclear non-proliferation regime. Here, the nuclear industry plays an important role. Through building safeguards considerations into nuclear facility designs, industry can support effective and efficient verification by IAEA safeguards inspectors.

Nuclear safeguards must remain at the cutting edge of technological developments, especially amid the rapid expansion of the nuclear industry, the emergence of novel reactor designs and a wave of new applications for nuclear technology. These place fresh demands on nuclear verification. To ensure that IAEA safeguards continue to be effective and efficiently implemented, cooperation with industry and regulators is essential.

'Fostering open exchange'

Against that backdrop, the IAEA Symposium on International Safeguards is making innovation and cooperation with industry a defining theme. Meeting under the title 'Innovation and Resilience in a Changing World - Safeguards as a Shared Responsibility', the Symposium will bring policymakers, regulators, industry and IAEA experts together to address opportunities and challenges in nuclear verification.

Massimo Aparo, IAEA Deputy Director General and Head of the Department of Safeguards, says this year's Safeguards Symposium is taking place at a time when the operating environment is more complex, technologically demanding and financially strained than ever before. "By fostering open exchange, the Symposium provides opportunities for the Department and our stakeholders to identify areas where collaboration can be expanded to ensure that nuclear verification remains robust for years to come."

Held every four years, the Symposium generates ideas for actions, and reviews progress made since its last edition. The Symposium in 2022 welcomed nearly 1,000 participants from 124 countries. 

This year's programme includes an Industry Night, the dedicated evening event where industry stakeholders can present technologies, showcase research and engage with the global safeguards community. Industry stakeholders are invited to exhibit their services and products, and can reserve exhibition space until 15 August.

"As nuclear energy expands around the world, trust and cooperation will be fundamental to the success of the global nuclear industry," said Sama Bilbao y León, Director General of World Nuclear Association.

"IAEA Safeguards provide international trust and give governments, investors and communities confidence that nuclear materials are being used only for peaceful purposes. As our industry expands into new countries, new markets and new applications, and develops new technologies, it is essential that professionals across the nuclear sector understand the role of safeguards and work together to implement them effectively to reinforce both non proliferation objectives and deployment realities. The Symposium is a confidence-building and stabilising forum that allows the IAEA, industry, and relevant stakeholders to strengthen their mutual understanding and collaboration to promote effective and efficient safeguards implementation in support of the expected growth of peaceful nuclear activities globally."

The Symposium will also feature a dedicated training day, giving industry professionals and representatives from newcomer countries an opportunity to deepen their understanding of safeguards requirements and meet IAEA experts - and provide engineers, designers and project managers with practical insights into applying safeguards requirements to current and next-generation reactor designs and technologies.

Linked to this will be the central focus on 'Safeguards by Design', which provides guidance to State authorities, designers, equipment providers and prospective purchasers on the importance of taking international safeguards into account when designing a nuclear facility or process. It is applicable to all aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle, from initial planning and design through construction, operation, waste management and decommissioning.

Safeguards by Design has several advantages for both the industry and the IAEA. It enables informed design choices for effective and efficient safeguards implementation and ultimately reduces the operational burden and mitigates the risk of costly retrofitting. For new nuclear facilities, especially novel designs or processes, the earlier safeguards are considered the better: Safeguards by Design allows for safeguards to be built 'into' the system, rather than around it afterwards.

The fifteenth IAEA Symposium on International Safeguards will be held from 9 to 12 November 2026, at the Vienna International Centre in Vienna, Austria. Registration and further information are available on the IAEA event page. This article was also co-authored by the IAEA’s Haley Mead, Adem Mutluer and Wolfgang Picot.

Russia stresses long-term nature of nuclear cooperation with China


Rosatom Director General Alexei Likhachev told reporters in Beijing that Russia and China both think "a century ahead" in developing nuclear energy, and said the Russian state nuclear corporation plans to "continue localising fuel fabrication technologies".
 
(Image: Rosatom)

He was speaking during a visit in which the 30th meeting of the Russian-Chinese Subcommittee on Nuclear Issues was held, which he co-chaired with Shan Zhongde, Director of China's Atomic Energy Agency.

Rosatom reported that "the parties discussed the progress of current projects, as well as the future agenda for cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy. Following the meeting, a protocol was signed".

In comments reported by Russia's official Tass news agency Likhachev referenced the state nuclear corporation's work with China on supplying equipment and software codes for China's CFR-600 fast sodium-cooled reactor and preparations for its operation.

He also said that this year Rosatom would start supplying advanced nuclear fuel for China's VVER-1200 reactors and fast neutron reactors.

He said: "When developing nuclear power, every country, and above all Russia and China, the leaders in this race, thinks a century ahead. A century is not a figure of speech here - it means the need to ensure that a power plant has fuel for more than 100 years of operation, both natural uranium and the most advanced technological solutions for efficient and safe fuel. And it is in China where we are introducing our advanced technologies related to safe fuel, including fuel with an 18-month cycle.

"We will continue localising fuel fabrication technologies here in accordance with the growth in reactor demand."

According to Tass, he said one each of the new VVER-1200 units at Tianwan and Xudapu nuclear power plants would begin commissioning "in the coming weeks" with the second new units at each plant, set to follow next year.

And on nuclear fusion, he said: "China has its own developments and operational facilities that will undoubtedly enrich us as we move forward with joint projects."

The Northern Sea Route - where nuclear-powered icebreakers have been playing an increasingly important role in opening up the new Arctic trade route - is another area of bilateral focus, with cargo transportation from China set to double this year, he said.

Background

Rosatom's TVEL fuel company dispatched in 2022 all shipments to supply the first core loading of the CFR-600 sodium-cooled pool-type fast-neutron reactor under construction at Xiapu in China's Fujian province.

The production of CFR-600 uranium fuel was established at the Elemash Machine-Building Plant in Elektrostal in Russia in 2021. For this purpose, the site for the fabrication of fuel assemblies for fast reactors was modernised at the enterprise, unique equipment was developed and installed.

Construction of unit 1 of the Xiapu fast reactor demonstration project began in 2017. It is part of China's plan to work towards a closed nuclear fuel cycle.  In addition to the reactor in China, there are BN-600 and BN-800 sodium-cooled fast reactors at the Beloyarsk nuclear power plant in the Urals region of Russia.

Saudi Arabia, USA sign nuclear agreements


An intergovernmental agreement on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and an accompanying bilateral safeguards agreement has been signed by Saudi Minister of Energy and Minister of Industry and Mineral Resources Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman bin Abdulaziz and US Secretary of Energy Chris Wright.
 
(Image: US Department of Energy)

The agreement "aims to enhance cooperation between the two countries in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and to facilitate the exchange of expertise, knowledge, and technologies, contributing to strengthening bilateral cooperation in accordance with the highest international standards of nuclear safety, nuclear security, and nonproliferation", according to a statement published by Saudi Arabia's official national news agency, SPA. It also "reflects the shared vision of both countries to expand cooperation in energy and future technologies while supporting sustainable development".

Formal cooperation agreements are required between countries that want to trade nuclear power goods and services. Those involving the USA are known as 123 Agreements after the paragraph of the country's 1954 Atomic Energy Act which requires them.

No details have been given about the contents of the agreements, although media reports ahead of the announcement by the two countries suggested that the agreement was expected to include provisions that would allow Saudi Arabia to enrich uranium. However, this is seen as a potential nuclear proliferation risk: the same technology used to increase the content of the fissile uranium-235 isotope to levels needed in nuclear fuel (typically up to 5% for nuclear reactors in operation around the world today) could also be used to produce weapons-usable highly enriched uranium. Previous 123 Agreements concluded by the USA with other countries - including that concluded with the UAE in 2009 - have specifically prohibited those countries from developing domestic uranium enrichment capabilities.

The US Department of Energy (DOE) said the two agreements "lay the legal foundation for a decades-long, multi-billion-dollar partnership that advances several priority economic and strategic objectives, including nuclear non-proliferation", providing "great access for American companies in the Saudi nuclear energy programme" as well as advancing US and regional security by "upholding high standards of nuclear safety, security, and non-proliferation and strengthening the United States' competitive edge in civil nuclear technology".

"These agreements reflect our two nations' shared commitment to strengthening US-Saudi commercial relations, delivering prosperity at home and security to our allies abroad," Wright said. "Rest assured, these agreements uphold the highest standards of nuclear safety and non-proliferation, while relying on the world's best nuclear technology and scientists, designed right here in the United States."

Saudi Arabia's electricity generation is dominated by fossil fuels, but the potential use of nuclear power - including for desalination of water - has featured in the country's plans for many years. It has, over the past decade or so, signed nuclear cooperation agreements with countries including France, Argentina, South Korea, China, Hungary and Jordan, as well as Russian nuclear company Rosatom. According to the World Nuclear Association information paper on Saudi Arabia, the King Abdullah City for Atomic and Renewable Energy (KA-CARE) - set up by the Saudi government to advance its nuclear and renewable energy agenda - has also been in negotiations with the Czech Republic and the UK as well as the USA.

The 123 Agreement is to be reviewed by the US Congress.

EDF extends life of UK's Heysham 1 and Hartlepool



EDF has announced that the Heysham 1 and Hartlepool advanced gas-cooled reactor nuclear power plants will continue generating electricity until March 2030, an extension of two years.
 
Hartlepool is now due to operate until 2030 (Image: EDF)

The decision comes following a detailed review covering technical aspects like the condition of the boilers and the graphite cores as well as supply chain resilience and workforce planning. Decisions on end of generation dates for EDF's nuclear power plants in the UK are independent of the regulators or government and are taken by EDF's licensee board following recommendations from EDF Nuclear Generation Limited's Executive. Prior to this decision, Heysham 1 and Hartlepool were due to move into defueling in March 2028 based on a review in September 2025.

As well as supporting more than 1,000 jobs across the two sites for longer, extending the generating lives of these plants could boost nuclear output by 28 TWh over the two-year period, enough to power 8.4 million homes, EDF noted.

"We have been clear it is our ambition to generate from these stations for as long as it is safe and commercially viable to do so it is great to be able to confirm a further two-year extension for Heysham 1 and Hartlepool," said EDF's Managing Director of Nuclear Operations, John Munro. "The AGR stations have been the backbone of secure, zero-carbon generation in the UK for five decades. The nuclear fleet also has a key role in maintaining grid stability, which is so important as the overall system becomes led by renewables. Today's decision retains stable baseload, domestic generation, reducing reliance on imports during tighter periods."

When EDF acquired the fleet in 2009, all seven advanced gas-cooled reactor (AGR) stations were scheduled to be offline by 2023, but a series of life extensions mean four of those stations are still generating with three now in various stages of defuelling or decommissioning.
 
"When nuclear goes offline it is often replaced with gas generation," Munro said. "If we are serious about reducing the UK's reliance on gas and retaining system stability, it makes sense to keep these stations online to support energy security and our carbon targets."
 
According to EDF, keeping these plants online will retain around 12% of the UK's nuclear generation in the mix in 2028 and the volume of gas they could avoid in each year of the extension is equal to 25 Liquid Natural Gas cargoes or 20% of the LNG imports in 2025.

EDF said it will continue to keep AGR lifetimes under review to establish whether further life extensions can be achieved.

