technology

Far-right activists clashed online with billionaire Elon Musk and other supporters of President-elect Donald Trump over the necessity for a talented immigration program that has long been a lifeblood for Silicon Valley – pointing to a possible rift between Trump's core nationalist base and of technology suggests leaders who’ve come to support him.

The dispute, which became public throughout the holiday week, may very well be a harbinger of a split inside Trump's coalition over the implementation of immigration policy, a difficulty that enlivened Trump's White House campaign.

The controversy spread to She pointed to Krishnan's previous support for lifting some caps on H-1B visas, a program that permits foreigners with technical skills to work within the United States. The policy is “in direct contradiction” to Trump’s agenda, Loomer wrote.

The criticism was met with intense tension amongst a few of Trump's closest advisers, particularly Tesla and SpaceX CEO Musk. David Sacks, who will probably be the president-elect's AI and crypto czar; and Vivek Ramaswamy, who will head a commission to chop government spending. “'Normal' is not enough in a highly competitive global market for tech talent,” Ramaswamy said. “And if we act as if it is, we will get our rights from China.”

The online fight sparked a series of racist posts from Loomer through which he falsely referred to Indians as “third world invaders” with low IQs while saying he wanted a “civil war” between Trump's far-right base and the “tech bros.” who’ve come to support his upcoming government.

Notable Republicans, including former Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley, supported Loomer's position. “There is nothing wrong with American workers or American culture,” she said Thursday on X. “We should be investing and prioritizing Americans, not foreign workers.”

Musk, who once held an H-1B visa and has relied on this system to employ 1000’s of Tesla employees, said this system is a critical way for technology firms to recruit one of the best engineering talent to compete globally. “The number of people who are super talented engineers AND super motivated is far too small in the US,” Musk wrote on X at Christmas. “If you want your TEAM to win the championship, you have to recruit top talent wherever you are whatever they are.”

The online feud reflects the challenges Trump will face in holding together the fragile political coalition that won him the White House, which included unprecedented financial support from Musk and other Silicon Valley billionaires.

“It’s a sign of future conflict,” said Samuel Hammond, a senior economist on the Foundation for American Innovation. “It’s like foreplay.”

Krishnan declined to comment. Loomer and a representative from the Trump transition team didn’t reply to requests for comment. Trump traveled with Loomer throughout the campaign, but amid criticism of her past comments, he said in September he didn’t “control” her.

Trump has tried to portray himself as a champion of legal immigration, regardless that he severely restricted entry options for immigrants in his first term. Trump has offered few concrete details about how he’ll handle high-skilled immigration into the tech industry during his second term.

In a June episode of the “All In” podcast, co-hosted by Sacks, Trump said he would mechanically give a green card to each international student with a school degree.

“If you graduate or get your doctorate from a university, you should be able to stay in this country,” he said.

In the run-up to the primary Trump administration, many tech CEOs tried to construct a bridge with the president-elect throughout the transition period by meeting in his New York Trump Tower. But those delicate relations collapsed when Trump almost immediately implemented what critics and federal judges called a “Muslim ban,” barring residents of several Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States.

The incident amounted to a “shock wave” within the industry, where many individuals are or know founders and employees with an immigrant background, said Hammond.

“Immigration is an economically important issue for the tech industry, but in many cases it is also a personal one,” he said. “They all understand the inefficiencies and bureaucracy surrounding the U.S. immigration system and the Kafkaesque nightmares it can cause.”

But this time the tech industry is rather more directly involved in Trump's transition. Self-proclaimed “first buddy” Elon Musk has spent much of the weeks since Election Day on the president-elect's side, and Trump has tapped many Silicon Valley investors and executives for distinguished roles in his administration.

As Silicon Valley firms compete to develop artificial intelligence products, the necessity for foreign-born talent has increased. 28 of the highest 43 AI firms within the United States were co-founded by immigrants, and 70 percent of full-time doctoral students in AI-related fields are international students, in keeping with a 2023 evaluation by the U.S. Institute of Technology National Foundation for American Politics.

While Trump expects a tricky immigration policy that features the militarized mass deportation of illegal immigrants, many within the tech industry are urging him to expand legal immigration for highly expert employees. Some argue that the change is crucial for the United States to stay competitive with China.

During his first presidency, high-skilled immigration emerged as certainly one of the most important flashpoints between Trump and Silicon Valley. Although Trump at times acknowledged the necessity for American firms to recruit top talent, his administration restricted the H-1B program. Stephen Miller, who helped craft some immigration policies throughout the first Trump administration, is returning to the White House as Trump's deputy chief of staff for policy and homeland security adviser.

The online debate resonated with lawmakers in Washington, who’ve long sought ways to enhance the H-1B program. Rep. Ro Khanna, a Democrat who represents Silicon Valley, defended Krishnan and said he supports reforming the H-1B program.

“We should celebrate that immigrants like Elon Musk, Jensen Huang and Sriram Krishnan choose to come to the United States,” he told The Washington Post. “This has strengthened our economic and technological supremacy. I am happy that Sriram is appointed.”

Restrictions on H-1B visas during Trump's first term faced strong opposition from major tech firms. During the pandemic, Trump temporarily froze H-1B visas, a move the federal government said would help Americans who’ve lost their jobs. That same yr, the Trump administration also introduced latest rules that tightened eligibility for H-1B visas and required firms to supply higher salaries to those on visas. A federal judge later rejected a number of the rules, including the salary regulation.

In President Joe Biden's final weeks in office, his administration rolled out rules to “modernize” the H-1B program by making it easier for international students to acquire visas and improving the efficiency of the appliance process.

“These reforms target systematic abuse by IT consulting firms while recognizing the program’s proven net positive impact on U.S. technological competitiveness,” said Divyansh Kaushik, vp at Beacon Global Strategies.

Tech firms particularly depend on H-1B visas to recruit talent, that are capped at 85,000 latest visas per yr. Amazon had probably the most latest petitions approved, with 3,871 latest H-1B employees in 2024, in keeping with Amazon Data compiled from the nonpartisan organization National Foundation for American Policy. Google had 1,058 approved applications and Tesla had 742, the information showed. (The Washington Post is owned by Amazon founder Jeff Bezos.)

Ramaswamy said in an X post on Thursday that tech firms are hiring foreign-born engineers because “for far too long American culture has revered mediocrity over excellence,” drawing criticism from notable pro-Trump figures.

