Immigration and Customs Enforcement has been deporting thousands of people to their home countries, but many are also being sent to “third countries,” nations the deportee is not originally from. This often leaves the deported person stranded in a place where they do not speak the language or understand the customs.

Mexico

While thousands of Mexican migrants have been deported to Mexico, the country has also been far and away the one with the greatest number of third-country deportations. About 20,000 people without Mexican heritage have been deported to Mexico during the second Trump administration, according to Refugees International’s Third Country Deportation Watch (TCDW).

These deported people are also racing against the clock, as the Mexican government “gives third-country citizens just 10 days to remain in the country, with its overstretched asylum system the only option for most,” said the Washington Office on Latin America. As it stands, at least “1,100 deported people per month in Mexico are citizens of other Latin American nations.”

Guatemala

Though the third country agreement between the U.S. and Guatemala wasn’t renegotiated until July 2025, ICE has been ramping up deportations significantly since then. Several thousand people have since been sent to Guatemala, including 2,284 Mexicans deported to the country from the U.S. between April and August 2026, according to the TCDW.

This marked a notable change for Mexican deportees, given that before the deal with Guatemala, most Mexicans deported from the U.S. were “sent almost exclusively back to their country by air and land,” said The Associated Press. But these migrants are “part of a ‘transit stopover’ before being taken to Mexico as part of an ‘arrangement’ with the Mexican government,” said Guatemalan President Bernardo Arévalo.

Panama

About 360 non-Panamanians have been deported from the U.S. to Panama, according to the TCDW. The nation has been a third-country destination during almost all of the second Trump administration. In one instance, a group of refugees “were put on U.S. military planes,” said Human Rights Watch. They didn’t know their destination and “realized they were in Panama only after landing.”

Another notable story came just one month after President Donald Trump returned to power, when “hundreds of asylum-seekers were sent to Panama instead of being allowed to present claims in the United States,” said the American Immigration Council. They were eventually “released by the Panamanian government and told they had 30 days to leave the country.”

Costa Rica

Costa Rica is another large Central American third-country destination where about 331 people have been deported from the United States, the TCDW said. Costa Rica agreed to take on these people because the country “seeks a closer alliance with Donald Trump’s government, which has been securing cooperation from other Central American countries in accepting deportees from other nations who have been detained by U.S. immigration agents,” said The Guardian.

Human rights observers are concerned that “some of the people being deported to Costa Rica may be asylum-seekers who were never given a fair chance to present their cases in the United States,” said Refugees International.

El Salvador

About 250 people without El Salvadorian heritage have been sent to the country from the U.S., according to the TCDW. Flights to El Salvador are relatively new, as ICE transfers to the nation only began in July 2026.

This number may seem minimal, and it is generally true that third-country deportations only “represent a small share of U.S. removals,” said the Migration Policy Institute. When it comes to the Trump administration’s deportation efforts, though, “fear may be their main function.”

Honduras

While Mexican immigrants are being sent to Guatemala, many others are also being sent to Honduras; about 170 non-Hondurans have been deported to the country, according to the TCDW. A transfer deal between the U.S. and Honduras has been in place since October 2025.

Officials have said that “one of the objectives of the deportations, which have not been formally announced by the U.S. government, is to deter illegal immigration from Mexico by sending some of its citizens further south and farther away from the U.S.-Mexico border,” said CBS News in a report on deportations to Honduras and Guatemala. This comes as Mexico has “voiced its opposition to the deportation of Mexican citizens to other countries.”

Uzbekistan

While most countries in this list are in Central America, one nation thousands of miles away also makes a surprising appearance: Uzbekistan. Over 130 people have been deported to the Central Asian nation as a third country, according to the TCDW.

Many of the deportees to Uzbekistan are from neighboring Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan. There have been concerns about how these deportees are being treated in Uzbekistan, particularly “given that human rights organizations have documented a consistent pattern of harassment, restrictions and reprisals against activists and rights defenders” in Kyrgyzstan and Kazakhstan, said the Global Detention Project, which could create “risks for those being returned.”