EDF manages the UK's seven nuclear power plant sites, five that are operating (Sizewell B, Torness, Heysham 2, Heysham 1 and Hartlepool) and two that have entered decommissioning (Hinkley Point B and Dungeness B). It took over the sites when it acquired British Energy in 2009. The company is also constructing the new Hinkley Point C plant in Somerset, and there are advanced plans for a replica of Hinkley Point C at Sizewell C in Suffolk.

The lifetimes of the Torness and Heysham 2 AGR plants were not reviewed as part of this process. These plants are expected to close in March 2030, as announced in December 2024.

Earlier this month, it was announced that the Sizewell B plant is set to get a 20-year lifetime extension after terms were agreed by the UK government and operator EDF. The pressurised water reactor, which came online in 1995, had an initial 40-year operating life to 2035.

Chris O'Shea, CEO of Centrica, which has a 20% share in the operating plants, said: "I'm delighted that Heysham 1 and Hartlepool will continue to play a key role in the UK's energy system for longer. These stations provide reliable, low-carbon electricity that supports Britain's energy security, protects skilled jobs and underpins a more resilient economy. Following the recent positive news on the life extension of Sizewell B, this further demonstrates the important role nuclear can continue to play in delivering the secure and dependable power the UK needs as demand for electricity grows."

Approval for VVER fuel production in Germany


The Lower Saxony Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Protection, acting on behalf of the federal government, has approved an application from Framatome subsidiary Advanced Nuclear Fuels to expand its facility in Lingen for the production of fuel for VVER-1000 reactors. The approval is subject to strict conditions.
 
A Framatomr VVER-100 fuel assembly (Image: Framatome)

Framatome subsidiary Advanced Nuclear Fuels (ANF) applied in March 2022 under the Atomic Energy Act for permission to begin producing hexagonal pressurised water fuel elements under licence with TVEL, the fuel arm of Russian state nuclear corporation Rosatom. The fuel elements are to be manufactured using Russian licences and Russian technology in a joint venture with TVEL for the Eastern European market. The licence application includes some changes to some manufacturing and testing equipment and the installation of some additional equipment in existing buildings to enable the manufacture of VVER fuel elements.

The federal government had already clarified in a supervisory letter to the state that, given the current assessment by federal security authorities regarding the risk of sabotage or espionage, there was no legal basis for denying the permit.

The Lower Saxony Ministry for the Environment, Energy and Climate Protection has now announced that it has approved ANF's application, subject to a number of conditions, as "after intensive review and inquiries, [it] had no legal grounds under the Atomic Energy Act to reject or limit the application". The restrictions it has imposed include a general ban on entry to the facility for employees of TVEL or Rosatom, as well as persons authorised by them. Entry is only permitted in very limited cases and under the supervision of the regulatory authority.

In addition, the ministry said the hardware and software of the TVEL-licensed machines must undergo external security audits, and these machines must be data-integrated with the rest of the fuel element factory's operational technology and information technology infrastructure. Also, the finished gadolinium fuel rods arriving from Russia must be 100% inspected for potential tampering using active and passive scanners according to the 'four-eyes' principle. Furthermore, ANF employees must receive regular training and awareness programmes to protect against espionage and sabotage.

Lower Saxony's environment ministry said the approval could be revisited "if new risks are identified", particularly in "national security", Euractiv reported.

ANF was created in 1975 and currently employs around 400 people in Lingen. ANF fabricates fuel rods and assemblies for pressurised water reactors and boiling water reactors for customers worldwide.

In recent years, especially since the war with Ukraine began, nuclear power operators in European Union countries who had previously relied on Russian-supplied fuel have sought alternative suppliers. Nineteen VVER reactors - developed during the time of the Soviet Union and historically reliant on Russian fuel supplies - are currently in operation in the EU, including four VVER-1000 reactors in Bulgaria and the Czech Republic, and 15 VVER-440 reactors in the Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary and Slovakia.

Framatome has "a dual-track approach" to supplying fuel to VVER reactors in operation in the EU. In the short term, it will fabricate fuel identical to the proven design currently used by the reactors. In parallel, Framatome is developing and qualifying European sovereign fuels of its own design for VVER-440 and VVER-1000 reactors. The qualification of a new design requires several years within the framework of regulatory and usual certification practices, Framatome notes.

Framatome had planned to produce both VVER-1000 and VVER-440 fuel under licence from and as part of a joint venture with Rosatom at its subsidiary Advanced Nuclear Fuels in Lingen. However, it was recently reported that Framatome has now decided to produce the VVER-440 fuel at its Romans-sur-Isere fuel production site in south-east France. The company expects to submit a request to the French nuclear regulator, the Autorite de Surete Nucleaire et de Radioprotection, by the end of 2026 for approval of the changes needed at the French plant for the production of VVER-440 fuel.

Oklo cleared to start up test reactor


The US Department of Energy has granted authorisation to nuclear technology company Oklo to start up its Groves Isotope Test Reactor, located near Lockhart in Caldwell County, Texas.
 
Groves Isotope Test Reactor facility (Image: Oklo)

This authorisation, granted under department's Reactor Pilot Program, completes the Department of Energy (DOE) authorisation process and clears the way for fuel loading, startup testing, and reactor operations. The authorisation followed a rigorous readiness review, through which DOE confirmed that Oklo has achieved the engineering, organisational, and operational readiness needed to safely receive fuel and begin reactor operations. 

The Reactor Pilot Program, announced in June 2025, aims to expedite the testing of advanced reactor designs that will be authorised by the DOE at sites located outside of the national laboratories. Part of the Reforming Nuclear Reactor Testing at the Department of Energy executive order signed by President Donald Trump in May last year, its goal is "to construct, operate, and achieve criticality of at least three test reactors using the DOE authorisation process by July 4, 2026". 

Antares Nuclear's Mark-0 reactor became the first reactor under the programme to reach initial criticality in early June, closely followed by Valar Atomics' Ward 250 reactor. Deployable Energy's Unity demonstration reactor achieved criticality on 1 July, while Aalo Atomics' Critical Test Reactor chieved initial criticality in the early hours of 4 July.

Groves is a low-power test reactor designed to demonstrate reactor design, build, and operations, and to establish operating experience needed to support future isotope production facilities. The project advances Oklo's plans to establish domestic production of critical isotopes for potential use in cancer care, manufacturing, scientific research, space exploration, and national security.

A privately financed facility, Groves was built on private land, including full-scale civil excavation and construction, and assembled with all full-scale systems, components, and fuel either sourced commercially or manufactured by Oklo.

"This facility marks the fastest time that we are aware of to go from greenfield to substantial completion for a full-scale, privately funded and sited reactor in history," said Oklo co-founder and CEO Jacob DeWitte. "By building on a greenfield site on private land, performing full-scale civil excavation and construction, and procuring fuel and all major components commercially, we demonstrated that the advanced nuclear industry can move at a pace that many did not believe possible. And this experience is fully translatable to future commercial deployments."

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Nuclear Energy Mike Goff added: "The US Department of Energy is excited to see another Reactor Pilot Program participant receive authorisation. With the right enabling environment, Oklo has been able to accelerate their progress and is now ready to take the next step with their technology."

Landmark module installation at Lufeng 2


The CA01 'super module' has been installed at unit 2 of the Lufeng nuclear power plant in China's Guangdong province, China General Nuclear announced.
 
(Image: CGN)

With a hoisting weight of more than 950 tonnes and measuring more than 26 metres long, 29 metres wide and 23 metres high, the concrete and steel CA01 module - composed of 47 sub-modules - sits inside the unit's containment module where it will house the plant's reactor pressure vessel, steam generators and other components.

The installation of the CA01 module on 21 July "signifies that the construction of the reactor building for Unit 2 of the Lufeng Nuclear Power Plant has entered a new phase, laying a solid foundation for subsequent nuclear island structure construction and equipment installation", CGN said.


(Image: CGN)

The CAP1000 reactor design - the Chinese version of Westinghouse's AP1000 - uses modular construction techniques, enabling large structural modules to be built at factories and then installed at the site. The CA01 module is referred to as a super module because it is too large to be transported by road and rail, and was constructed on site.

The CA01 module of unit 1 at the Lufeng site was installed in September last year.

"Building on the successful experience of unit 1, the assembly phase of unit 2's CA01 module further expanded the scope of modular construction, enabling the pre-assembly and integration of more items on the ground, and improving the overall integrity of the assembly compared to unit 1," CGN said.

Background

The Lufeng nuclear power plant is the first nuclear power project in eastern Guangdong Province. The proposed construction of four 1250 MWe CAP1000 reactors (units 1-4) at the Lufeng site was approved by China's National Development and Reform Commission in September 2014.

The Lufeng units have not been built in the numerical order their names would appear to suggest.

In April 2022, the State Council approved construction of two Hualong One units at Lufeng as units 5 and 6. First concrete was poured for unit 5 on 8 September 2022 and that for unit 6 on 26 August 2023. The reactor vessel of unit 6 was installed in February this year. Units 5 and 6 are expected to begin operating in 2027 and 2028, respectively.

The construction of units 1 and 2 did not receive State Council approval until August 2024. The first safety-related concrete for the nuclear island of unit 1 was poured in February last year, with that of unit 2 following in December. Both units are scheduled to begin operating in 2030. Approval for units 3 and 4 is still pending.

According to CGN, once all six units are in operation, the Lufeng plant will generate about 52 TWh, which will reduce standard coal consumption by almost 16 million tonnes and reduce carbon dioxide emissions by more than 42 million tonnes.

Bulgaria's planned AP1000s 'strategic bilateral priority'


Commitment to the on-going project to build two new units at the Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant has been stressed in talks between senior Bulgarian and US representatives.
 
A model of a concept of two new units, with three data centres (Image: Kozloduy NPP-Build)

The new board of directors of Kozloduy Nuclear Power Plant-New Build EAD, which is state-owned via its parent company Kozloduy NPP EAD, which operates the existing nuclear power plant, held talks with the US Chargé d'Affaires in Bulgaria, H Martin McDowell, and Patrick Thilou, Political and Economic Officer, at the embassy.

"The two sides declared their common commitment to the project for new nuclear power capacities in Kozloduy, which remains a strategic priority in the bilateral cooperation between Bulgaria and the United States of America," the project company said.

"The main topic of the discussion was the progress on the construction of units 7 and 8, the next stages of implementation, and the possibilities for financing from US export banks.

"In conclusion, the delegations expressed mutual readiness to continue active dialogue and close cooperation throughout all subsequent stages of the project's implementation."

The meeting came the week after Bulgarian Prime Minister Rumen Radev - a former president who became prime minister with a new government in May - met with representatives of Westinghouse.

According to the government press service: "During the meeting, the implementation of the preliminary engineering activities for the project to build units 7 and 8 of the Kozloduy NPP was discussed. Issues related to the completion of the feasibility study for the time frame for the construction of the new units and the expected final price were also considered."

Background

Kozloduy units 1-4 were VVER-440 models which the European Commission classified as non-upgradeable and Bulgaria agreed to close them during negotiations to join the European Union in 2007. Units 5 and 6 feature VVER-1000 reactors that were connected to the grid in 1987 and 1991, respectively. Both units have been through refurbishment and life-extension programmes to enable extension of operation from 30 to 60 years. The country's two operable reactors generate about one-third of its electricity.