Brenden Dilley, a pro-Trump podcaster, responded to Ramaswamy's post. “I always love it when these tech bros emphatically tell you that they have no understanding of American culture and then have the nerve to tell you that YOU are the problem with America,” he wrote.

Loomer, who has 1.4 million followers on (“Loomer trolls for attention. Ignore.” Musk said on X.)

Loomer said she hopes the feud with Silicon Valley will change Trump's views.

“We look forward to the inevitable divorce between President Trump and Big Tech,” she said on X. “Let's pray that this fake Big Tech 'lovefest' with Trump ends sooner rather than later.”

Why did the federal government shut down social media?

The social media ban was undoubtedly directly related to this leaked audio clips. These delivered to light alleged conversations between quite a lot of key figures, including the Prime Minister, the Police Commissioner, ministers and members of the judiciary. Some of those conversations touched on sensitive topics akin to police brutality and institutional interference.

The principal justification for the social media ban was due to this fact national security – as stated within the Prime Minister's discussions intercepted on his private and secure line and were shared on social media.

The Prime Minister initially dismissed the leaks as being manipulated by artificial intelligence. But reporting on the leaks became increasingly necessary and the social media ban was subsequently imposed. It was lifted inside 24 hours of an enormous accident Game each locally and internationally.

Has there ever been a social media ban?

It is the primary time that social media has been banned in Mauritius. However, there have been more general concerns about digital freedoms.

The latest Ibrahim Index of African Governance – a tool that measures and monitors governance in African countries – showed that digital freedom in Mauritius has fallen by 21.7% during the last decade. It's now ranked 25 (out of 54) in Africa, although Mauritius has one National strategic plan transform the country right into a digitally advanced, inclusive society by 2030.

There has also been a tightening of laws regarding Cybersecurity and cybercrime Mauritius has a law that criminalizes any crime committed by social media users.

The crackdown on social media is a cause for concern in a rustic where social media is amazingly popular. The majority of Mauritians get their news through social media and 85% of the Mauritian population are Facebook users.

What is the status of media freedom in Mauritius?

The social media ban have to be seen as a part of a general erosion of democratic rights and freedoms in Mauritius.

This trend has been occurring over the past 10 years, but has accelerated since 2019 with the introduction of quite a lot of data monitoring and control projects.

The Mauritius protected city For example, the project is rolling out 4,000 cameras (with facial recognition functionality) across the island. The project has been touted as an idea to enhance safety and is a cause for concern. Citizens fear that this can violate their political rights and civil liberties.

In 2021, the Information and Communications Technologies Authority wanted to alter the law to make sure greater regulation of social media. The proposal had many local and international points thrust back because it was seen as a way of controlling data on social media platforms.

In 2023, this became mandatory for residents Re-register SIM cards or have it deactivated. There were concerns about possible intrusion into citizen data. A case has been filed with the Supreme Court of Mauritius and the matter remains to be pending.

Aside from concerns over data surveillance, there has also been a restriction on freedom of expression in Mauritius.

After writing online posts, quite a lot of journalists and atypical residents were harassed and a few were even arrested under the offenses subsection of the Information and Communication Technologies Act (2001). They were targeted because their posts were considered critical of the present regime. The ICT Act has greatly reduced the digital space.

The media has been further targeted by laws that impose heavy fines on media outlets and journalists, require journalists to reveal their sources, and require media outlets to reapply for his or her license yearly as a substitute of each three years.

The increased level of scrutiny and scrutiny lately has had a chilling effect Self-censorship amongst certain journalists.

Some journalists were harassed or sometimes excluded from press conferences the ruling party.

This erosion of freedoms is reflected in various democratic rankings. In the last decade, Mauritius has lost its status of liberal democracy to an electoral autocracy – a rustic through which the federal government tightly controls political power. In the newest Ibrahim Index of African Governance, the island was ranked as “increasing deterioration“about democracy.

What does this say concerning the current state of politics within the country?

Under the present government, which got here to power in 2019 after an election marred by irregularities, some key institutions have been taken over. This includes parliament and the police. The executive branch in Mauritius appears intent on consolidating its power and control.

The manager now has the upper hand in decision making and minimizes checks and balances. There were also several attempts at this rein in The powers of the Director of Public Prosecutions are restricted by undermining the independence and autonomy of this authority.

The island's democratic backsliding is a matter of great concern. Mauritius is currently being hit by a triple blow – one aging populationA population decline and significant Brain drain. As the country faces these challenges, the federal government must remain accountable to the people.

Nepal's try and achieve justice and accountability after the a decades-long civil war was frozen greater than two years ago with none significant progress being made – but a recent development raises hopes that it could soon be revived and renewed.

In August 2024, the country Parliament passed a long-awaited law This will lay the muse for the establishment of a 3rd – and hopefully final – round of truth commissions to research the greater than 66,000 cases of conflict victims which have been gathering dust because the end of the last commissions in July 2022.

The two most important bodies involved — the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) and the Commission of Inquiry into Cases of Enforced Disappearances — were launched by the Nepalese government in 2015 to deal with crimes committed throughout the conflict in Nepal, often called “The People’s War.”

In 1996, Maoist rebels began an rebellion against the Nepalese government in western Nepal, which escalated right into a ten-year civil war throughout the country. According to United Nations estimatesThe conflict has left 13,000 people dead, 1,300 persons are still missing, and there are an unknown variety of victims of torture and conflict-related sexual violence.

The people’s war ended with the signing of the Comprehensive peace agreement This included, amongst other things, the Nepali government organising a high-level truth commission.

So far, the commissions have accomplished two rounds. The first round, which covered nearly all of victim cases, began in 2015 with a two-year mandate that the federal government prolonged thrice for one more yr. The second round, which lasted from 2020 to 2022, was interrupted for months because of COVID-19.

The commissions got three most important tasks: to uncover the reality about serious human rights violations, to create a climate of peace, trust and reconciliation, and to make legal recommendations for compensation for victims and perpetrators of the conflict.

But despite seven years of labor, little progress has been made towards achieving these goals. No investigations have been conducted, no perpetrators have been delivered to justice, and no compensation has been paid to victims. Reconciliation in a rustic that also bears the scars of the conflict stays a good distance off.

From 2022 to 2023, I researched the country's transitional justice process in Nepal. During my research, I heard people describe Nepal's lengthy process as “a legal merry-go-round,” “Groundhog Day,” and “Transitional injustice.”