Ghana

Over 100 people living in the U.S. without Ghanaian heritage have been deported to Ghana, according to the TCDW. But unlike some other nations on this list, legal action has actually been taken against Ghana, with an “international coalition of human rights lawyers and advocates” suing the country, said The Associated Press.

The lawsuit accuses Ghana of not allowing these people to stay in the country, instead “forcing deportees from the U.S. back to the home countries they had fled in violation of their rights,” said the AP. Many of these people were allegedly “flown from Ghana to their home countries within hours or days of arriving.”

Our sincere thanks go to all the schools that participated in the best of the best senior schools 2026 – we know how much work goes into all your submissions. A special thanks to our judging panel and consultants, including Sophie Oakes of Oakes Education and Louise Hitchen of 134marketing for their contributions.

Best entrepreneurship and innovation: Caterham School

Few schools can claim to have built their own AI platform used by schools nationwide, but RileyBot – Caterham’s own AI edtech tool – is now used by teachers and pupils in more than 30 UK schools. The school’s EDGE Innovation programme develops problem-solving, resilience and ethical AI skills from the first year upwards. Pupils work with real businesses, tackle live challenges, join hackathons and build start-ups, while sixth formers can access a lecture series featuring Accenture, Deutsche Bank, UCL and angel investors. This year, Caterham launched a UCAS-recognised KS4 EDGE qualification with Nottingham University Business School and Enactus – more than 80 pupils have enrolled alongside GCSEs, far exceeding expectations. Pupils design social enterprises that blend commercial thinking with genuine community impact. caterhamschool.co.uk

Other contenders:
Godolphin and Latymer School
North London Collegiate School

Best SEND: Bancroft’s School

Bancroft’s is academically ambitious, but ambition only matters when every child can access it. Over 160 pupils with SEND are supported across a wide range of needs, including dyslexia, ADHD, autism, speech and language diffculties, sensory impairment, physical disabilities and mental health. Support begins before pupils arrive. The SENCo and deputy SENCo visit feeder primaries, meet families and plan transitions so every child is known from day one. All Year 7 pupils are screened for literacy needs within their first fortnight. In the classroom, provision is practical and personal, with laptops, reading pens, flexible seating, movement breaks and individual learning support profiles reviewed termly with teachers, parents and pupils. In 2025, SEND pupils achieved positive A-level value-added, without any lowering of expectations. bancrofts.org

Other contenders:
Merchant Taylors’ School
Blundell’s School

Best partnerships: Shrewsbury School

Shrewsbury School’s Partnership and Community Engagement programme, recognised by the Independent Schools Inspectorate as a “significant strength”, goes far beyond tokenism. The flagship partnership with Alpha Academies Trust in Stoke-on-Trent serves over 4,300 pupils in one of the UK’s most deprived communities. A co-designed programme running from Year 4 to Year 10 saw 1,100 Alpha pupils engaged in 2025-26, supported by 660 hours from more than 60 Shrewsbury staff. 84 per cent of participants reported greater confidence, 73 per cent stronger communication skills, and measurable gains in ambition and awareness of future pathways. In 2024-25 alone, Shrewsbury pupils raised over £150,000 and contributed 850 volunteering hours, making it a worthy winner for meaningful partnerships. shrewsbury.org.uk

Other contenders:
Magdalen College School, Oxford
Sevenoaks School

Best boarding: Hurstpierpoint College

Boarding at Hurst feels a bit different. The paired house model brings boys and girls together naturally, making it feel more modern and a more thoughtfully designed approach to co-education. Pupils mix across year groups, forming natural friendships amongst boys and girls that they might not otherwise make. Younger pupils benefit from the support of older peers, while older pupils develop leadership through mentoring. The no-screen policy is a stand-out encouraging youngsters to enjoy more time together, with evenings playing board games, and enjoying pizza and film nights, encouraging natural interaction. At the heart of it all are the Houseparents, knowing every pupil by name, creating space for honest conversations and ensuring no one goes unnoticed. hppc.co.uk