Westinghouse's AP1000 has been selected as the technology for the two proposed new units and in November 2024 Hyundai Engineering & Construction, Westinghouse and Kozloduy NPP-New Build signed an engineering contract for the new capacity, with ministers saying that signing the contract meant that schedule and finance details would be firmed up for the new capacity. The Ministry of Energy and the USA's Citi bank agreed on a partnership in July last year to secure funding for the construction of the new units, and site location applications were submitted.

In December Kozloduy NPP-New Build EAD and a consortium comprising Laurentis Energy Partners, its subsidiary Canadian Nuclear Partners SA (CNPSA) and BWXT Canada, signed an owner’s engineer contract to advance the two new AP1000 units.

How the two new units could look at Kozloduy (Image: Westinghouse)

The aim is for the first new Westinghouse AP1000 unit - unit 7 at Kozloduy - to be operational in 2035 and the second one - unit 8 - to be operational in 2037. The 2,300 MWe capacity of the two new units would exceed the 1,760 MWe capacity of the closed first four units. The Bulgarian government has also said that further units will be needed to replace units 5 and 6 by 2050.  It has also been considering the deployment of small modular reactors in the country.

Friday, July 24, 2026

In a Tisha B'Av reversal, these American Jews grieve for destruction of Palestinian lives

(RNS) — Seven cities across the country — including Boston, Chicago, Denver, Kansas City, Philadelphia and Seattle — held similar public rituals to mark the Jewish day of mourning.


A group of Jews close their eyes in prayer during a Tisha B’Av ritual focused on solidarity with Palestinians in Durham, North Carolina’s Central Park on Wednesday, July 22, 2026. (RNS photo/Yonat Shimron)


Yonat Shimron
July 23, 2026 
RNS



DURHAM, N.C. (RNS) — A group of 40 Jews gathered in a public park under cloudy skies on Wednesday (July 22) and wrote on scraps of white cloth the things they were grieving for this Tisha B’Av:

Dead children of Gaza
Loss of precious life
Apathy in the face of destruction
Loss of imagined future

When they finished, they ripped the cloth, a Jewish mourning custom, and pinned it to a black banner with the words “For These Things We Weep” (a phrase from the biblical book of Lamentations).



Over the past three years, Tisha B’Av, the traditional day of mourning for the destruction of the first and second Jerusalem temples, has become an occasion among some on the left to lament not what was done to Jews (first by the Babylonians and, centuries later, the Romans), but what the state of Israel has done to Palestinians since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on Israel.

“Today in 2026, we weave into this day of lamentation the ongoing destruction of Palestinian life by Israel,” said Rabbi Salem Pearce, a Durham-based rabbi who is a member of Rabbis for Ceasefire, a nonprofit group founded in 2023 to protest Israel’s retaliation in Gaza.

“A history of destruction and tragedy leads us to rise in solidarity with Palestinians facing violence by the Israeli military, and Tisha B’Av reminds us of the inviolable dignity of all human life,” she continued, speaking to the gathered crowd.

RELATED: As Jews mark Tisha B’Av, ancient mourning rituals make room for modern grief

Seven cities across the country — including Boston, Chicago, Denver, Kansas City, Philadelphia and Seattle — held similar public rituals to mark the Jewish day of mourning. It was the third year that Rabbis for Ceasefire had organized such an event. In Durham, it was cosponsored by the local chapter of Jewish Voice for Peace and Makom, an anti-Zionist congregation.

This is not the first time Tisha B’Av has been stretched to mark other historical tragedies. In past years, Jewish activists have also held public rituals on Tisha B’Av to mark the Holocaust and, more recently, the deaths of 1,200 Israeli residents who died at the hands of Hamas on Oct. 7, 2023.

But it is a reversal of sorts to use Tisha B’Av to mark tragedies inflicted on other people by Jews. The war in Gaza, which the Durham group called both a genocide and an ethnic cleansing, has angered and mobilized the Jewish left — and divided American Jews.



Polls show half of American Jews say Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza are unjustified. They don’t like Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, with roughly 6 in 10 viewing him very or somewhat unfavorably, according to an AP/NORC poll. But they also fear that criticism of of Israel — such as that recently expressed by New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani in a video calling Netanyahu a war criminal — makes them feel unsafe as Jews.

Those at Wednesday’s Tisha B’Av in Durham said they felt morally compelled as Jews to respond to Israel’s actions in Gaza and elsewhere.

Rabbi Salem Pearce, right, and Eiiana Light, a songwriter and educator, led a Tisha B’Av ritual in a Durham, North Carolina, park Wednesday, July 22, to grieve Israel’s destruction of Palestinian lives. (RNS photo/Yonat Shimron)

Beth Bruch, one of the organizers of the Tisha B’Av ritual, related that her grandparents were able to escape Nazi Germany and settled in Illinois, while so many others Jews died in Europe.

“I just wish that more people had spoken up for my ancestors back then,” said Bruch, a 53-year-old school librarian. “How could I not speak up for people now?”

As an American Jew, she said she feels implicated in a war that has killed 73,000 Palestinians in Gaza, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, many with U.S.-made bombs.

“Our calendar gives us times to actually feel our grief, and I think it’s especially important given our complicity as Americans in what’s going on in Palestine,” Bruch said. “It’s my tax dollars that are funding the weapons, the war, the bombs that are being used to kill so many children, adults, elders in Gaza and the West Bank, even since the ceasefire.”

Grieving the destruction of Gaza is not just a political act, it is also part of the Jewish tradition of “teshuva” or repentance, those gathered for the ritual were reminded. Tisha B’Av, which concluded Thursday, is a bridge into the month of Elul, the final month of the Jewish year, a period of spiritual introspection leading up to the High Holidays with their theme of repentance.

A group of Jews write what they are grieving for this Tisha B’Av on scraps of white cloth in a public park in Durham, North Carolina, on Wednesday, July 22, 2026, before pinning them onto a banner that reads “For These Things We Weep.” (RNS photo/Yonat Shimron)
As part of a public ritual in Durham, North Carolina, on the eve of Tisha B’Av, July 22, 2026, participants write down what they are grieving for and pin it to a black banner. Most notes refer to grief for Palestinian lives. (RNS photo/Yonat Shimron)

“Even as the bombs fall, we are called to begin our teshuva, the path to sacred repair,” Pearce told participants.

She then led the chanting in Hebrew from the Book of Lamentations, which is traditionally sung with each verse beginning in a major key and descending into a minor key to evoke a sense of grief. A musician led two songs.

Kasey Kinsella, a 33 year-old performing artist who helped plan Wednesday’s liturgy but could not attend, said she believed such rituals are critical to helping Jews share their grief collectively.

“These grief rituals like this one is an opportunity to really come together and feel the emotions distributed to more than just ourselves,” she said. And critically, she added, such rituals can lead to more action.


As Jews mark Tisha B’Av, ancient mourning rituals make room for modern grief


(RNS) — ‘October 7 will definitely be in my mind, but Tisha B'Av also gives you the long view of Jewish history,’ Rabbi Diana Fersko said.


Worshipers sit on the floor of a synagogue before the reading of Lamentations during Tisha B’Av on Aug. 8, 2011. (Photo courtesy Wikimedia Commons)

RNS


(RNS) — As Jews across the world observe Tisha B’Av, the annual fast mourning the destruction of the First and Second Temples in Jerusalem, many will also grieve modern-day tragedies.

The holiday, which begins at sundown Wednesday (July 22) and ends Thursday at sunset, is observed as Judaism’s central day of communal mourning. Centuries-long tradition contributes to an evolving memory of the fast day through “kinot,” the liturgical poems recited in synagogues that mourn the destruction of Jerusalem while also commemorating later tragedies.

Over centuries, rabbis and poets have composed new kinot in response to catastrophes and persecutions, from the Crusades and Inquisition to the Holocaust.

Since the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel and the devastating war in Gaza, new lamentations have continued that tradition as modern authors started penning liturgical poems.


Rabbi Diana Fersko (Photo courtesy of Rabbi Diana Fersko)

“In 2026, Tisha B’Av looks a lot like it’s always looked,” Rabbi Diana Fersko, chief Jewish life officer at the Marlene Meyerson JCC Manhattan, told RNS. “It’s this day of sadness where you’re letting yourself sit in that emotion and reflect on some of the darkest moments in Jewish history. You’re doing it with your community, learning, reflecting, praying and contemplating the cosmic journey that we’ve been on.”

Unlike many Jewish holidays that emphasize celebration, family gatherings or festive meals, Tisha B’Av calls for an embrace of grief for 25 hours. Throughout that time, mourners fast, avoid physical comforts — like foregoing regular chairs for low stools — and gather in synagogues to read the biblical Book of Lamentations, alongside the kinot.

Fersko said the tradition of adding new kinot to respond to times of crises demonstrates that Jewish mourning has never been frozen in time.
RELATED: Orthodox Jewish groups oppose daylight saving bill, argue it would disrupt prayer

After Oct. 7, new liturgical works appeared almost immediately. “Kinat Be’eri,” written by Israeli poet Yagel Haroush to mourn the massacre at the Be’eri kibbutz in southern Israel, quickly became popular. The poem notably starts each stanza with “Eicha” — the Hebrew word for the question “how?” — alluding to the Book of Lamentations and wrestling with God amid mass deaths.

Yaacov Osadon is a “paytan,” or Jewish liturgical singer, from Dimona, Israel, who has spent a decade studying traditional Moroccan Jewish hymns and “piyyutim,” Jewish liturgical poems and hymns chanted during religious services, in his Sephardic tradition. He said diverse Jewish communities across the diaspora and Israel have always sought to grieve as a people after defining moments of loss.

“The purpose is not only to preserve their memory, but also to examine circumstances that led to these tragedies, learn from them and pray that such suffering will never happen again,” said Osadon, whose day job is operations manager at Yatir Winery, a kosher fine wine producer near Dimona.


Rabbi Or Rose leads prayer at a multifaith gathering at the Washington National Cathedral in 2025. (Photo courtesy of Rabbi Or Rose)

Rabbi Or Rose, director of the Betty Ann Greenbaum Miller Center for Interreligious Learning and Leadership at Hebrew College in Newton, Massachusetts, said this sense of evolving memory reflects the enduring purpose of the holiday itself.

“Tisha B’Av is about how we carry loss now, and how memory can become a stimulus for moral and spiritual introspection and renewal,” Rose said.

This year, he said, the holiday arrives as many Jews continue to process multiple crises in what Rose described as “a world that feels especially fragile and unsettled.”

Rose continued, “The liturgy of Tisha B’Av is intentionally spare and somber. The traditional physical practices of the day — fasting, sitting low, refraining from comfort, and observing a kind of communal austerity — help make the mourning feel embodied, and not just intellectual.”

New liturgical poems do not replace ancient laments, Fersko said, but rather place more recent suffering — and prayers for restoration — within the longer arc of Jewish history.

“October 7 will definitely be in my mind, but Tisha B’Av also gives you the long view of Jewish history,” Fersko said. “As long as it’s done with thought, care and sincerity, it makes sense to bring modern pain points into this very sad day.”