Many Nepalis I spoke to consider that the federal government strategically dragged out the transitional justice process to avoid accountability, hoping that individuals would eventually get fed up with the method and forget. In fact, a heavy cloud of hopelessness and frustration hung over the commissions, as legal and financial constraints and political bias hampered the primary two rounds, severely slowing progress and affecting the commissions' ability to operate and public confidence.

Court hearing “adjourned”

In 2022, I interviewed a conflict victim within the rolling hills of Rolpa within the west of the country, where the conflict beganShe had presented her case to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission seven years ago, but had not heard anything since. “In a sense, our complaints are adjourned,” she said. “They are not yet finished, but they are not being forwarded either.”

She was considered one of about 300 women who has officially reported a case of conflict-related sexual violence to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

However, a former truth commissioner told me that this number might be as high as 1,000 because some victims of sexual violence describe their cases as “torture” to distance themselves from the stigma and shame often related to sexual violence in Nepal.

I also met with the leaders of several women's organizations who’ve documented 1000’s of cases of conflict-related sexual violence in Nepal but haven’t yet referred these cases to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission because of ongoing concerns about confidentiality and trust.

The lack of progress made by truth commissions in Nepal suggests that they’re being misused to perform what I call ‘transitional justice ritualism’: the act of a state creating empty institutions that lack the obligatory basis to supply real consequences.

As a part of this ritual of transitional justice, the Nepalese post-conflict coalition government has, in my opinion, used truth commissions as a political tool to exhibit to the international community that it’s committed to its obligations under the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2006 and to avoid Universal jurisdiction – the international legal principle that permits other states to prosecute individuals for serious human rights violations, no matter where those crimes occurred.

The threat of universal jurisdiction has been a selected problem for alleged perpetrators in Nepal since 2013, when Colonel Kumar Lama, a former commander of the Royal Nepal Army throughout the Nepal conflict, was arrested within the United Kingdom on charges of torture and war crimes. While Lama acquitted there for lack of evidencethe danger of universal jurisdiction for war criminals in Nepal still for those in positions of power throughout the civil war.

A controversial step forward

But a recent change in Nepal’s political leadership and the adoption of the brand new law that Law on the Investigation of Enforced Disappearances and the Truth and Reconciliation Commissionrepresent a chance for the Government to transcend lip service to transitional justice.

Under the amended law, a 3rd round of appointed commissioners will serve for a period of 4 years – hopefully enough time to finish their unfulfilled mandates. A government committee is working on the appointment latest truth commissioners ahead of the country's major holiday, Dashain, in October 2024. The amended law also provides for the creation of specialized sub-units inside the TRC – for truth-finding and investigation, reparations, sexual violence and rape, and victim coordination – which could potentially improve resource rationalisation and move forward a few of these stalled parts of the commissions.

However, hope was tempered by fear and uncertainty. Victim groups support the lawswhile others protest In their view, these provisions could undermine justice, particularly by protecting offenders through lighter sentences.

International human rights groups They acknowledge positive and long-awaited changes to the present law, but additionally warn of significant gaps in accountability that might undermine the transitional justice process.

UN Human Rights Commissioner Volker Türk said the The revised law is “an important step forward,” he said, but added: “It is imperative that the legislation is interpreted and implemented in a way that upholds the rights of victims, including the right to truth, justice and reparation, and that accountability is guaranteed in full compliance with international human rights standards.”

Potential for international support

Although it seems that the transitional justice process continues to be being led by Nepal, doors could also be opening for international support in the shape of economic or technical assistance – which might represent a big turning point in the method.

The amended law provides for a “fund”“To finance the investigation process and compensation for the victims, a fund shall be arrange, supported by the Government of Nepal and open to contributions from other national and international organizations.

Sushil Pyakurel, a former member of Nepal's National Human Rights Commission, is a component of a bunch of human rights activists, lawyers and victims who’re forming a civilian monitoring committee to act as a watchdog for the resumed trial. Pyakurel stressed that Nepal's civil society, together with the international community, must put pressure on the federal government to maintain its guarantees of victim-centered implementation.

“You can make any law you want, but it's how you implement it that matters,” Pyakurel told me. “Even if the law is different, nothing will change if the mentality remains the same.”

The reinstatement of truth commissions in Nepal offers the federal government a likelihood to exhibit its commitment to a transparent and legit process, but I consider it must transcend the transitional justice ritualism of the previous two commissions to deliver real justice and recognition for the victims of the country's civil war.

The San Jose Unified School District board of directors on Wednesday night rejected key findings from a Santa Clara County civil jury that attacked the South Bay's largest school district on a wide range of issues, from student safety to access to board meetings.

In a five-hour meeting marked by long discussions, tensions and, at times, scathing criticism of the grand jury itself, saying it was too old and too white, the board unanimously approved a response that rejected almost all the regulator's findings.

“I'm concerned about … the racial makeup of this grand jury,” said Chairwoman Wendi Mahaney-Gurahoo. “It doesn't represent the people we serve. I'm concerned that it's mostly white people telling us, 'We don't like what you're doing.' And I'm a white person.”

The Santa Clara County Superior Court, which convenes a civil grand jury every year to analyze complaints about problems with public facilities, said the grand jury's findings were its own. The foreman of the civil grand jury that issued the report didn’t reply to a request for comment.

The district had 90 days to reply from the June 10 release of the grand jury's civil report, but urged board members to approve the response Wednesday night to resolve the difficulty before school starts in two weeks.

The civil court grand jury tossed the 42-page report last month, which raised concerns about unusually high turnover amongst school administrators, a scarcity of student health centers, problems with school safety and investigations of staff, and a general lack of transparency. The report also faulted the district's school board for failing to make sure district accountability and supply leadership.

District 24-page written response alternated between acknowledging its “dark” history of the past 40 years – a court order to desegregate schools, bankruptcy, labor disputes, and the arrest of the previous superintendent for stealing money and forgery – and stating the numerous progress already made in lots of areas where the civil jury system needs improvement.

Renata Sanchez, president of the San Jose Unified State College Teachers Association, reiterated the progress the district has already made in public comment at Wednesday's meeting.

“There are no findings in this report that I have not already discussed with district leaders,” she said. “…The findings already address areas that have been identified as growth areas for the district…We still have a lot of room to grow, but we have laid some groundwork.”

The district's response said the grand jury's findings were baseless, misleading and narrow-minded. The district said the 80 civil jury interviews weren’t representative of the district's community, limited in scope and heavily concentrated in two of the district's 41 schools.

“The San Jose Unified School District is disappointed that the Civil Grand Jury report consists largely of opinions that are not supported by specific and accurate examples, properly interpreted data, or thorough research,” the district said in its response.

