While the investigation into the Oct. 19 heist at Paris' Louvre continues, scrutiny is now focused on the museum’s security measures — or lack thereof. Considered one of the most significant robberies in museum history, the theft of crown jewels worth an estimated $100 million is not the Louvre's first. And some believe it’s time to reinforce its defenses.

Several factors at fault
The elaborate robbery, which involved thieves dressed as workers and an electric cherry picker, has “raised significant questions about whether one of the world’s most famous museums could have been better protected,” said The New York Times. Much of the blame has been placed on the Louvre’s security camera system. The building’s exterior is “surrounded by cameras,” but there were “not enough officers to continuously monitor the feeds.”

But there were warnings before the crime. The museum’s security systems were “rated as outdated and inadequate by an official report written before the theft of crown jewels,” said The Times of London. And several areas in the Louvre are not covered by security monitors. In the “Denon Wing, where the Apollo Gallery targeted by the robbers is located, a third of the rooms have no CCTV cameras,” though the specific room the thieves looted did have cameras, said officials.

The future
Security updates may happen not only in France but also in museums across the world, as the heist “should lead all institutions that hold valuable items to assess their security measures,” said Northeastern Global News. Even many “up-to-date technologies need to be assessed against the low-tech methods” that the Louvre thieves used. 

The Louvre does have planned security upgrades. But simpler ideas are available. While “modern museum security is a complex and expensive affair,” there’s also an “intriguing 50-year-old mathematical problem that deals with this very issue,” said BBC News. It involves calculating the “minimum number of guards — or equivalently 360-degree CCTV cameras — needed to keep a whole museum under observation.” Museums should be “reminded of the lessons” this problem has to offer.

The brutal civil war that has ravaged the East African nation of Sudan for the past two years took a dark and alarming turn this week. The paramilitary Rapid Support Forces fighting against the Sudanese military assumed control of the North Darfur capital of el-Fasher. This capture comes as a growing chorus of international observers accuse the RSF of genocide and crimes against humanity, raising the prospect that the Sudan might once again split, similar to the succession of South Sudan in 2011.

What has happened in el-Fasher?
Approximately 1,500 civilians have been killed in el-Fasher over the past week, "all of whom were executed while fleeing the city to escape the clashes," said the Sudan Doctors Network, which tracks conflict-related violence, on X. Aid agencies in the region have received “credible reports of atrocities” resulting from the capture of el-Fasher, including “summary executions, attacks on civilians along escape routes, and house-to-house raids,” said Al Jazeera. 

Following “international outrage” at allegations of war crimes and genocide in el-Fasher, RSF Gen. Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known commonly as Hemedti, “admitted there had been violations by his forces” and promised investigations into the acts by a “committee that has now arrived in the city,” said BBC. But observers of Sudan’s ongoing violence say Hemedti has made “similar promises” in response to past accusations of atrocities carried out by his forces. Those promises “were not fulfilled.”

Could Sudan see another split?
High on many Sudanese observers’ lists of concern is the possibility that the capture of el-Fasher and the Darfur region at large could be the start of a national schism akin to South Sudan’s 2011 declaration of independence and establishment as a separate nation. The RSF is now able to “consolidate its control” in the region that the group has chosen as its “base for a parallel government.” The total RSF control of Darfur points to “dangerous and worrying consequences in the future in terms of partition,” said U.S. Senior Advisor for Arab and African Affairs Massad Boulos at Reuters.
 

People in skeletal costumes roam the streets during the start of Goth Weekend in the U.K. town of Whitby. The alternative music festival, which began in 1994, is held twice a year to celebrate goth culture.
Temilade Adelaja / Reuters

Unlike in the real world, where politics can often be dreary, on the small screen, writers can spice up political fiction and nonfiction with potboiler plots and ripped-from-the-headlines drama. Case in point, Netflix’s soapy but glorious transatlantic political thriller “The Diplomat” returned on Oct. 16 for a third season. These are some of the other stellar political series of late.

‘Borgen’ (2010-2022)
A political thriller that doubles as an extended lesson in comparative politics, “Borgen” (pictured above) is the rare show that takes both politics and plot seriously. The show is “one of the greatest TV series of the past decade” in large part because “you have to navigate” the country’s fascinating multiparty political system, said Vanity Fair. (Netflix)

‘Bodyguard’ (2018)
Richard Madden is David Budd, a father of two small children and an Afghanistan veteran suffering from PTSD. He’s tapped to be head of security for U.K. Home Secretary Julia Montague (Keeley Hawes) after stopping a suicide bombing in the show’s gripping opening. This six-episode limited series “excels at both the daring gasp-inducing twist and the methodical construction of slower-burning thrills,” said Variety. (Netflix)

‘Say Nothing’ (2024)
A taught, nine-episode limited series, FX’s historical thriller is told A taught nine-episode limited series, FX’s historical thriller is told through the eyes of Irish Republican Army leader Dolours Price (played by Lola Petticrew and as an older woman by Maxine Peake). The show’s “longitudinal account of political disillusionment makes it one of the year’s finest shows,” said The New Yorker. (Hulu)