For Osadon, the lessons of Tisha B’Av extend beyond remembrance. Jewish tradition, he pointed out, teaches that the Second Temple was destroyed because of “sinat chinam,” or baseless hatred, and destructive internal division among Jews. In today’s sharply polarized Israeli society, he believes that message carries particular urgency.

“History should not only be remembered — it should also be learned from,” he said. “We should make every possible effort to strengthen mutual respect, preserve our unity despite our differences and ensure that disagreement never turns into hostility.”

Rose echoed that teaching, pointing to the late Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook’s call for “ahavat chinam,” or baseless love, as an antidote to repair a broken world.

The Jewish tradition, Rose said, “does not let us only point outward at the world’s cruelty; it also asks us to examine our own moral failings, our communal divisions and the ways hatred can corrode our life together,” he said.

One teaching predicts the coming Messiah will be born on Tisha B’Av, suggesting that redemption will emerge only after catastrophe.

“Tisha B’Av teaches us that Jewish hope is not naive optimism,” Rose said. “It is hope forged in the presence of loss. The day holds grief and longing together, and in that sense it points toward a future in which what has been broken may yet be mended.”


Takeaways from the AP-NORC poll of more than 1,000 Jewish Americans

WASHINGTON (AP) — The survey of 1,022 Jewish adults — including people who identify as Jewish by religion and religiously unaffiliated people who identify as Jewish through culture, ethnicity or family background — offers a rare detailed accounting of a key demographic that sits at the very center of some of the nation’s most divisive political debates.




Linley Sanders
July 21, 2026 

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Associated Press surveyed more than 1,000 Jewish adults in the U.S. to better understand their views on Israel’s military actions in Gaza, their opinions of the political parties and their experiences with prejudice in the United States.

The survey of 1,022 Jewish adults — including people who identify as Jewish by religion and religiously unaffiliated people who identify as Jewish through culture, ethnicity or family background — offers a rare detailed accounting of a key demographic that sits at the very center of some of the nation’s most divisive political debates.

Here are five takeaways from the AP-NORC survey:

Jewish adults have complicated views about Israel and the war in Gaza

Among Jews with a religious affiliation, views on Israel’s recent military actions are far from uniform or uncritical.

About 7 in 10 Jewish adults overall identify as Jewish when asked about their religious affiliation. The rest, about 3 in 10 Jewish adults, say they are atheists, agnostics, or have no particular religious affiliation, but still identify as Jewish in other ways.

While about 8 in 10 of those with a religious affiliation say Israel’s immediate military response to Hamas’ attack on October 7 was “justified,” only about half say Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza are justified. Among Jewish adults without a religious affiliation, only about half saw Israel’s immediate response as justifiable. Now, only about 2 in 10 say the ongoing military operations are acceptable.

About one-quarter of Jewish adults with a religious association believe Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, an accusation that’s been leveled by some major human rights organizations and a team of independent experts commissioned by the United Nations. That accusation has been vehemently denied by Israel and the U.S. government. Roughly 4 in 10 Jewish adults without a religious affiliation say Israel has committed genocide.

Many Jewish adults feel unsafe in the United States

About 6 in 10 Jewish adults say prejudice against Jewish people is an “extremely” or “very” serious problem in the United States today.

About one-third of Jewish adults in the survey say they feel “very” or “somewhat” safe as a Jewish person in the U.S. today, while about one-third feel “very” or “somewhat” unsafe. The remaining roughly 3 in 10 say they feel neither safe nor unsafe.

A significant share of Jewish adults, about 3 in 10, say they or someone in their household has experienced physical assault, verbal abuse, online harassment or damaged property because of their Jewish background over the last year, according to the survey.

The survey points to how Jewish adults’ attitudes toward their own personal safety have changed over a relatively short period as more Americans became critical of the United States’ close alliance with Israel and the war in Gaza. The poll found that Jewish adults who feel a close emotional tie to Israel are particularly likely to feel unsafe in the country today.

Most American Jews don’t feel politicians are supporting Jewish people

Few Jewish adults believe that President Donald Trump — or the Democratic or Republican parties — are doing a good job supporting Jewish people in the U.S.

Only about 2 in 10 Jewish adults say Trump supports Jewish people in this country “extremely” or “very” well. That’s similar to the slight share who find the Republican Party and the Democratic Party highly supportive, but Jewish adults are more likely to say the Democratic Party is at least “somewhat” supportive.

Americans overall are more likely than Jewish adults to see Trump as “extremely” or “very” supportive of Jewish people in the United States. About 3 in 10 U.S. adults say Trump is highly supportive of Jewish people, compared to about 2 in 10 Jewish adults.

The poll also found most Jewish adults have negative views of Trump. About 7 in 10 Jewish adults have a “very” or “somewhat” unfavorable opinion of Trump, compared to about 3 in 10 who have a favorable view.

Jewish adults are divided over whether protesting Israel is a form of antisemitism

Protests around events conducted in support of Israel became more common following the backlash over Israel’s military action in Gaza.

The war in Gaza began with Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel that killed roughly 1,200 people, most of them civilians. Israel responded with a yearslong counterattack that killed more than 73,000 people, according to the Gaza Health Ministry, which is part of the territory’s Hamas-run government. Its casualty figures are viewed as generally reliable by U.N. agencies and international organizations but don’t distinguish between civilians and militants.

The poll found that about half of Jewish adults say protesting an event that is supportive of Israel is not a form of antisemitism, but roughly 4 in 10 say it is. About 1 in 10 are uncertain.

Jewish adults are more unified in deeming some actions as definitively antisemitic. The overwhelming majority say vandalizing synagogues or Jewish-owned businesses because of Israel’s actions is antisemitism. The same goes for denying the reality or scope of the Holocaust, putting responsibility for Israel’s actions on Jewish people in the United States or saying Israel shouldn’t exist as a Jewish state.

Support for Israel is less of a priority for younger Jewish adults

Support for Israel is a key component of the religious identity of many older Jewish adults in the United States, but younger Jewish adults appear less likely to prioritize it.

About half of older religious Jewish adults — those 45 and older — say that supporting Israel is “extremely” or “very” important for their Jewish identity. By contrast, only about 4 in 10 younger religious Jewish adults emphasize support for Israel.

Younger Jewish adults are more likely to prioritize other forms of connection, like celebrating Jewish holidays. About 7 in 10 Jewish adults under 45 say celebrating Jewish holidays is at least “very” important to their Jewish identity, compared to about half of older Jewish adults.

Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.

Consequence Without Catastrophe: Why Sport Commands Human Attention

Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.

I was tense. Not mildly interested. Not casually curious. Genuinely tense.

As the World Cup Final entered its closing minutes, every attack seemed to matter. Every misplaced pass felt consequential. When one team surged forward, I leaned toward the television almost involuntarily. My heart rate rose. I found myself willing the match toward an outcome that, if I were honest, would have almost no meaningful effect on my life. If Spain had lost, my life would be the same. Nothing existential depended on the result. And yet the tension was real. Why?

It is tempting to answer that people simply love sports. But that isn’t really an explanation. It merely restates the phenomenon. The more interesting question is why a symbolic contest between 22 players on a field can produce genuine physiological and emotional investment in billions of people around the world.

What kind of human invention is sport that symbolic stakes can feel psychologically consequential? One answer is that sport may be one of civilization’s most successful attention technologies: a cultural invention designed to organize millions—and sometimes billions—of minds around the same unfolding uncertainty. Rather than simply entertaining us, it synchronizes perception, concentrates emotion, and transforms individual spectators into participants in a shared symbolic reality.

That question leads far beyond soccer. It reaches into anthropology, neuroscience, ritual, warfare, philosophy, and the history of civilization itself. The World Cup may not simply be the world’s most-watched sporting event. It may be one of humanity’s greatest cultural achievements: a way of transforming existential conflict into shared experience—allowing us to feel the intensity of struggle, uncertainty, triumph, and loss without requiring catastrophe.

To understand why sport commands such extraordinary human attention, we first need to understand one of civilization’s greatest inventions: symbolic consequence. Throughout much of human history, the events most capable of synchronizing human attention were those with genuine existential stakes. Warfare, famine, predation, epidemic disease, and environmental catastrophe demanded collective focus because survival depended upon it. Shared danger aligned perception, sharpened attention, and coordinated action with remarkable efficiency.

But as societies became larger and more complex, they confronted a remarkable design challenge: How can a civilization preserve the psychological power of shared stakes without paying the devastating price of perpetual catastrophe? One of humanity’s most elegant solutions was the invention of symbolic stakes—bounded experiences capable of producing genuine attention, emotional investment, and social cohesion without requiring genuine destruction. Sport represents perhaps the most sophisticated expression of this invention: It preserves the emotional grammar of conflict while stripping away its physical destruction, allowing societies to rehearse rivalry without paying war’s irreversible costs.

We often assume that sport commands attention because it is exciting. The reverse may be closer to the truth. Sport has endured across civilizations because it is extraordinarily effective at producing sustained collective attention. Excitement is not merely its appeal; it is one of its functions.

It borrows much of the attentional architecture of existential conflict: opposing sides, defended territory, finite resources, strategic cooperation, temporal urgency, uncertainty, triumph, and defeat. Yet it removes the very feature that makes conflict catastrophic. The contest unfolds within agreed-upon rules, defined boundaries, impartial officiating, and fixed time limits. The conflict is real; its consequences are deliberately constrained.

Between the first and last whistle of a soccer match, an extraordinary transformation occurs. The field becomes a closed ecosystem of meaning. Every possession acquires significance. A defensive stop becomes momentous. A missed opportunity becomes heartbreaking. Time itself seems to accelerate as the final whistle approaches. Although almost nothing changes in the material world for the overwhelming majority of spectators, millions experience authentic tension, anticipation, hope, disappointment, and relief.

It manufactures consequence without catastrophe.

This simple observation points to something far more profound than entertainment. It describes a civilizational achievement. Sport demonstrates that human beings need not face existential danger to experience existential emotions. War confronts us with existential stakes; sport invites us into experiential ones. Both organize emotion, but only one leaves cities in ruins. Unlike theater, whose ending is already written, or war, whose costs are all too real, sport uniquely combines symbolic stakes with genuine uncertainty. Transforming conflict into a symbolic experience allows societies to rehearse cooperation, rivalry, sacrifice, resilience, uncertainty, and collective identity within a framework designed to prevent conflict from spilling into the physical world.

The World Cup is the largest expression of this idea ever created. Throughout the match, billions of people voluntarily inhabit the same unresolved future. They attend to the same clock, the same uncertainty, the same possibility of triumph or defeat. In an age increasingly defined by fragmented media and personalized algorithms, the tournament remains one of the few institutions capable of synchronizing human attention on a planetary scale. The World Cup is therefore not merely an escape from reality. It is a refinement of one of reality’s oldest patterns: the human need to gather around shared stakes, shared uncertainty, and a shared future. Civilization’s genius may have been learning how to satisfy that need symbolically rather than catastrophically.

Attention Follows Uncertainty

We do not lean toward the screen when the outcome is guaranteed. We do not hold our breath for the expected, nor do our hearts race for the inevitable. The human brain is, at its core, a prediction engine—constantly modeling the future to navigate an uncertain world. When the future is largely predictable, attention relaxes; the brain conserves energy. But when the future becomes genuinely unresolved, the mind snaps into high gear.