District leaders and board members expressed respect for the civil grand jury and its work, but additionally questioned the variety of its members and investigative methods.

According to the 2023 Civil Grand Jury DemographicsOf the 58 potential jurors, 78% were white and 59% were 65 years of age or older.

Trustee Carla Collins said her interview with the civil jury left her feeling “troubled” about democracy and the biased view of the investigation.

“I left feeling … concerned that this was asking for trouble if an important checks and balances system in our country was being used in this way,” Collins said. “What I experienced was a small, silent group led by some obviously disgruntled, empowered members.”

Parents' reactions were mixed: some echoed the district's criticism of the civil jury, while others expressed disappointment on the district's decision to reject the report's findings.

“I was really disappointed and concerned that most of the response to the report was just denial and defensiveness,” said Trudi McCanna, a Willow Glen mother. “If we can't admit we have problems, we can't address them.”

The board was unable to succeed in agreement in two areas: school safety and public access to board meetings. The district's response acknowledged that further evaluation must be done on safety planning and emergency responsibilities, but additionally criticized the grand jury for not interviewing two key district safety officials.

The Board also discussed the civil jury's findings regarding public access to Board meetings, ultimately adding that it could explore options to potentially live stream or video record meetings in the longer term.

Currently, Silicon Valley's largest district doesn’t videotape meetings or publish presentations used at board meetings. Community members can access audio recordings and meeting agendas online, but must request supporting documents or attend meetings in person to participate.

District Superintendent Nancy Albarrán, who said she enjoys watching other school districts' public board meetings, said the district's decision to not live stream or record the meetings could also be unpopular but stems from a desire to get monetary savings, protect community members' privacy and avoid disruption.

Albarrán went on to say that in a big district like San Jose Unified, where there may be “a lot of diversity of opinion,” the boardroom isn’t the very best place for discussions. She said livestreaming or recording board meetings would disrupt the best way the board operates since it introduces “unpredictable elements.”

However, community members argued that the district's refusal to record and live stream meetings excluded those that couldn’t attend in person and led to misunderstanding or confusion.

The county acknowledged that the civil jury's report was limited because members only had access to publicly available data and documents, but Trustee Teresa Castellanos argued that was the entire problem.

“The community doesn't know what we're doing,” she said. “This gave us an excellent opportunity to comment on our actions, but we shouldn't have to comment on our actions in front of a civil jury. We should be doing this on a regular basis and communicating on a regular basis.”

Originally published: July 25, 2024 at 3:39 pm

Montgomery, Alabama, describes itself as Birthplace of the US civil rights movementBut although Montgomery now accepts its history of bus boycotts and protest marches, it stays certainly one of the most segregated cities within the USAand still struggles with racial inequality.

Today, the population of Montgomery is almost 60% black. The Poverty rate The proportion of black residents is 30.8%, and of white residents 10.6%. The city's infrastructure is deteriorating and tax revenues are shrinking.

Cities with a history of segregation suffer more incessantly from systemic racism that is still within the veins of their planning laws and policies. As Scientist for urban development and concrete planningI desired to learn more about how Montgomery's history affected access to parks and public spaces there. My research explains how the town's history continues to influence modern planning and creates unequal access to parks.

Separate and unequal parks

In the Jim Crow eraFrom the 1870s to the mid-Twentieth century, cities within the South enforced racial segregation in schools, transportation, recreational facilities, and parks to forestall racial mixing. Civil Rights Act of 1964 Although such practices were banned, their effects were long-lasting.

In 1957, Montgomery passed an ordinance making it a misdemeanor to make use of public parks or other places except those assigned to their race. Four of the town's 14 parks were designated as black-only and ten as white-only, although the population almost 44% black.

Parks for black residents were in much worse conditions than for white residentsSome all-white parks, reminiscent of Oak Park, were situated in black neighborhoods, but black residents faced arrest in the event that they entered these parks.

Tacit maintenance of separation

In 1958, black residents of Montgomery filed a category motion lawsuit against the segregation policy within the parks. Montgomery authorities responded with Closure of all city parksalthough they continued to take care of them.

According to a federal court in Alabama ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in 1959The city reopened some parks but gave private, racially segregated schools exclusive use of certain areas. It also renamed the Parks and Recreation Department the Recreation Department, allowing it to direct funds to recreational facilities reminiscent of swimming pools, access to which was restricted by paid memberships.

The plaintiffs reopened the desegregation case in 1970, and it reached the Supreme Court in 1974. There, Justice Harry Blackmun described the town’s response to the 1959 ruling as “an elaborate excuse to to anticipate and circumvent the court order.”

In the years that followed, desegregation laws spurred white flight to the suburbs. As Montgomery lost white residents and their taxes, it annexed the encompassing areas, leaving the downtown area and its existing parks primarily for black residents, while whites moved to suburbs with latest parks.

During urban renewal within the Nineteen Fifties and Nineteen Sixties, a few of Montgomery's high-quality parks were demolished, privatized, or repurposed. For example, Interstate Highway 85 was routed through Oak Park, a black middle-class neighborhood. Urban planning scholars Rebecca Retzlaff describes this as a deliberate attempt displace civil rights leaders and black middle-class householdsThe construction of highways through black neighborhoods in Montgomery and elsewhere also exposed those areas to increased noise and air pollution.

Montgomery's parks today

Today, black Montgomery residents have unrestricted access to the town’s 65 parks. However, in a 2019 report, Montgomery’s Recreation Department found that while “obvious and systematic regulatory structures based on race or ethnicity have been eliminated, the legacy of that framework can still be seen in many ways.”

To examine current park resources in Montgomery, I examined 63 city parks with five criteria to measure access, quality and parking conditions.

– Accessibility: the variety of residents living inside a half-mile walking distance of a park

– Recreational facilities: facilities reminiscent of sports fields, playgrounds and swimming pools

– Other amenities: non-sporting facilities reminiscent of picnic tables and toilets

– Natural elements: green spaces, flowerbeds and ponds

– Rudeness: the presence of garbage, graffiti, noise or signs of drug or alcohol consumption, reminiscent of empty liquor bottles and used syringes

I discovered that 36 of the parks I reviewed inside half a mile of predominantly black neighborhoodsThis improved access partly reflects the expansion of the town's black population as white residents moved to the suburbs.