Other contenders:
Rugby School
Sevenoaks School

Best creative arts: Bede’s School

At Bede’s in East Sussex, the creative arts feel properly alive. This is a school where pupils are not just encouraged to perform, but to think, make, design and take creative risks. The scale of the work is impressive, from the annual Cabaret showcase to this year’s Les Misérables at the Attenborough Centre for Creative Arts in Brighton. These are ambitious productions, and the fact that BTEC production arts pupils are behind the sets, sound and lighting gives them real depth and credibility. There is plenty happening beyond the main stage too. Drama pupils have taken work to the Edinburgh Fringe, while Bede’s Legat Dance Academy offers high-level training in ballet, contemporary and jazz. Pupils learn from industry professionals, and many go on to serious creative pathways. Bede’s stands out with creativity being an impressive and pivotal part of the education. bedes.org

Other contenders:
Merchant Taylors’ School
Notre Dame School Cobham

Best extra-curricular: Gordonstoun School

At Gordonstoun, the co-curricular life is remarkable. Pupils are expected to get stuck in, whether that means heading out on expeditions, taking part in international exchanges, sailing on the school’s own yacht or serving in groups such as the Fire Service, Coastguard Rescue or Pool Lifeguards. There is real substance behind the offer too. The new Adventure Campus in the Cairngorms gives pupils even more scope for challenge, while recent activities have included endurance races, night-time challenges and ambitious long-distance events. What makes Gordonstoun stand out is the sheer breadth of opportunity. With 75 activities and electives, from robotics and archaeology to cookery, every pupil has the chance to find something that stretches them. This is a school where co-curricular life sits at the very heart of education. gordonstoun.org.uk

Other contenders:
Roedean School
St Swithun’s School

Best pastoral care: Mayfield School

Mayfield School has made girls’ wellbeing central to its identity. Following a whole-school review in 2024, Mayfield committed to becoming a national leader in girls’ wellbeing by 2027, embedding a structured yet deeply human approach to pastoral care. Support is highly visible with over 50 staff trained in Mental Health First Aid, forming a trusted network, while weekly multidisciplinary meetings ensure early, coordinated care. Two daily activity periods, alongside mindfulness and creative pursuits, balance ambition with space to breathe. Staff wellbeing is equally prioritised, allowing adults to model healthy habits authentically. At the heart of its community sits St Raphael’s Wellbeing Centre, a RIBA award-winning sanctuary. The results speak for themselves with pupils feeling safe rising from 93 per cent to 98 per cent in 2025. mayfieldgirls.org

Other contenders:
Wellington College
Notre Dame School Cobham

Best sport: Millfield School

Millfield is in a league of its own as the UK’s premier sports school. With 30 sports, over 200 specialist staff and world-class facilities, students enter what can only be described as an Olympic Village, an environment engineered to unlock exceptional sporting potential. This year, 34 seniors and 21 juniors represented 26 countries internationally, while individual achievements spoke for themselves. One pupil made history as the first British swimmer to break the sub-minute barrier in every stroke. Another earned a place at Wimbledon Juniors. A third claimed the U17 US Squash Nationals title. But Millfield’s philosophy runs deeper than trophies. With a current pupil balancing A-levels with Paris 2024 Olympic experience and Los Angeles 2028 ambitions, Millfield equally values both academic and athletic excellence. millfieldschool.com