Throughout evolutionary history, uncertainty often signaled danger. A rustle in the tall grass, an unexpected storm on the horizon, an unfamiliar silhouette at the edge of camp—these were moments when the inability to predict the next five seconds could mean death. To survive, humans evolved neural systems exquisitely sensitive to uncertainty. When the future becomes difficult to predict, networks involved in attention, motivation, learning, and decision-making become more active, sharpening perception and pulling consciousness into the present moment.

Sport hijacks this ancient survival mechanism and puts it in a bell jar. 

The brain is not merely watching a ball. It is continuously interpreting a dense stream of social information—cooperation, competition, strategy, adaptation, trust, and leadership—that is compressed into a shared symbolic contest. A match is a deliberate machine for generating structured unpredictability. In close contests, the brain treats each new play as evidence bearing on an unresolved future, continuously updating expectations as the possible outcome shifts from moment to moment. Unlike a theater performance or a novel, where the ending has already been written and merely awaits revelation, a sporting event is authored in real time. The actor on stage cannot truly fail to deliver a line without breaking the play; the striker on the field can miss an open net by an inch, forever altering the story that everyone is living together.

Yet uncertainty alone cannot explain the extraordinary power of sport. The world is filled with uncertain events that command almost none of our attention. We do not become emotionally invested in the outcome of a stranger’s coin toss, nor do billions gather to watch an unfamiliar stock price fluctuate. Uncertainty is necessary, but it is not sufficient.

Attention follows uncertainty when uncertainty has been endowed with shared consequence. This is the mechanism by which sport functions as an attention technology. For the length of a match, civilization constructs a closed ecosystem of meaning. That is precisely what sport accomplishes. Within the carefully bounded world of the game, civilization temporarily assigns profound meaning to an otherwise arbitrary sequence of events. Every action acquires symbolic weight. Every pass matters. Every tackle matters. Every shot matters. Not because the physical world depends upon them, but because millions of people have agreed to temporarily inhabit the same symbolic universe. The game has temporarily become its own universe of consequence.

The brain is not merely tracking the movement of a ball. It is reading leadership, cooperation, sacrifice, deception, resilience, timing, and trust compressed into two hours of embodied interaction. Sport, therefore, accomplishes something remarkable. It does not merely manufacture consequence without catastrophe; it manufactures uncertainty without catastrophe. It creates a genuinely unresolved future while ensuring the conflict remains bounded by rules, time, and mutual consent. The emotional architecture of existential life is preserved, but its destructive consequences are held in check.

This is why sport captures us in a way scripted drama rarely can. It offers something increasingly rare in modern life: a domain of absolute rule-bound order that nevertheless yields genuine unpredictability. The rules never change, yet the ending remains unknowable.

When billions of people watch a World Cup match, they are not merely observing a game. They are inhabiting the same unresolved future. Once spectators enter that symbolic world, the players cease to be merely strangers. They become temporary representatives of hopes, identities, and possible futures that spectators have chosen to inhabit. Every pass, every tackle, every shot represents a branching point in a story whose ending has not yet been written. Their collective attention converges not because the movement of a ball is inherently meaningful, but because civilization has temporarily endowed that uncertainty with shared consequence.

The World Cup thus reveals something profound about the human condition. We do not simply crave certainty, nor do we seek chaos. We seek meaningful uncertainty—a future whose outcome matters, but whose consequences need not destroy us. Sport may be one of civilization’s greatest inventions precisely because it gives us that experience, again and again, without requiring catastrophe.

The Grammar of Conflict

Civilizations did not invent sport randomly, nor did they preserve its form by accident. Across centuries and across cultures separated by oceans and eras, sport has consistently retained a remarkably similar family of structural features. It is tempting to dismiss these as mere rules of play, but they are anything but arbitrary. They endure because they are precisely the elements that organize human attention around collective struggle.

Together, they form what can only be called the grammar of conflict. Like every language, this grammar consists of a small set of recurring elements that can be recombined into countless different expressions. Its basic vocabulary includes:

  • Two Sides: The irreducible binary. Before attention can unify, perception must first bifurcate: us and them, self and other.
  • Territory & Boundaries: A physical space endowed with symbolic meaning, where progress is measured, positions are defended, and movement itself becomes consequential.
  • Uniforms: The temporary subordination of the individual to the collective. The uniform instantly communicates allegiance, transforming isolated people into a visible coalition.
  • The Clock: Time ceases to be an abstract continuum and becomes a dwindling resource. Every passing second changes the meaning of every decision.
  • Rules & Referees: The external authority that prevents conflict from collapsing into chaos. Rules preserve uncertainty while ensuring that the contest remains symbolic rather than violent.
  • Spectators: Conflict becomes culture because it is witnessed. The audience does not merely observe the contest; it amplifies its significance by investing collective attention in its outcome.
  • Stakes: Every contest requires something that can be won or lost. The specific prize may be symbolic—a trophy, a championship, national pride—but without stakes, uncertainty becomes mere randomness rather than meaningful drama.
  • Victory & Defeat: Every sentence in the language of conflict seeks resolution. In a world full of ambiguity, negotiation, and inconclusive debates, the final score delivers a clear ending. Someone wins. Someone loses. The uncertainty is resolved.

This grammar is not unique to sport. War, politics, courtroom litigation, geopolitics, elections, and even many modern video games draw upon remarkably similar structural principles. Each recombines the same underlying vocabulary to produce different kinds of conflict. Sport, then, does not imitate war. Rather, sport and war are two different sentences written in the same underlying language.

The crucial difference is that sport systematically transforms that language. It preserves the generative grammar of consequential conflict while removing its catastrophic consequences. The struggle remains real; the destruction does not. By deploying this grammar within a bounded arena, civilization created a high-stakes language that nearly everyone can intuitively understand. We do not need to be taught how to feel when a team advances into enemy territory as the clock winds down. Our species has been reading this grammar for millennia.

When we sit down to watch a match, we are not learning a new language. We are speaking one of humanity’s oldest ones. Civilization’s achievement was not inventing that language, but teaching it to speak without bloodshed.

The Planetary Ritual

Every four years, something extraordinary happens. For a brief window of time, billions of people—separated by language, ideology, geography, and wealth—voluntarily orient their attention toward the same unfolding reality. They watch the same clock tick down. They react to the same sudden moments of triumph and despair. Strangers across opposite hemispheres inhabit the same symbolic present.

In the early 20th century, the sociologist Émile Durkheim sought to understand what held human societies together. He coined the term collective effervescence to describe those rare, heightened moments when individuals gather around a shared symbol, participate in a common ritual, and suddenly experience themselves as part of something vastly larger than their individual lives. In these moments, the boundary between the self and the group briefly dissolves.

The World Cup may be the largest recurring instance of collective effervescence in human history. This is not merely because sports are popular. It is because civilizations require recurring mechanisms that transform individual attention into collective attention. Durkheim described the subjective experience of this synchronization. The World Cup reveals one of its most remarkable modern expressions. Throughout history, this function has been performed by a relatively small number of institutions. Shared religious rituals gathered villages beneath a single roof. Harvest festivals marked the turning of the seasons. Public coronations reaffirmed political authority. And, most destructively, war forced entire populations to align their attention toward a common existential threat.

As traditional institutions have fractured, the need for shared focus has not vanished. It has simply sought new containers. This reveals one of the defining scarcities of the twenty-first century. Information is no longer scarce; it is overwhelming. Computing power continues to expand. Data accumulates faster than any individual could ever consume it. What has become genuinely rare is something else: shared attention.

Algorithms increasingly optimize for individual engagement rather than collective experience. Media is personalized. Feeds are curated for each user. Millions of people can inhabit the same city while occupying entirely different informational worlds. We rarely look at the same sky, let alone the same screen. We increasingly inhabit parallel realities tailored to our individual interests, anxieties, and desires.

The Olympics and the World Cup represent two different expressions of human excellence. The Olympics celebrate the extraordinary diversity of human achievement, inviting our attention to move among dozens of sports, stories, and champions. The World Cup does almost the opposite. It gathers billions of people around a single unfolding narrative, concentrating attention on a single unresolved future that the world experiences together. Its achievement is not breadth, but convergence.

In this context, the World Cup becomes far more than a tournament. It is a planetary ritual. It remains one of the last institutions capable of resisting fragmentation—one of the few occasions when billions of people voluntarily inhabit the same unresolved future, speak the same ancient grammar of conflict, and experience the same rising and falling tension together, without requiring a single life to be lost. Perhaps this is the deeper purpose of sport. Not simply to entertain us, nor merely to determine who is strongest, fastest, or most skilled. Its greatest achievement may be reminding billions of strangers what it feels like to inhabit the same present together.

I was tense. So were billions of other people. Not because we knew one another. Not because our survival depended upon the outcome. But because, for the duration of the match, civilization had once again aligned billions of minds around a future that none of us could predict.

The Species That Plays

In his 1938 classic Homo Ludens, the historian Johan Huizinga argued that play is not merely an activity contained within culture. Culture itself arises in play and as play. We are not only the species that thinks—Homo sapiens—or the species that makes—Homo faber. We are also Homo ludens: the species that plays. Yet Huizinga’s observation leaves us with a deeper, more intimate mystery. Why do we seek play? Why do billions of people voluntarily spend their time, emotion, and anxiety entering artificial domains of tension?

Consider what we do when we sit down to watch a match, open a novel, attend a performance, or follow an election. We willingly surrender our equilibrium. We allow events beyond our control to elevate our heart rates. We weep over symbolic triumphs and mourn symbolic defeats. We submit ourselves to suspense even when nothing in our immediate survival depends upon the resolution.

If human beings were purely rational creatures driven solely by the pursuit of comfort and security, this behavior would be inexplicable. We would seek only ease, certainty, and predictable pleasure.

Instead, we actively seek tension. The reason touches something fundamental about human consciousness. Humans do not simply seek pleasure. We seek meaningful participation in an unresolved future. To be alive is to exist in time—to stand continually at the narrow, razor-sharp boundary between a remembered past and an unwritten future. Nothing feels more suffocating to the human spirit than a future that appears entirely predetermined, rigid, or indifferent. Nothing feels more thrillingly vital than a future that hangs in the balance: one in which action matters, choices ripple outward, and the ending remains genuinely unknown.

Stories, theater, music, politics, religion, and sport all organize this experience in different ways. They draw us out of the monotony of predictable routine and place us inside moments of meaningful contingency. They create structures in which anticipation intensifies, possibilities multiply, and what happens next appears to matter.

Sport may be the purest version because its conclusion has not yet been composed. The players do not know the ending. The spectators do not know it. Even the institutions that built the arena and established its rules cannot determine what will happen once play begins. When we immerse ourselves in the outcome of a match, we are rehearsing what it means to be alive in time. We reach for an ancient human longing: to care deeply about what happens next, to feel the weight of possibility, and to experience the electrifying sensation that the future—if only for one hundred twenty minutes—is still waiting to be written.

Epilogue: After the Whistle

The whistle blows.

Its sharp sound cuts through the roaring stadium, and in a fraction of a second, the universe of the game collapses. The bench spills onto the turf in jubilation. The losing side sinks into the grass, staring blankly into the sky. On screens thousands of miles away, cameras move across faces streaked with tears and faces radiant with disbelieving joy.