However, my assessment found that 83% of parks for black residents were of poor quality, only 8% were of fair quality, and 9% were of excellent quality. For parks for white residents, the figures were 50% of poor quality, 31% were of fair quality, and 19% were of excellent quality. The primary factor behind this discrepancy was maintenance, as measured by the quantity of trash, noise, vandalism, and evidence of criminality.

The size of the park also matters. Most black residents of Montgomery live near small neighborhood parks, which my survey found to be within the worst condition. Larger community parks Make a profit of community and sporting events, so the town government tends to take a position extra money in these locations.

Park access and environmental justice

Research shows that access to nature is essential for people’s lives Physical and mental healthThis makes public parks vital resources, especially in urban areas. Poor people and folks of color often have less access to parks, which are frequently situated in areas with high real estate prices.

My research shows how systematic disinvestment Maintain unequal access to parks in cities with a history of segregation. With limited resources, cities like Washington, DCAnd Philadelphia have tended to take a position in large community parks. Many small neighborhood parks, that are critical for equal access, need improvement.

Montgomery’s comprehensive plan, Imagine Montgomery 2040calls for the modernization and simpler maintenance of parks and recreational facilities. Involving residents in setting priorities for park projects could help make these investments more equitable – especially in the event that they goal small parks in troubled neighborhoods where the legacy of segregation still lingers.

With a attack against Donald Trump at a rally in Pennsylvania on July 13, 2024, the United States experienced one other violent episode in its increasingly polarized politics. Former President Trump, who’s officially set to change into the Republican presidential candidate within the 2024 election, survived the assassination attempt when, as initial reports said, a the bullet grazed his ear. But one demonstrator was killedother bystanders were injured and the suspected shooter can also be dead. The Conversation's political editor Naomi Schalit spoke to University of Massachusetts, Lowell, scientist Arie Perliger after the event. Perliger shared insights from his study of political violence and assassinations. Given the strong political polarization within the US, Perliger said, “it's no surprise that people end up behaving violently.”

Schalit: What was your first thought while you heard the news?

Pearls: The very first thing that occurred to me was that we’re principally just one centimeter away from a potential civil warI consider that if Donald Trump had actually suffered fatal injuries today, the extent of violence that we’ve got seen up to now could be nothing in comparison with what would have happened over the following few months. I consider that may have unleashed a brand new level of anger, frustration, resentment and hostility that we’ve got not seen within the United States for a lot of, a few years.

The attackat the least at this early stage, it’d confirm the strong sense amongst many Trump supporters and lots of people on the far right that they’re being delegitimized, that they’re on the defensive, and that there are efforts to fundamentally prevent them from participating within the political process and stop Trump's return to the White House.

For many individuals on the far right, what we’ve got just seen suits thoroughly right into a narrative that they’ve been constructing and spreading for months.

Political assassination attempts usually are not nearly killing someone. They have an even bigger goal, don't they?

In some ways, Assassinations to avoid the lengthy technique of downgrading and defeating political opponents when there may be a sense that even an extended political struggle is not going to be enough. Many perpetrators see murder as a way That will allow them to realize their political goals in a short time and effectively without having to have quite a lot of resources or quite a lot of organization. If we try to attach that to what we've seen today, I believe quite a lot of people see Trump as a unicorn, a singular phenomenon that in some ways has absorbed your entire conservative movement. So when you remove him, you’re feeling just like the problem shall be solved, or may very well be.

I believe the conservative movement has modified dramatically since Trump was first elected in 2016. Many features of Trumpism at the moment are quite popular in various parts of the conservative movement. So even when Trump eventually decides to step down, I don't think Trumpism – as a set of populist ideas – will disappear from the Republican Party. But I can definitely understand why individuals who see Trump as a threat consider that removing Trump will solve all problems.

In a study on the causes and effects of political assassinationsYou have written that if the electoral process fails to deal with “the most serious political grievances,” electoral competition has the potential to trigger further violence, including the assassination of politicians. Did you see that on this attempted assassination?

Democracy cannot work if the several parties, the several movements, usually are not willing to work together on certain issues. Democracy works when several groups are willing to succeed in some type of consensus through negotiations, to work together and cooperate.

What we’ve got seen over the past 17 years, essentially since 2008 and the rise of Tea Party Movementis that there may be increasing polarization within the United States. And the worst thing about that polarization is that the American political system has change into dysfunctional within the sense that we’re pushing out all politicians and decision makers who’re eager about working with the opposite side. That's one thing. Second, people delegitimize politicians who’re willing to work with the opposite side, thus portraying them as individuals who’ve betrayed their values ​​and their political party. And third, people delegitimize their political rivals. They turn a political disagreement right into a war wherein there is no such thing as a room for cooperation to deal with the challenges they consider the nation faces.

When you mix these three dynamics, you essentially create a dysfunctional system where either side are convinced that it's a zero-sum game and that it's the top of the country. If the opposite side wins, it's the top of democracy. When either side keep drumming into people's heads that losing an election is the top of the world, it's no surprise that individuals will eventually be willing to take the law into their very own hands and use violence.

Entered into force 60 years ago, Civil Rights Act of 1964 In the USA, discrimination based on “race, color, sex, religion or national origin” was prohibited.

Still, as historian I’m a believer in social movements and political change, and I imagine that crucial lesson we are able to learn from the law for movements today will not be its content, but quite the way by which it got here about.

As first-hand accounts from that point clarify, the movement won since it directly injured the interests of white entrepreneurs. 1955 Montgomery Bus BoycottThe 1963 Boycott of outlets in Birmingham and lots of lesser-known local boycotts imposed enormous costs on local business owners and compelled them to support integration.

The conventional narrative

A typical view amongst scholars, activists and most people is that the civil rights movement was successful because violent attacks on peaceful black demonstrators mobilized white public opinion in favor of the movement.

One of probably the most famous incidents occurred in May 1963 in Birmingham, Alabama, when town’s security officer, Eugene “Bull” Connorturned Fire hoses and dogs on black demonstrators.

The general perception is that Connor's actions outraged the whites within the North, and in response Kennedy administration sent federal troops to Birmingham and Civil Rights Act to the congress.

But this view fails to acknowledge the source of the movement’s power.

For one thing, it exaggerates public sympathy for the civil rights movement. Three months after the attacks on black demonstrators in Birmingham, for instance, almost two thirds of the general public against the famous March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom from August 1963.

In addition, the Kennedy administration predicted that civil rights laws harm the Democrats within the elections“The President has never had any illusions about the political benefits of equal rights,” wrote Kennedy’s adviser Arthur Schlesinger in his memoirs “A thousand days.” “But he saw no alternative” in view of the movement's actions.