Other contenders:
Notting Hill & Ealing High School, GDST
Berkhamsted School

Best STEM: Gresham’s School

Gresham’s School is setting a new standard for STEM education through its pioneering international exchange programme with the School of Science and Technology (SST) in Singapore. Now in its second year, this unique partnership gives pupils the rare opportunity to visit Dyson’s global headquarters and collaborate on solutions to real-world challenges, from flood defences to air pollution monitoring. What makes Gresham’s approach truly distinctive is its emphasis on student-led innovation. Mixed teams from both schools develop and present working prototypes, building not just technical skills but confidence, creativity and global awareness. It’s hands-on, high-stakes learning at its best. This school will undoubtedly produce the next generation of creators and innovators. greshams.com

Other contenders:
The Perse School Cambridge
Caterham School

Best preparation for life: Benenden School

Benenden stands apart as a school where young women are empowered to discover their strengths and ambitions without limitation. Its philosophy of ‘A Complete Education’ ensures that students leave with both strong academic results and the character, skills and confidence to flourish beyond school. From the Lower School’s bespoke CREATE Diploma through to the sixth form’s Professional Skills Programme covering financial literacy, enterprise and inclusive leadership, Benenden offers a structured journey of personal development. The Electives Programme, spanning more than 70 courses, further broadens horizons well beyond the examined curriculum. In 2025, 85 per cent of leavers secured their first-choice university destination, reflecting a school that genuinely prepares students for what comes next. benenden.school

Other contenders:
Shrewsbury School
Norwich High School for Girls, GDST

Best sixth form: Ardingly College

Ardingly’s sixth form is the college’s most sought-after entry point for good reason. With six applicants competing for every place among 300 students, its reputation speaks for itself. At its heart is exceptional academic breadth. Offering both A-levels and the IB Diploma with an average class size of just 10, students receive genuinely personalised teaching. The results follow: Ardingly ranks as the top British boarding school for the IB and sits in the top 40 co-ed schools for A-levels, generating around 400 Russell Group offers alongside Oxbridge and Ivy League places annually. Godwin Hall unites the year group in a co-ed community, while the Enterprise & Employability programme – whose students recently won Imperial College London’s Entrepreneurs Innovation Challenge – ensures every leaver earns their World Ready Passport. ardingly.com

Other contenders:
Shiplake College
Bancroft’s School

Best teaching and learning: Berkhamsted School

Berkhamsted operates a research-based curriculum that both responds to cutting-edge discoveries and powers internal discovery itself. Staff can access grants to organise research projects and ethical experiments, and present their findings at our annual teaching and learning event. Metacognitive practices are woven into every lesson, and pupils take growing responsibility for this as they progress. Year 10 study Learning Pathways, exploring different revision and thinking styles, and sixth form students lead metacognitive sessions for younger pupils. By gathering extensive performance data, we design learning programmes that target skill deficits and contemporary challenges. For example, predictions that empathy will be an essential 21st-century skill catalysed the use of the Empathy Studios video platform to develop pupils’ sense of perspective. berkhamsted.com

Other contenders:
Bedales School South
Hampstead High School, GDST

This article first appeared in The Week’s Independent Schools Guide Autumn/Winter 2026, edited by Amanda Constance.

The conversation around artificial intelligence (AI) in schools is moving fast. Just a few years ago, the focus was on limiting its risks, preventing plagiarism and cheating. But time and tech wait for no man, and the question now has shifted to how can schools ensure pupils are AI literate?

For Ceri Jones, Headmaster at Caterham School in Surrey, there is “a real urgency” to the issue. “We keep talking about a world that is coming to us,” he says. “The reality is that the world is already here.”

Educators, he believes, are recognising that future success will depend less on grades or university destinations than on how young people respond to uncertainty and disruption.

For Caterham, that meant developing an explicit curriculum focused on “future-ready skills”. The school’s EDGE curriculum – explore, develop, grow, evolve – gives pupils, from the first year of prep to the upper sixth, dedicated digital innovation lessons, developing technological confidence alongside problem-solving, teamwork, entrepreneurship and self-reflection.