Then, slowly, the dissolution begins. The broadcast ends. Television screens flicker off in living rooms from Buenos Aires to Tokyo. Flags are folded and tucked into coats. Millions of people step into dark streets, board late-night trains, or close their laptops and walk into quietly lit kitchens to make a cup of tea. In a physical sense, almost nothing has changed. The political borders of the world remain where they were two hours earlier. The economy continues along its indifferent axis. The personal burdens, obligations, and quiet heartbreaks that each spectator carried into the room are waiting exactly where they left them.

Yet something real has happened. During the match, the boundaries of individual isolation briefly became permeable. Billions of separate minds, enclosed within private worries and algorithmically curated worlds, agreed to inhabit the same present. They watched the same clock. They reacted to the same collisions and reversals. They held their breath as the same ball descended through the air, even when they hoped it would land in different places.

The final whistle does not merely end a soccer match. It dissolves one of the largest temporary communities of attention ever assembled on Earth. Like all rituals, it leaves behind a peculiar stillness—the stadium empties. Paper drifts across rows of vacant plastic seats. The grass, stamped with the marks of studs and bodies, cools beneath the floodlights. Millions return to their regular lives.

I stopped watching the television. My heart rate slowly returned to normal. I had been tense. And so had billions of others. We did not know one another. We did not all want the same outcome. Our survival did not depend upon what happened on the field. But for a little while, amid an ocean of noise and fragmentation, we had cared about the same unresolved future. And that shared tension had been enough.Email

Martina Moneke writes about art, fashion, culture, and politics, drawing on history, philosophy, and science to illuminate ethics, civic responsibility, and the imagination. Her work has appeared in Common Dreams, Countercurrents, Eurasia Review, iEyeNews, LA Progressive, Pressenza, Raw Story, Sri Lanka Guardian, Truthdig, and ZNetwork.org, among others. In 2022, she received the Los Angeles Press Club’s First Place Award for Election Editorials at the 65th Annual Southern California Journalism Awards. She is based in Los Angeles and New York.


Source: FPIF

The World Cup is a photographic image of the world, but it is overexposed. It is blurred though the filters of nationalist propaganda and individual heroics. At play are all the features of geopolitics: power games, big money, troubles with AI, competition at all costs, threats, animosities, and mistrust, to name just a few.

Consider, for instance, the Olympic Games. In the Olympic Games, the rules are clear. No kind of demonstration or political, religious, or racial propaganda is permitted at any Olympic sites, venues, or areas. Individuals, organizations, and nations cannot profit from them, politically or commercially. The goal is to promote friendly efforts and healthy rivalry.

The World Cup, by contrast, is a professional championship with its own changing rules and an open focus on profit for all involved. The national exaltation of the results is expected. The World Cup mobilizes nations around their teams and, especially, around heroes on those teams. As the biggest spectacles on the planet, aside from wars, World Cup matches would make Roman rulers envious.

Ritualized Spectacle

The bigger the spectacle, the more elements of rituals they embrace. According to Émile Durkheim, rituals create a state of collective effervescence, forging emotional unity and reminding people they are part of something larger. That can give individuals a warm feeling of belonging or a blinding patriotic zeal. In The Mass Psychology of Fascism, Wilhelm Reich convincingly depicted how the energies of the masses can be steered, manipulated and exploited.

When it comes to rituals connected to sport events, “togetherness” is demonstrated through repetitive acts, the wearing of various sorts of uniforms, flag-waving, shouting with or without music. The “Viking row” of the Norwegian fans leaves many impressed and others envious. Testosterone is on open display, allowing for the free expression of basic instincts without the label of  “uncivilized.” Hero-worship also plays a prominent role, even when the heroes are not at their best. This summer in the United States, the heroes have been Harry Kane, Lionel Messi, Erling Haaland, Cristiano Ronaldo, Kylian Mbappe, Jude Bellingham and others at the top of the list. . Donald Trump and FIFA chief Gianni Infantino, though not actively chasing the ball, have tried but failed to join their ranks.

At the margins but persistently followed by the cameras are the rich, famous, and powerful. Many heads of states traveled to support their national teams. Glued to their screens, spectators around the world could also follow the socializing of David Beckham and Tom Cruise, scrutinize the national insignia embraced by Brad Pitt and his girlfriend, wonder if Mick Jagger has lost weight, eyeball the outfits chosen by the jaded Victoria Beckham, witness Ryan Reynolds’s joy of cheering. and observe Jeff Bezos and Lauren Sánchez conversing. Who can ask for more from a sport?

Whatever else the World Cup delivers, it certainly provides a good amount of kitsch. According to the definition, kitsch appeals to popular or lowbrow taste, it is often of poor quality, using bright and clashing colours, is overly dramatic, immediately grabs attention, and evokes shallow emotions. Two steps forward is novelist Milan Kundera and his concept of “totalitarian kitsch,” which denies the complexities, doubts, and unpleasant realities of human existence by banning dissent, irony, and individuality. Each group of World Cup fans shows dissent only toward the judges when they start waving yellow or red cards at their favorites. Such fans unify against all the others, who are also unifying against all the others. It is blind tribalism at its best.

Money and Power

The World Cup means money.. Tickets prices are soaring. “FIFA recently listed a ticket for the July 19 final at New Jersey’s MetLife Stadium for $32,970,” according to Forbes. “In April, FIFA’s resale site listed four seats to the final for a little less than $2.3 million each.”. So, FIFA and the host stadiums are financially thriving, and so are broadcasters, traveling companies, sponsors, advertisers, hotels in America, and pubs around the world. Visitors are spending whatever they can. And before each game, the TV audience in The Netherlands was regularly informed that “this program has been brought to you by Coca Cola.”

Professional football has long been a big business, with players bought and sold at high prices. This practice is called the “transfer system,” and it’s been in effect since 1893, when the English Football Association formally registered players as owned by their clubs. This year’s World Cup features two hero-billionaires, Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi. Others are simply millionaires, earning on-field salaries and off-field payments through endorsements, licensing, appearances, and memorabilia as well as cash returns from any businesses in which the athlete has a significant interest.

Money goes well with power. In football, Gianni Infantino (an Italian, Swiss, and Lebanese citizen) is worth $20 million as of 2026, plus an annual compensation as FIFA president of $6 million per year. He also knows how to choose friends. He tirelessly and shamelessly praises Donald Trump, awarding him  the FIFA Peace Prize in a rather tasteless political spectacle that shouldn’t have anything to do with sport. Afterwards, after an intimate phone call from Trump, Infantino decided that a decision of a professional referee wouldn’t stand and American footballer Folarin Balogun could play even after receiving a red card. For a moment Trump was happy, but his outrageous intervention didn’t save the American team, which lost convincingly against Belgium.

In Other Scandals 

U.S. foreign policy also played a role in the games. Iran’s team could enter U.S. soil only a day before each match and then had to quickly return after the game to their accommodations in Tijuana, Mexico. U.S. Customs and Border Protection denied Somalian referee Omar Arana entry to the country because of some unspecified security challenge, and FIFA promptly removed him from the tournament.

Artificial intelligence also contributed to the games this summer. Video Assistant Referee (VAR) come under scrutiny following a string of controversial decisions in matches involving several countries, particularly Argentina and Portugal.

For these moves and others, FIFA and Infantino in particular lost a lot of respect. Trump was ridiculed in virtually all corners of the globe. And European trust in the United States and its president dropped, with 81 percent of citizens from eight countries considering America unreliable. But this, too, was an expression of patriotism, of the anti-American variety.

The game itself remains beautiful. As Tárlach Ó Ruiséil writes:

Football is one of the greatest art forms. The ability of a player to manipulate their body like the finest ballet dancer, to do what appears unnatural—a sudden change of direction, the power of a shot or header, athletic grace and strength—comes together in a free-flowing orchestra at its very best… The best players on the biggest stage, cultivating their talents while inspiring national pride, have turned the World Cup into the most iconic sporting spectacle on earth.

Though he insists that football belongs to the people, not to oligarchs, politicians, advertisers, or corporate executives, Ruiséil points out that the game never lacked political significance.

Italy’s triumphs in 1934 and 1938 were inseparable from Mussolini’s fascist regime. The 1978 World Cup served Argentina’s military dictatorship as a notorious exercise in sportswashing. And in 2026, Donald Trump’s public intervention… sounded less like a head of state respecting sporting independence and more like a powerful man expecting a favour.

Viking Row

The term ‘patriotism’ is generally perceived as something positive, though much has been written to the contrary. It is something more than the sense of belonging, and its darker sides are easily overlooked. For example, and characteristically, Milénio Stadium, a Portuguese Canadian Weekly claims:

That emotional connection is what makes the FIFA World Cup one of the most powerful and patriotic events in the world…. (it) proves that soccer is more than a gameit is a powerful expression of national pride, capable of uniting millions in a shared sense of identity, passion, and hope.

It would be useful to elaborate more on the word “hope” in this context, but sport commentators don’t have to be experts on all things socio-political. On the other hand, it would be farfetched to expect equal enthusiasm from football fans for both their team and their opponents. Their hearts go first to their own flag and team, and only when their clubs of choice are not playing or have been eliminated can football lovers appreciate the sport as it should be.

Not everyone will go along with the masses and their patriotic enthusiasms. Norwegian football fan Emil Anners Lappen decided, for instance, not to row while thousands of his countrymen directly around him did. Kundera’s totalitarian kitsch describes a political and aesthetic system in which all answers are given in advance in such a way as to preclude any questions. The true opponent of totalitarian kitsch is the person who asks questions and refuses to succumb to mass sentiment, even if those feelings are close to his heart and mind.


This article was originally published by FPIF; please consider supporting the original publication, and read the original version at the link above.

The World Cup Reminded Us What America Can Be

 July 24, 2026

The most powerful moments of the World Cup did not happen only inside stadiums. They happened in restaurants, city streets, neighborhood bars, national parks, and conversations between strangers who realized the person standing across from them was not a stereotype. They were a human being.

Millions of people came to North America expecting to find a country they had seen through television screens, political debates, and international headlines. Instead, they discovered something far more complicated and far more meaningful: actual people.

They found families cheering in stadiums. Volunteers helping visitors navigate unfamiliar cities. Small business owners welcoming new customers. Strangers sharing recommendations about their favorite restaurants, parks, and neighborhoods.

For a few weeks, the world did not experience America as an argument.

It experienced America as a place.

And perhaps that is one of the most important things that could have happened.

The World Cup has always been about more than soccer. It is a celebration of national identity, but it is also one of the largest human gatherings on earth. It creates moments where cultures meet, curiosity replaces suspicion, and people discover that the differences they imagined are often smaller than the similarities they share.

During this tournament, millions of visitors encountered the United States not through political narratives or social media conflicts, but through direct experience.

They walked our streets. They explored our cities. They visited our natural landscapes. They tasted our food. They encountered our contradictions.

And yes, they encountered some very American forms of excess.

International visitors were fascinated by our enormous grocery stores, massive restaurant portions, and the sheer scale of places like Bass Pro Shops and Buc-ee’s. They photographed hotel ice machines. They debated the cultural importance of ranch dressing. They laughed at our tendency to make everything bigger.