So what form of actions were these?

Black organizers aimed to disrupt the white power structure, especially the economic elites, as much as possible. As Martin Luther King Jr. later told“The political power structure obeys the economic power structure.”

By breaking up white businesses, often in a really organized In this manner, black activists achieved social change.

A “devastatingly effective” weapon

Economic boycotts in southern cities corresponding to Birmingham And Nashville, Tennesseeplayed crucial roles in the course of the civil rights movement.

A 20-month boycott of black customers in downtown stores Greenwood, Mississippicaused legal changes in town's attitudes in 1964.

The most famous boycott took place in 1955–56 in Montgomery, Alabama, where the nearly 13-month protest against racial segregation in public transport This would save an estimated $3,000 in day by day fares for city bus transportation.

black accounted for about 75% of public transit riders. Instead of using city buses, they walked, carpooled, and used black-owned taxi services. The boycott ended on December 20, 1956, when the U.S. Supreme Court in Browder vs. Gayle that racial segregation on buses was unconstitutional.

By 1960, this “economic weapon to combat racial segregation” was widely adopted by civil rights activists. reported the national magazine Business Week.

Three years later, Time Magazine wrote Boycotts have proven “devastatingly effective” in pressuring white business owners and government officials to desegregate.

In Birmingham, for instance Real estate magnate Sidney Smyer led the elite’s push for integration. Smyer was a convinced racistbut he capitulated within the face of the boycott and the disruption it caused.

“I am still a segregationist” he said in May 1963, but “I'm not a damn idiot.”

During the five weeks of boycotts, sit-ins and demonstrations, Birmingham’s shops had lost Millions in sales.

Smyer and his Colleagues at management level decided to limit their losses through integration. Then they dragged politicians, judges, school administrators and law enforcement officials with them.

This had been the plan of the civil rights strategists from the start.

According to the civil rights organizer Abraham WoodsThey hoped that the business owners harmed by the boycott in Birmingham “Pressure on town” integrate.

Andrew Young, an adviser to King, later said that “Bull Connor added to the impact, but the momentum would not have happened without Bull Connor and the dogs. … When the demonstrations were so massive and the economic withdrawal program was so tight, the city was literally paralyzed.”

Change within the law after Birmingham

The victory in Birmingham inspired other blacks to revolt. Kennedy's Justice Department reported one other 2,062 black protests in 40 states until the tip of 1963.

It also prompted Kennedy – 28 months after taking office – to propose a civil rights lawin June 1963.

While attempting to dissuade black leaders from marching on Washington, Kennedy acknowledged that the disruptive boycotts and protests “made the executive branch act more quickly and forced Congress to now deal with legislation,” as Schlesinger reported in his book “A Thousand Days.”

Kennedy also feared the radicalization of black consciousness after Birmingham. If the federal government didn’t implement moderate reforms, the “colored masses” might adopt “the thoughtless radicalism of the black militants,” as Schlesinger described the president's logic.

Kennedy’s assassination in November 1963 meant that the Civil Rights Act fell to his successor, Lyndon Johnson. a heated fight In Congress, Johnson signed the bill on July 2, 1964.

By massively and sustainably disrupting the interests of the ruling class, especially corporations, black organizers, who were formally excluded from political power, were in a position to force changes within the law.

The lesson here is that comprehensive legal reform requires massive unrest outside the electoral and legislative spheres. Without this unrest, it would be very difficult to pass a law that negatively impacts established rulers.

Bob Moseswho helped register black residents to vote through the civil rights movement in Mississippi, believed that civil rights extend beyond the ballot box. For Moses, who was each a teacher and an activist, mathematical education is a civil right: a prerequisite for earning a living wage in modern society. In 1982, he founded the Algebra Project to be certain that “students at the lower end of the scale acquire the mathematical knowledge they need.”

As a researcher who studies Opportunities to enhance mathematics experiences I consider a brand new approach that expands access to algebra can assist more students learn the maths skills that Moses, who died in 2021, considered so vital. It's a goal that districts have long struggled to realize.

Efforts, improve students’ performance in algebra have been going down for many years. Unfortunately, the mathematics pipeline within the United States is filled with stubborn Opportunity gaps. According to the Testimony of the Nation – a project commissioned by Congress and administered by the Department of Education – only 29% of fourth-graders and 20% of eighth-graders within the United States were proficient in math in 2022. Low-income students, students of color, and multilingual learners, who are inclined to lower scores Students who rating lower than average, e.g. in mathematics exams, often wouldn’t have the identical access to qualified teachers, high-quality curriculum and well-equipped classrooms as others.

A brand new approach

The Dallas Independent School District – or Dallas ISD – wins national attention for improving learning opportunities by raising expectations for all students. Following within the footsteps of greater than 60 districts in Washington Statein 2019 Dallas ISD implemented an progressive approach by which students in middle school are routinely enrolled within the advanced mathematics subject as a substitute of getting to decide on it.

Under an opt-in policy, students need a advice from their parents or teachers to take math in middle school and Algebra 1 in eighth grade. This policy resulted in each low enrollment numbers and little or no diversity within the advanced math course. Some parentsparticularly blacks and Latinos, didn’t know find out how to enroll their students in advanced courses attributable to an absence of communication in lots of districts.

Additionally, implicit biaspresent in all demographic groups can influence teachers’ perceptions of scholars’ behavior and academic potential and thus their following recommendations. Teachers at public schools within the USA are far less racially and ethnically diverse than the scholars they supervise.

The Dallas ISD policy revision aimed to Promote inclusivity and to bridge educational gaps between students. Under this initiative, every middle school student, no matter background, was enrolled within the advanced math course resulting in Algebra 1 in eighth grade, unless they opted out.

The shift from opt-in to opt-out led to a dramatic increase within the variety of black and Latino learners who the vast majority of students in DallasAnd the district’s overall math scores remained stable. 60% of Dallas ISD eighth graders are currently taking Algebra 1thrice the previous level. In addition greater than 90% take the state examination.

Efforts are expanding

Other cities are paying attention to the impact of Dallas ISD's changing policy. The San Francisco Unified School District, for instance, announced plans in February 2024 to introduce Algebra 1 in eighth grade in all schools by the 2026/27 school yr.

In fall 2024, the district will offer three pilot programs Algebra 1 in eighth grade. Pilot projects range from an opt-out program for all eighth-graders – with additional support for college students who aren't doing as well – to a program that routinely enrolls proficient students in Algebra 1, offered as additional math instruction through the school day. Students who aren't doing as well can opt out of taking it.