This September, Caterham is launching a new GCSE-equivalent Ethical AI & Entrepreneurship qualification in partnership with Nottingham University Business School and Enactus UK, the social entrepreneurial education charity. Validated by business leaders and education specialists, the course combines entrepreneurship, ethical AI and social impact, with pupils developing AI-assisted solutions to real-world challenges under the guidance of university mentors. Successful students will receive a GCSE-equivalent qualification that can be included on university applications.

“This isn’t just about teaching kids how to make money,” says Jones. “It’s about teaching them how to have an impact and change the world for the better.”

Many pupils, he says, feel overwhelmed by global challenges. “Our job as educators is to create a sense of optimism, to make them believe they can solve problems.”

The new qualification has also struck a chord with parents. When Caterham explained that pupils would study ten GCSEs plus the new course rather than 11 GCSEs, Jones admits the school was unsure how families would respond. “But it went down really well. A number of parents just said: ‘Thank God, this is exactly what schools should be doing.’”

Alongside curriculum changes, Caterham has invested heavily in its own AI technology. Rather than relying on commercial platforms, it recruited machine-learning engineers to develop AI tools designed specifically for schools.

“We were determined to ensure that what we put in front of our pupils, in terms of AI or enhanced technology, is independent by educational purpose and pedagogy. I think, too often, the off-the-shelf products you buy don’t have pedagogy safeguarding or ethical use at their heart,” says Jones.

Its education technology company, Sphinx AI, created RileyBot, an AI learning assistant now shared for free with local state schools. Rather than completing work for pupils, RileyBot guides them through problems much like a teacher would.

“It’s about developing pupils’ agency around AI,” says Jones. “The reality is pupils are experimenting with AI whether we like it or not. My view is: let’s help them do it safely, securely and productively.”

AI is now embedded across school life. Jones describes pupils using large language models (LLMs) to generate code and build websites, while Year 7 pupils recently created an app to help new students navigate the transition from primary school, using school data to build an interactive school map.

But he is equally clear that traditional disciplines remain essential.

“We’re also teaching ethics, philosophy and critical thinking,” he says. “That’s also part of the AI education: you know – what is truth, what is reality?”

“We can no longer just teach kids to pass exams in the expectation that they’ll go to university and get into the world of work,” says Jones. “Whilst that pathway will still be there, I suspect, for a long time, I think there’s this other pathway emerging and I want all pupils to know they have the opportunity to build their own futures.”

For the Sherborne schools in Dorset, AI ambition is spreading beyond the school walls and into the town itself. This year, the boys’ school is marking the centenary of the arrival of its famous alumnus, Alan Turing, the father of modern computing. This month, the newly formed Sherborne Schools Group – Sherborne Boys, Sherborne Girls and Sherborne Prep – will formally unite under one brand. Central to its vision is the Sherborne Turing Project, a multimillion-pound initiative to transform this somewhat sleepy west country town into a hotbed for digital innovation and education.

The project includes the creation of The Turing Centre, an innovation, AI and entrepreneurship hub, alongside the inaugural Turing Conference this October, hosted by the school. Organisers hope it will become an annual gathering of leaders from technology, academia and industry.

Alastair Poulain, Deputy Head (Co-Curricular) at Sherborne Prep says the vision was driven by the town itself. A key aim is raising “the aspirations and ambitions” for all the young people of the town; outside of Sherborne’s school walls, opportunities are in short supply for many.

The conference will give Sherborne pupils and those from neighbouring schools “a chance to meet and hear from the great and the good in AI and tech”, he says. Speakers include AI luminaries such as Kerensa Jennings, Suki Fuller, Jamie Bartlett and Alan Turing’s nephew, Dermot Turing, while organisations including Bletchley Park, GCHQ and BAE Systems will take part in an afternoon tech festival.

The aim for the Turing Centre is to create a bold commercial space for Sherborne pupils and the people of Sherborne, providing AI education, creative labs, a technology incubator and start-up support, with ambitions to attract businesses and establish a university presence in the town. “We’re a bit of a black hole university-wise,” says Poulain, adding that discussions with a private university are already under way.