Some of it was funny because, honestly, some of it is a little ridiculous.

But beneath the humor was something more important. They were experiencing a culture that is creative, diverse, and constantly evolving.

Every country has traditions that seem unusual from the outside. Every society has things that make visitors pause and ask, “Why do you do that?”

Curiosity is often the beginning of understanding.

And the World Cup gave the world a reason to be curious about America.

Some of the most memorable moments of the tournament had little to do with what happened on the field.

Scottish fans transformed Boston into a celebration of music, friendship, and national pride, filling pubs and neighborhoods with such enthusiasm that locals joked they had nearly emptied the city’s supply of beer.

Norwegian supporters brought their famous row-bow celebration to Times Square, turning one of the world’s most recognizable public spaces into a spontaneous display of joy and cultural pride.

In Atlanta, more than 500,000 visitors arrived for matches and the FIFA Fan Festival. Fans embraced local traditions, documenting their love for American staples like Waffle House and Carolina barbecue. Local businesses became international gathering places where conversations began over shared meals.

In Philadelphia, Brazilian supporters transformed the famous Rocky Steps into a massive celebration of music, dancing, and national pride. Local bars and restaurants experienced crowds comparable to some of the biggest sporting events in America.

Across the country, visitors traveled between host cities and encountered an America that rarely appears in political debates. They found roadside attractions, family restaurants, neighborhood gathering places, and landscapes that inspire awe.

They did not simply attend matches.

They experienced a country.

And perhaps most importantly, they met Americans.

One of the great dangers of modern life is that we increasingly believe we know people we have never met.

We learn about entire countries through headlines. We form opinions about communities through viral videos. We reduce millions of individuals into political categories and cultural stereotypes.

The World Cup offered a powerful reminder that human beings cannot be understood from a distance.

The visitor from another country is not simply a representative of a nation. They are a person with a family, a history, a sense of humor, struggles, hopes, and dreams.

The same is true of Americans.

For many people around the world, America is often encountered through images of political division, economic power, and cultural conflict. Those things are real. We should not ignore our challenges.

But America is also the volunteer helping a visitor find their seat at a stadium.

It is the stranger explaining which hiking trail to visit.

It is the family recommending their favorite local restaurant.

It is the immigrant helping a traveler navigate an unfamiliar city.

In Seattle and Houston, immigrant volunteers played an important role helping international visitors navigate stadiums, training facilities, and local communities. Their presence reflected something fundamental about the American experience: newcomers do not simply arrive in America. They help create America.

This lesson became personal for me through the experience of a close friend.

One of my best friends traveled with his brother from Denver, Colorado, to Guadalajara, Mexico, to attend the Colombia versus DR Congo World Cup match.

When he told me about the trip, I was thrilled for him. Watching a World Cup match in another country is the kind of experience many sports fans dream about. To witness the passion, culture, and energy surrounding a global event firsthand is something truly special.

I was also a little jealous.

I have to confess that.

But his trip forced me to ask myself an important question: Would I have done the same thing?

And if not, why not?

The honest answer is that, like many Americans, I have absorbed certain messages about Mexico for much of my life. We are often presented with images of cartel violence, danger, and instability. We are sometimes encouraged to see Mexico primarily as a place to fear rather than a place filled with millions of people living ordinary, meaningful lives.

Of course, every country has real challenges. But how much of our fear is based on reality, and how much comes from a constant stream of images that prevent us from seeing the full picture?

My friend chose not to let fear make the decision for him.

He followed his passion for soccer. He followed his curiosity. He followed his desire to experience something beyond his own familiar surroundings.

And what did he discover?

Not a stereotype.

A country.

He found hospitality, culture, history, food, music, and people eager to share their home with visitors.

His experience expanded his understanding because he was willing to step beyond the boundaries created by fear.

That is one of the great gifts of travel. It challenges assumptions. It complicates the stories we inherit. It reminds us that no country can be reduced to its worst moments.

Fear can protect us.

But fear can also limit us.

When we allow fear to determine where we go, who we meet, and what we believe, we shrink our world.

When we choose curiosity instead, the world becomes larger.

This is where the ideas of philosopher Karl Popper remain profoundly relevant.

In The Open Society and Its Enemies, Popper argued that free societies are strengthened by openness: openness to new ideas, criticism, diversity, and human exchange.

“We are social creatures to the inmost center of our being,” Popper wrote.

Human beings do not flourish in isolation. We develop through relationships, conversations, friendships, and encounters with people whose experiences differ from our own.

Popper warned about the dangers of the “closed society,” a world built around rigid identities, unquestioned beliefs, and suspicion toward outsiders.

Closed societies seek comfort through separation.

Open societies discover strength through exchange.

A closed society fears difference.

An open society learns from it.

Popper also understood that openness requires responsibility. A free society must defend the conditions that allow freedom to exist. As he famously wrote, “Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance.”

A healthy democracy can maintain borders, uphold laws, and protect its citizens while still embracing the diversity and exchange that make societies stronger.

The choice is not between chaos and isolation.

The choice is between fear and confidence.

Few issues reveal this tension more clearly than immigration.

Immigrants have always helped shape America. They have built businesses, advanced science, enriched the arts, strengthened communities, served in our military, taught in our schools, and cared for our families.

Immigration is not a footnote in American history.

It is American history.

The United States has never been powerful because it kept the world away. It has been powerful because it invited people from around the world to contribute to something larger than themselves.

That is not weakness.

That is our strength.

The World Cup demonstrated this in a way that no political campaign could manufacture.

People did not develop a deeper appreciation for America because of a speech or a slogan.

They experienced America through relationships.

They met us.

And being met changed everything.

We often think international relations happen only in government buildings, conference rooms, and diplomatic meetings.

But some of the most important diplomacy happens in ordinary places.

It happens over shared meals.

It happens on city streets.

It happens when someone from another country visits an American landscape and understands why we protect our public lands.

It happens when fans from different nations celebrate together.

The World Cup may have done more to improve America’s image around the world than any carefully designed public relations effort because it allowed people to experience the country without a filter.

Not the America of stereotypes.

Not the America of political advertisements.

The America of everyday life.

A country that is loud, complicated, imperfect, creative, generous, and always becoming.

The greatest lesson of the World Cup is not about soccer.

It is about humanity.

It is about remembering that democracy is not sustained by people who all look alike, think alike, or come from the same places. It is sustained by people willing to build something together despite their differences.

America’s greatest strength has never come from closing itself off from the world.

It has come from engaging with the world.

The World Cup gave us a glimpse of America at its best: a place where strangers become neighbors, where cultures meet and create something new, and where diversity becomes not a source of fear but a foundation for belonging.

The open society is not simply a philosophical idea.

It is a daily practice.

And for a few unforgettable weeks, the world came here and reminded us why it still matters.

George Cassidy Payne, syndicated by PeaceVoice, is a Rochester-based writer whose work sits at the intersection of politics, ethics, and lived experience. A poet, philosopher, and 988 crisis counselor, he covers issues of democracy, justice, and community resilience. 

Marilyn Monroe and the World Cup


 July 24, 2026

Milton H. Greene, Marilyn Monroe ‘Ballerina’ sitting, 1954. Photo: Courtesy National Portrait Gallery.

Marilyn and Joe D.

If any, it was baseball that was Marilyn Monroe’s game. In 1954, she married the recently retired, New York Yankees great Joe DiMaggio. She attended games with Joe and was once photographed standing at home plate with a baseball bat on her shoulder. In truth, she knew little about the game and didn’t care about sports – “I’ll leave those things to the men,” she said.

Maybe she chose DiMaggio for his grace – he didn’t run so much run as glide toward flyballs in center field; or maybe his steadiness – in 1941 he set a record for getting hits in 56 consecutive games. But whatever the reason, she picked wrong. After showing up uninvited on the location set of The Seven Year Itch on East 58th Street in Manhattan, he grew incensed watching take after take of the famous subway grate scene and onlookers ogling his wife.  Did he think he married Eve Arden? The marriage was over before it barely started.

I went to see Marilyn Monroe: A Portrait, at the National Portrait Gallery in London, the morning after the much-anticipated World Cup football game between England and Argentina. I’m not a big sports fan, and have no attachment to the English squad, but after weeks of public build-up, discussion and expectation, the debacle in Dallas was deflating. I was ready to think about something else and MM seemed an undemanding choice. Little did I guess the exhibition would describe another kind of catastrophe — one more personally affecting than the one that befell English football.

Choosing sides in the World Cup

Though I wanted to be a good ex-pat and root for the American team to win the World Cup, that was impossible. A victory (unlikely though it was) meant a team visit to the White House and Trump crowing that the U.S. was the “hottest” country in the world. And if that wasn’t enough to turn me off the American team, supporters in stadiums chanting “U S A! U S A!” were. They might have been attending a MAGA rally. Trump’s successful overturning of the red card against the American star Folarin Balogun was the clincher.  I couldn’t root for a team helped by the cheater-in-chief

England was the natural place to land. I live in Norwich, U.K. and know lots of people who are big supporters of the English squad. It’s nice to fit in. But that too proved difficult. Could I forget English captain Harry Kane’s golf game with Trump? Would he have said about Hitler what he said about the president: “His golf is pretty good to be honest with you.”

Then there’s the matter of the St. George’s Cross, unfurled on playing fields, waved by fans, and painted on faces and bared (mostly male) torsos. In recent years, the red and white banner has become a sign of British chauvinism, racism and xenophobia. A few journalists have said the proudly multi-cultural English club has reclaimed the banner from the far right. But that’s overly optimistic. A few weeks ago, my wife Harriet and I visited the town of Caister-on-Sea in Norfolk. St. George banners and pennants flew from poles at homes and businesses, and atop the light posts on the high street. Unsurprisingly, the town votes mostly Reform UK or the even further right Great-Yarmouth First Party, an offshoot of Restore Britain, led by Rupert Lowe, Nigel Farage’s rebel angel. Among the policies they support are mass deportation of “illegal migrants,” restoration of the death penalty, strengthening Britain’s “Christian heritage,” and banning halal and kosher meat. UK football fans have no business carrying the St. George Cross unless they want to be associated with that.

And finally, there’s the national anthem sung before English games. It has the same melody as the American contrafactum, “My Country Tis of Thee”:

God save our gracious King! Long live our noble King!
God save the King! Send him victorious, Happy and glorious,
Long to reign over us, God save the King.

Many Brits don’t know the words. When I asked Harriet if she did, she replied “of course!” and sang: “God save our dah-dah king, dah dah dah, dah, dah-dah, God save our King.” But there on the football field in Atlanta, was the English squad, singing every word. You’d think the nation would long ago have retired the song. Imperial nostalgia has for generations crippled the country. It lay behind the Suez debacle in 1956, the elections of Margaret Thatcher, John Major, David Cameron, Teresa May and Boris Johnson, Brexit and the U.K.’s senseless and self-destructive participation in the American wars against Afghanistan and Iraq. The yearning for past, imperial glories (aka crimes) has fortified Britain’s fascist right for a generation and now fuels the rise of the fascist and corrupt Farage. So please, British people, no “victorious” king to “reign over us.” Love your team (and even savvy old Charles) but skip the anthem!