However, districts nationwide that enroll all students in Algebra 1 and permit them to opt out are still within the minorityAnd some have stopped offering Algebra 1 in eighth grade altogether, leaving students with only pre-algebra courses. Cambridge, Massachusetts – the town where Bob Moses founded the Algebra Project – is amongst them.

Concerns about equity capital remain

Between 2017 and 2019, district managers in Public Schools in Cambridge has eliminated the practice of placing middle school students in “accelerated” or “grade-appropriate” math classes. Only just a few middle schools within the district now offer Algebra 1 in eighth grade.

The policy shift, designed to enhance overall educational outcomes, was driven by concerns about significant racial disparities in enrollment in advanced highschool mathematics. Completion of Algebra 1 in eighth grade allows students to climb the maths ladder and take harder subjects, similar to calculus, in highschool. At Cambridge, students who took Algebra 1 in eighth grade were mainly whites and Asians; Black and Latino students mostly took mathematics classes at their respective grade level.

Some families and educators claim the district's decision has made it difficult to access advanced math courses. much more unfairToday, advanced math instruction in highschool tends to be limited to students whose parents can afford to assist them prepare through private tutoring, after-school programs or private lessons, they said.

While the district has tried to enhance access to advanced math in highschool by offering a free online summer program for incoming ninth-graders, Performance differences remain large.

Perhaps a balance of top-down policy and bottom-up support will help schools across the United States realize the vision Moses dreamed of in 1982 when he founded the Algebra Project: “That in the 21st century every child has a civil right to mathematical education – the ability to read, write, and reason with the symbol systems of mathematics.”

Rev. James M. Lawson Jr., the died on June 9, 2024 on the age of 95was a Methodist minister and a powerful advocate of nonviolence in the course of the civil rights movement.

Lawson is best generally known as the pilot of two crucial civil rights campaigns – one in Nashville in 1960 and the opposite in Memphis in 1968.

In Nashville, Lawson trained students within the systematic use of non-violent pressure tactics. Multiracial student teams would sit at local lunch tables reserved for whites to violate segregation laws. Most importantly, it prepared them to be beaten or arrested. Following the instance of Mahatma Gandhi, who used nonviolent resistance to oppose the British occupation of India, students engaged in collective nonviolent direct motion. When the primary wave of scholars were beaten or arrested, one other wave of scholars poured in behind them to take their places.

Hundreds were arrested or beaten before their actions prompted Nashville Mayor Ben West to publicly declare segregation immoral—a signal to downtown business owners that it was time to finish Nashville's segregation policy.

In Memphis, Lawson organized what became the last election campaign within the lifetime of Martin Luther King Jr.King got here to Memphis to affix forces with 1,300 impoverished garbage staff who were striking against their employer, the Memphis City Council, over poor wages and dealing conditions. When two staff, Echol Cole and Robert Walkerwere crushed by a garbage compactor as they sought shelter from the rain. The staff had had enough and went on strike. Ultimately, they won a small pay rise and modest improvements within the workplace.

By 1968, Lawson had established himself as a number one authority on nonviolent conflict, a fact what King himself testified. I studied Lawson and I argue that he was probably the most significant figures within the nonviolent civil rights movement of the Fifties and Nineteen Sixties.

Early influences

Lawson grew up in Massillon, Ohio. His father, James M. Lawson Sr., was an African Methodist minister. who carried a gun on his hipPerhaps an odd influence for a nonviolent advocate, however the elder Lawson taught his son to all the time fight for what is true.

His mother taught him the ability of affection. After Lawson slapped a white child for calling him a racist name, his mother patiently asked, “Jimmy, what did that do… there has to be a better way.” Lawson called this moment “a supernatural experience, a transformative experience…that began my experiment to find the better way.”

As a student at Baldwin Wallace College, he was inspired by Abraham Johannes Tintewhich Time magazine called America’s “Pacifist primary.“ Muste represented the Community of Reconciliationthe oldest pacifist anti-war group in US history.

Lawson also closely followed the work of the Congress for Racial Equality when it challenged racial segregation laws with nonviolent direct motion within the early Forties.

Lawson realized he had a likelihood: he could challenge racial segregation, and he could do it with nonviolence. Inspired by these examples, Lawson decided never to obey a segregation law againHe said: “I have made a commitment that… I will not allow myself to be disciplined or twisted into something I am not.”

Nonviolence and racial segregation laws

Lawson put his philosophy into practice when the United States entered the Korean War in 1950. Lawson concluded that he wouldn’t cooperate: “There were certain laws that Christians did not have to follow: the segregation laws and the military draft laws. So I sent back my draft notices and said I could no longer join.”

He believed that conscription laws had the identical fundamental problem as racial segregation laws. They too were “a complete denial of the meaning of freedom.”

Lawson spent nearly 14 months in prison for refusing to fight within the Korean War. After his parole, he went to India, where he worked with the Student Christian Movement in Nagpur. Lawson tried to raised understand the situation. Gandhian principles This enabled him to make use of them within the fight against racial segregation, racism and violence under Jim Crow laws.

In the autumn of 1957, Lawson decided to maneuver south and have become the Southern Secretary of the Fellowship of Reconciliation, a predominantly white pacifist group that had long been concerned about African-American civil rights. Based in Nashville, Lawson traveled to all the former Confederate states except Florida during his first full 12 months of labor. Teaching the philosophy and practice of non-violent protest.

He taught black Christian students that by resisting racial segregation they were imitating Jesus, who challenged the oppression of the Roman Empire.

Lawson taught his students that Jim Crow laws were designed to make black Americans feel and behave like second-class residents. He argued that it was unethical to abide by such laws. Anyone who knowingly cooperates with evil resides a lie, Lawson argued. To share in a single's own suffering and the suffering of others is a fate worse than death, he said.

His compelling argument convinced many Americans that they may not cooperate with Jim Crow. As his student Diane Nash recalled: “Oppression all the time requires the participation of the oppressed.”

Lawson and students across the country used nonviolent noncooperation to finish legalized racial segregation within the United States. He taught his students that they need to be willing to fight and die for the reason behind human freedom and justice, but that they need to not kill.

Lawson's influence lives on

Lawson continued his philosophy of nonviolence when he moved to California in 1974. He allied himself with the Justice for caretakers movement and gave workshops on non-violence until his death.

Lawson leaves behind powerful lessons. In a recent documentary entitled “Love & Solidarity“, Lawson said, “Love is power. It is essentially the most creative power within the universe. It is the best force available to humanity. Humanity must learn the way to use it.”