Sherborne is also embedding AI in the classroom. It has developed its own platform, Sherbot, and is piloting Turing Tutor, an AI-powered learning platform that, like Caterham’s RileyBot, gives pupils access to an individual AI tutor. “It’s ambitious and very exciting,” says Poulain. Not only will Turing Tutor plug individual learning gaps, but it will also aid neuro-diverse students “who can soar in some areas and may struggle with others”, and give teachers a richer picture of each child’s progress by bringing together assessment and performance data.

“Ultimately we want the town of Sherborne to be known for its progressive AI and entrepreneurship,” says Poulain. “That means supporting not just our pupils, but parents, local businesses and the wider community. We’ve got a lot of young families in Sherborne but a lot of people wearing red cords do like to come down and retire here, and we want them to be good with AI as well.”

Being good with AI is what gets Ed Halliday out of bed every morning. Halliday is a lecturer in AI and entrepreneurship at the University of Bristol’s Centre for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, and co-founder of Future Faculty, an education start-up that equips young people with the skills and mindsets to thrive in future careers. “Naturally, AI has become an increasingly important part of that work,” he says. The company now runs AI boot camps for students and graduates, helping them become AI-native operators and gain an edge in a competitive jobs market. More than 4,000 students have taken part to date.

“Our hypothesis is that if you learn how to harness AI in the right way, you can say to an employer: ‘I’ve augmented my existing skills with AI to do more, faster, and achieve greater impact,’” says Halliday. “It’s about giving students a competitive advantage in a pretty complex labour market.”

Future Faculty has worked with the LSE, King’s Business School, UCL and other universities. Students aged 18-25 learn to build apps, prototype ideas and solve real problems set by employers, from designing products and marketing campaigns to creating automated business systems. “It’s a real-life sandbox,” says Halliday. “It’s about bringing the outside world into education.”

But AI is never the end goal. It is the process that matters, says Halliday. “Understanding a problem, interrogating it, testing ideas and refining solutions – that’s the cornerstone of my teaching.”

“The fact we’re teaching AI is incidental because really we’re teaching critical thinking,” he adds. Students need to understand how AI models are built and “how they’re incentivised to produce information” so they can become “pilots rather than passengers”.

Halliday uses LLM ‘hallucinations’ as an example. To a lay person like you or me, hallucinations (when an LLM generates false, misleading or completely fabricated information, but presents it confidently as a factual truth) are a mistake, a fault in the system. Not so, says Halliday. It’s because these LLMs were built using something called “deep reinforcement learning”, which basically rewards a correct move but sanctions a wrong move, leading the LLM to logically guess when it doesn’t know the answer. “It’s not a bug,” says Halliday. “It’s actually a design feature.”

Future Faculty also encourages students to retain the “friction of the cognitive process” in their work. Before turning to AI, they discuss ideas with peers and sketch them out on paper, reflecting consciously on when AI adds value and when they want to rely on their own creativity. “It’s about thinking: ‘Where do I want to retain my humanity?’”

Despite the disruption AI is bringing, Halliday remains optimistic. “We’re in for a messy three-to-five years and then we’ll come out of it with more clarity.”

While he accepts the recruitment process is currently “broken”, his advice to young people is to find a different way. Don’t apply to the job on LinkedIn that has already had 100 applications – do your research, find the companies in your area and approach them directly. Don’t ask for a job; rather, let them know “I can help you”, and then show them how. AI has its limits, he says, and employers continue to value “human perspectives and human judgement”.

“I think we’ve reached a tipping point when we’ve realised we’re better than technology sometimes makes us feel,” he says. “We aren’t satisfied with seeing sloppy AI generated videos or posts on social media, because we enjoy things that are quite arduous, hard work, like sketching, using pen and paper or spending time discussing things. We’re going to run out of patience with copying and pasting AI answers into our homework, because it feels like giving up.”