I couldn’t support Argentina either. Though the country was subjected for most of the 19th and early 20thcenturies to dependence on the “British world system,” as Adam Tooze has recently written, that relationship is long over.  The country is now governed by the corrupt, autocratic, obnoxious and chain-saw loving President Javier Milei whose politics are a throwback to the years of the military junta and Dirty War (1976-’83). He was recently re-elected after receiving a promise from his friend Trump and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant of a $20 billion currency swap and another $20 billion of private investment. Rooting for Argentina against England was out of the question.

And to be honest, the sight of skinny, pale, Anthony Gordon in the match against Argentina, sprinting toward the goal to tap in Morgan Rogers’ cross was thrilling – I cheered wildly. But just then, with at least 25 minutes left in the game, the English coach Thomas Teuchel, a lean, tough talking German whose last name is uncomfortably close to Teufel (devil), pulled out Gordon and several other attackers and replaced them with a defensive team unable to mount an offense. The result was predictable: almost the entire rest of the game was played near the English goal, the one place on the field were Lionel Messi, perhaps the greatest of all time, had a freehold. He directed the attack and himself teed up two perfect passes for Argentine scorers. Just after the game ended, I bought my next morning, senior-discount, off-peak, day-return (in American “round-trip”) ticket to London.

Disaster pictures

Around the corner from the much larger National Gallery on Trafalgar Square, catercorner to the church of St. Martin-in-the-Fields on St. Martin’s Lane, sits the National Portrait Gallery, established in 1856, and housed in its current premises since 1896. Formerly a staid institution, stuffed with portraits of kings, queens and notables, it has received successive face lifts and lately a new mission – to bring in more tourists, new audiences, and more money. It has obliged in the expected ways: by mounting exhibitions of portraits by younger and non-white artists, and more significantly for the bottom line, celebrity themed and fashion forward exhibitions. Marilyn Monroe on her 100th birthday was a no-brainer.

The material in the exhibition was cleverly organized by photographer and date. While Monroe worked with a few photographers for nearly the whole of her adult life (she died in 1962, aged 36), she mostly moved from one to another:  So, the story of her photographic history is also the story of her life. First the teenager was documented by Andre de Dienes and Bruno Bernard; then in her 20s by Cecil Beaton, Milton H. Greene, and Sam Shaw; then Richard Avedon, Alfred Eisenstadt, Eve Arnold, Inge Morath, Bert Stern, and so on.

Monroe was a confident and canny model. Almost from the beginning, she understood the value of establishing a close relationship with her photographers (sometimes sexual) and insisting upon editorial discretion. She would examine contact sheets, circling the ones she liked and crossing out with a marker the ones she didn’t. Sometimes, as in the case of Bert Stern in 1962, she even reviewed the negatives, using a stylus to scratch an X on the ones she rejected, making them unusable. (Stern nevertheless printed these disfigured images after Monroe’s death – some are in the exhibition.) In just a few cases, she allowed photographers to publish images she didn’t like – that was the case with Richard Avedon’s sad Marilyn, titled Marilyn Monroes, Actress, New York, 1957. Monroe knew a genius when she met one.

The exhibition also includes painted homages to Monroe, mostly posthumous. An exception is Willem de Kooing’s Marilyn Monroe from 1954. It’s a good, Abstract Expressionist painting, with advancing reds and yellows held in check by brushy black contours. But it would be hard to call it a portrait; we learn nothing from it about Monroe because nothing is said. The same is true for the famous Warhol images, three of which are in the exhibition. The paintings (made with paint and screens) and screen prints (made with ink and screens) are concerned with celebrity, commodity, repetition, desire and surfeit – but not Marilyn Monroe. Indeed, it’s her disguise that we see — heavy lidded eyes, open-mouthed half smile, yellow hair and beauty mark — not her character or temperament. This is icon, not individual.

Gene Kornman, publicity portrait of Marilyn Monroe as Rose Loomis in the 1953 film Niagara, Wikimedia Commons; and Andy Warhol, Green Marilyn, 1962. National Gallery of Art, Washington D.C. Photo: Courtesy National Portrait Gallery, London.

The latter is what we search for in photo after photo of Marilyn but rarely discover. Even in her nudes, she kept herself to herself. There are perhaps glimpses of sorrow in Avedon’s photos, self-reflection in Shaw’s pictures of her and her husband, playwright Arthur Miller, and vulnerability in Milton Greene’s image of Marilyn as a ballerina from 1954. That was the year she became a bona fide star from three films released the year before: the Hitchcockian noir Niagara, and two comedies, How to Marry a Millionaire and Gentlemen Prefer Blondes. I still cry from delight and admiration every time I see her, dressed in a pink satin, floor length, strapless gown and matching pink opera gloves, singing “Diamonds Are a Girl’s Best Friend.” The song and its performance offer one answer to Marxist-feminist Evelyn Reed’s contemporaneous argument that capitalism progressed  “from selling women as commodities, to selling commodities to women.”  Marilyn’s fetish-forward production number argues that women should use the promise of sex to trick wealthy men into giving them diamonds. A gift economy is the antithesis of capitalism.

The earliest Warhol picture in the exhibition, Green Marilyn, was part of his “Disaster Series” (1962-67) which represented plane crashes, car crashes, the electric chair, suicides, and similar subjects. They are widely considered the artist’s best works because they appear to undermine the image of the U.S. – still widespread on the cusp of the Vietnam War – as a land of affluence and ease. In 1963, even before the assassination of Kennedy, Warhol said about the series:

The big plane crash picture, the front page of the newspaper: ‘129 Die.’ I was also painting the Marilyns. I realized that everything I was doing must have been Death. It was Christmas or Labor Day—a holiday—and every time you turned on the radio, they said something like ‘4 million are going to die.’ That started it.

Knowing how the story ends — Marilyn Monroe’s suicide by drug overdose — nearly every image at the National Portrait Gallery exhibition is a disaster picture.

Parapraxis on Sutton Place

One work especially brought this home to me.  It wasn’t the small paintings by Margaret Harrison (Marilyn is Dead! 1998) and Marlene Dumas (Dead Marilyn, 2008) based upon autopsy photographs.  It was the photo by Sam Shaw of her and Monroe’s husband Arthur Miller standing on Sutton Place near their apartment at 444 East 57th Street in Manhattan. Behind them is the Queensboro Bridge. I know that location well because of a childhood misunderstanding, a kind of Freudian parapraxis.

My family lived on the other side of the Queensboro Bridge, in Forest Hills, about nine miles east on Queens Boulevard. I have just a few, but clear memories of Monroe’s death on August 4, 1962. Everybody was talking about it, my parents and two older siblings included. In addition to being famous and beloved, Monroe had married Miller a few years before and converted to Judaism, making her one of us. Though I was just six, I remember my mother crying and the two-word headline of the New York Daily News, “Marilyn Dead.” (It’s possible the latter is a false memory, and I only saw the newspaper headline later. My parents mostly read The New York Times.)

Daily News, “Marilyn Dead,” August 6, 1962; and Wurts Bros., Facade of 444 East 57th Street.  1949. Collection of the Museum of the City of New York, MNY243067. Public Domain.

Soon after that, coincidentally, my father drove with me beside him over the Queensboro Bridge into Manhattan. Exiting the bridge from the lower ramp, he pointed toward the building off Sutton Place where Monroe lived, and I assumed, died. Before then, I’d never thought about death as occurring at a specific time and nearby place.

Though I learned some years later that Monroe died in her little house with a pool in the Brentwood neighborhood of Los Angeles and not in her New York penthouse, Sutton place continued for years to invoke for me the actuality of death.  Every time I crossed the bridge by bus or car and exited via the 59th Street off-ramp, there it was, 444 East 57th Street. I haven’t returned there in years, but Sam Shaws’s picture of Marilyn and Arthur Miller brought it back to mind.

Monroe’s premature death was the result of multiple factors: illness, miscarriages, spousal abuse, drug addiction, psychiatric mistreatment, professional anxiety, loneliness and depression. Together they caused a tragedy -– that’s what was so vividly staged at the National Portrait Gallery.

World Cup final

A few days after my return to Norwich, Marilyn’s death safely secreted again in memory, I was back to watching football: the final game of the World Cup between Spain and Argentina. What a disappointment! On the Spanish side, there was lots of passing but little finishing; on the Argentine, lots of fouling and copious diving. At one point, the great Messi, after a collision with Spaniard Aymeric Laporte, lay on the ground, stiff and straight as a board, like a child playing dead. He got a foul but not the penalty kick he was hoping for. On another occasion, after Argentina’s Enzo Fernández was rightly given a red card for upending the Spanish Pau Cubarshe, Messi spotted Spanish left-back Marc Cucurella momentarily covering his mouth as he spoke. Messi ran to the nearest referee, pointed to Cucurella, and insisted he be thrown off the field for covering his mouth, a rule drafted to prevent racist abuse. (Messi is white – part Spanish and part Italian; Cucurella said nothing racist). The referees quickly dismissed the ploy. After the game, Messi claimed that “the system was rigged” against the 39-year-old, billionaire footballer.

 In the end, Spain, the far better team, prevailed. As important, 80-year-old Donald Trump used up three hours of his limited term of office and respiration, watching a boring game. He also had to endure Gianni Infantino’s ingratiation and the nearly 30 minute half-time show, featuring Madonna’s lip-synced, frozen-faced mash-up of pop and disco; Shakira lip-syncing the FIFA anthem titled “Dai Dai” (“C’mon, C’mon”) dressed in a Hula-skirt; and a somnambulist troubadour Justin Bieber performing his Gospel-lite “Everything Hallelujah.” He wore, naturally, items from his own clothing line: Hoodies $160, sunglasses $200.

Equally gratifying, Trump and Infantino were greeted with lusty boos when they walked on the field after the game to present awards. Then things went from bad to worse for them. First, Infantino wouldn’t let the president by himself carry the 18th carat gold, World Cup Trophy, apparently worried the kleptocrat-in-chief would make off with it. Then after shaking a few reluctant Spanish hands, Trump was ushered aside by team captain Rodri — no yellow card was issued, but the Secret Service must have been nervous. The U.S. president was subsequently edited out of the official Spanish and FIFA World Cup champions photographs.Trump, who two weeks ago called Spain “hopeless” and a country with “bad people,” was beaten. He now praised the country’s team and denied any previous trash-talking: “I have no tension. I have no tension with anybody.”

At about the same time in Argentina, President Milei was mocked for failing to delete his pre-scheduled posting on X declaring a national holiday for “the victory celebrations for the Argentine National Team.” Elsewhere, Palestinians and their allies celebrated the victory of Spain, whose president publicly recognized that Israel’s conduct in Gaza constituted a genocide and said that its president, Benjamin Netanyahu was “a criminal who must be arrested immediately.”  For a little while, there were glimmers of justice.

Stephen F. Eisenman is emeritus professor at Northwestern University and Honorary Research Fellow at the University of East Anglia. He is the author of a dozen books, the latest of which (with Sue Coe), is titled “The Young Person’s Illustrated Guide to American Fascism,” (OR Books, 2014). He is also co-founder of Anthropocene Alliance. Stephen welcomes comments and replies at s-eisenman@northwestern.edu