In a world stuffed with violence, Lawson showed us that nonviolence a good more powerful force To create societies characterised by justice, freedom and equality.

Iran’s role in funding and arming proxy groups within the Middle East is well documented and has received additional attention because the Hamas-led attack in Israel in October 2023. Likewise, Tehran’s Arms deliveries to Russia are well-known and have led to complaints and sanctions from the West.

Tehran's military intervention in one other deadly conflict, the Sudanese civil war, has received little coverage.

Since the conflict began in April 2023, he has killed at the least 13,000 people, injured over 33,000 more and offset Millions more. After years of relative peace, persons are massacred once more within the southern region of Darfur.

Immediately after the outbreak of fighting between two rival factions of the Sudanese military government, Iran limited itself to supplying humanitarian aid.

But this policy didn’t last long. Between December 2023 and January 2024 Tehran delivered several Mohajer-6 medium-range reconnaissance and attack drones to President Abdel Fattah al-Burhan and his Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF).

In February the drones helped the SAF, The paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) have launched an offensive in town of Omdurman.

Although the conflict in Sudan attracts less global attention than the conflicts in Ukraine and the Gaza Strip, it’s of strategic importance for Tehran. Expert on Iranian foreign policyI see how Tehran is increasingly using its engagement in African conflict zones to advance the country's military, industrial and particularly geopolitical goals. It follows an identical development to Iran's engagement in Ethiopia throughout the Tigray War 2020–22.

Radiate power

Militarily and commercially, drone exports to the SAF are a continuation of Iranian actions since Expiry of a UN arms embargo against Tehran in October 2020.

Since then, Iran has been supplying surveillance and attack drones not only to its quasi- and non-state proxies and partners within the Middle East – corresponding to Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis in Yemen – but increasingly also to states outside the region. like Ethiopia, Russia, Tajikistan And Venezuela.

Iran has done this to exhibit power, strengthen alliances and influence conflicts within the Middle East and other regions. At the identical time, it may prove to be a lucrative income for the Iranian economy and a showcase for the country's technology. While it’s difficult to find out the precise revenue Iran has earned from exporting military drones, the estimated value The global market value was $12.55 billion in 2022, and is anticipated to succeed in $14.14 billion in 2023 and $35.60 billion in 2030.

As for Sudan, arming the SAF serves each Iran's broader geopolitical goals and its competition with regional rivals, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Israel.

Rogue states

Relations between Iran and Sudan date back to 1989, when Tehran supported the coup led by Omar al-Bashir, who later became President of Sudan. In the Nineteen Nineties and 2000s offered development aid and military aid to Sudan. The country exported tractors there and stationed warships in Sudanese ports within the Gulf of Aden and the Red Sea.

Through these strategic routes and shipping lanes, Tehran exported oil to African countries and smuggled weapons to regional customers, including the Houthi rebels in Yemen and Palestinian militants within the Gaza Strip.

As a so-called Rogue state Although Sudan was subject to US sanctions and embargoes, it provided diplomatic support to Tehran throughout.

It recognized Iran's right to pursue a nuclear program and voted against UN General Assembly resolutions condemning Tehran's human rights record. From 1979 to 2021, Sudan was is the third largest Iran trading partner in Africa, accounting for 3% of its average annual trade with the continent.

But between 2013 and 2016, Iranian-Sudanese relations suffered a series of great setbacks. In 2014 Iran's cultural center closed and expelled its diplomatic representatives for allegedly propagating Shiism in a predominantly Sunni country. Two years later, in 2016, it and other countries within the Horn of Africa were cut formal ties with Tehran.

These setbacks resulted from Iran Withdrawal from Sudan and Africa to give attention to nuclear diplomacy with the United States and other world powers. also coincided with growing military, diplomatic and economic support from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to Sudan and other states within the Horn of Africa in exchange for joining the Saudi-led coalition against the Iran-backed Houthis in Yemen.

This assistance was particularly tempting for Sudan, which was facing isolation and economic difficulties because of the establishment of an International Criminal Court. Arrest warrant against al-BashirThe Secession of oil-rich South Sudan and the imposition of tougher sanctions by the USA

Although Iran and Sudan later Participation in multilateral meetings With regard to agricultural cooperation, bilateral relations between the countries have never fully recovered.

Progress on the Horn

The civil war offers Iran a possibility to correct its course towards Sudan. Supporting the SAF may help Tehran save relations with Sudan while curbing Saudi and Emirati influence within the country and across the continent.

Tehran seeks to assist al-Burhan and the SAF win the war and regain control of the state.

The SAF's support also suits right into a dynamic that existed before the war and is in turn linked to Iran's struggle for influence with Saudi Arabia. In 2019, Hemedti served alongside al-Burhan on the transitional military council after al-Bashir was ousted in a coup. visited Saudi Arabia and promised her support within the fight against Iran and the Houthis.

Nevertheless, the SAF’s support for Iran shouldn’t be without risks.

First of all, a victory for al-Burhan and the SAF is much from certain. Since October 2023, the RSF has captured some key statesincluding the capital Khartoum and the granary Gezira. In February 2024, the SAF will launched an offensive in Omdurman and made profits there. Nevertheless, the general balance could still be in RSF's favor.

And unlike within the wars in Syria and Ukraine, in Sudan Tehran finds itself within the awkward position of supporting an opponent of Russia that sponsors the RSF.

And unlike within the Ethiopia conflict, during which Iran supported the federal government against rebel groups alongside Turkey and the United Arab Emirates, Tehran and Abu Dhabi are competing for influence in Sudan. through the support of the SAF and RSFOutside the military sphere, the UAE has a substantial economic advantage ahead of Iran as Sudan’s largest export partner and second largest import partner.

Fueling conflicts

Even if al-Burhan were to emerge victorious, it shouldn’t be a on condition that Iran's position in Sudan would improve significantly or that its influence would grow.

Iran is restricted by its position as a Shiite power; Sudan is a Sunni-majority country. And even before Sudan broke off relations with Iran and descended into one other civil war, had long accepted agricultural, industrial, development and military support from Iran's regional rivals Saudi Arabia and Israel.

After Khartoum joined the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen, normalized relationships with Tel Aviv through the Abraham Accords in return for diplomatic and economic incentives from the United States

Time will tell whether Iran's military intervention in Sudan represents a turning point in bilateral relations or is merely an arms transfer in yet one more civil war fuelled by foreign intervention.