David Flower, Warden Elect at St Edward’s Oxford, concurs. The school – affectionately known as Teddies – has taken a measured approach to AI education.

“The way we have approached it is that, if you’re interested in AI, computer science or STEM, you need the basic qualifications first,” says Flower. “The main problem with generative AI is that it bypasses the educational process, so there is a risk that pupils have gaps in their knowledge and become infantilised by the AI because they have become dependent on it as a shortcut.”

Nor does he see much value in teaching prompt engineering. By the time today’s pupils leave school, LLMs may no longer require written prompts. “Prompt engineering is a bit of a gimmick,” he says. “It’s a bit like telling people how to use Google to search... Writing a good prompt is dependent on your scheme of knowledge.”

For Flower, a knowledge-rich curriculum is the foundation of effective AI use. Teddies has taken a slow-and-steady approach to making its curriculum and assessment “AI ready and relevant”. “We’ve been very careful not to throw the baby out with the bath water,” he says. “Education is a long-term project, and you can’t just be blown by the winds of changes in this or that direction.”

That means designing assessments that cannot easily be shortcutted by AI. Following an audit of its internally assessed Pathways and Perspectives course, for example, the school has shifted towards verbal presentations, handwritten work and sketchbooks, “things that we know are the work of the pupil”. It has also ended unsupervised typed assessments.

Teddies is not ignoring AI, however. From this term, sixth formers will work with Global Shapers, an AI literacy programme developed by graduates. “Our main aim is to make pupils critical users of AI,” says Flower.

He believes there is currently too much hype around AI. Young people are concerned about jobs, an education “outsourced to AI” and the world they are growing up in “being radically different from the world that existed 20, 30 years ago”. What pupils really want, says Flower, is some sense of where this is all heading, “which is, of course, the most difficult thing to do”.

But he argues that older generations and the media risk fanning the flames of AI anxiety. “There is a very lazy narrative that AI is taking young people’s jobs,” he says, pointing out that wider social changes, including the rise of remote working, have also reshaped entry-level employment.

“It’s very easy to view everything through the prism of AI, but society is much more complex than that.”

This article first appeared in The Week’s Independent Schools Guide Autumn/Winter 2026, edited by Amanda Constance.

Clearing my mother’s garage a few years ago, I stumbled across a file fat with letters addressed to me. Spanning a period in the early 1990s when I was an English literature undergraduate at the University of Edinburgh, they are (on the whole) rejection letters from newspapers and magazines that I had applied to for summer work- experience. Typed letters on weighty GSM paper, or indeed handwritten cards, from editors, and managing and deputy editors, at The Sunday Times, The Times, The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, The Independent, the Daily Express, Vogue, The Face, the TLS, the London Review of Books (I have no memory of being so enterprising)... the list goes on.

They are all handsigned and include the script of literary and journalistic luminaries such as Ferdinand Mount, Rosie Boycott, Glenda Bailey, Miriam Gross, Sheryl Garratt and Maggie O’Farrell. Some are short and sweet, some go into immense detail about why there are no vacancies at present. They are all personal, they are all encouraging. There is not one whiff of ‘computer says no’ from an anonymous HR apparatchik.

Why do I mention this? Because I can’t stop thinking about the gulf between then and now. And yes, I know 30 years is a long time, but how did we get here? Our daily news is now stuffed with stories of graduates sending out hundreds of job applications into the maw of remorseless technology and failing to get even an acknowledgement. Yes, I was rejected, but an actual person took the time to read my letter, reply to it, hand sign it, and put it in the post. I wasn’t just ignored by a machine.

How young people thrive in the age of AI is something we address in this issue. The challenges that schools face in preparing young people for the world of work or ensuring they have the AI literacy needed to succeed in an uncertain future. I feel more optimistic than I did before working on this edition, however; our education leaders and our schools are so alive to the threat. Those working on the frontline know that the skills needed more than ever by students are the most human ones: judgement, critical thinking, a rich hinterland of knowledge and personal real-world relationships.

AI has the potential to cause major disruption, but I think an increasingly automated world is driving a thirst for human connection and I feel more certain than before that we will prevail. I just wish today’s graduates could have their own pile of rejection letters to look back on in 30 year’s time.

I hope you enjoy this issue.

Amanda Constance is the editor of The Week’s Independent Schools Guide. Read the full publication below or click here.

President Donald Trump is inarguably a man of deep passions. He has expressed these as issues of great — and occasionally even national — importance. While that framing is not universally shared, particularly among the president’s many detractors, Trump’s penchant for publicly invoking both his reliable bugbears and darlings offers valuable insight into the inner life of America’s logorrheic leader. Here are nine obsessions Donald Trump just can’t quit.

Atomic bombs

Trump has “displayed a keen interest in the utility of atomic weapons for decades,” said the BBC. The fixation is part of a “political worldview that has long since solidified into firm beliefs for the septuagenarian,” in which the focus on atomic bombs reflects a “certain strain of Cold War arms-race enthusiasm and diplomatic brinkmanship.”

The “threat — and promise — of nuclear weapons” has been a “thread through both” Trump administrations, said Barron’s. Atomic weaponry has “been on his mind since the ’80s,” said Daryl Kimball, the executive director of the Arms Control Association, to the outlet. “He wants to solve this issue.”

Genetics

“For decades,” Trump has been “publicly obsessed with bloodlines” as part of a “stated belief that genetics are the best predictor of a person’s success,” said The New York Times. He has regularly “spoken favorably about the racehorse analogy” of selective human breeding, which has been “embraced by white supremacists for decades,” said the Los Angeles Times.

Trump’s “observations on genetics” are not “only an expression of racism,” said New York magazine. The interest also reveals “one of his deepest obsessions” and in part explains the “bizarre passivity” that “characterized his response” during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Gold

It’s “no secret” that Trump “really, really likes gold,” said Marie Claire. His Manhattan penthouse has “enough gold and marble to remind anyone of Versailles,” while his private jet has “gold-plated seat belt buckles and bathroom fixtures.” Trump’s Oval Office resembles a “Middle Eastern bazaar crossed with an opulent Cracker Barrel” in which “thick, gold frames line the walls; gold vases and ice buckets adorn the fireplace mantel; gold stars form a circle on the ceiling; and gold appliqués fill any gaps,” said The Atlantic. The president’s “brand” is “synonymous with over-the-top golden opulence, so Trump's version of the Oval is very on-brand,” said NPR’s Tamara Keith on “All Things Considered.”

Florsheim shoes

After “searching for something that would feel better after a day on the job,” Trump this past spring “settled on Florsheim” leather oxford shoes, coming to like them so much that “he started dispensing them,” said The Wall Street Journal. The president has “grown fond of guessing people’s shoe sizes in front of them” before tasking an aide to order them a pair, said The Daily Beast.

“I have fun with it,” said Trump when asked by Fox News’ Brian Kilmeade about reports detailing the footwear focus in a March 2026 interview. “Sneakers are wonderful, but I don’t want my Cabinet members wearing sneakers,” he continued, “so I’ll get them a pair of shoes” as a “gift from Donald Trump.”

Sharks

When it comes to ranking living creatures, “Sharks are last” on the president’s list — “other than perhaps the losers and haters of the World!” Trump said on X in 2013, years before he assumed the most powerful office on Earth. Trump is “obsessed with sharks,” said the president’s infamous paramour Stormy Daniels to InTouch. “I hope all the sharks die,” Daniels claims Trump, an obsessive “Shark Week” watcher, told her. Although Trump’s shark obsession may be “funny on the surface,” the animals are “essentially a physical distillation of what Trump hates the most,” said Slate: “Power in the hands of anyone but him, existential uncertainty, nature.”

Show tunes

A GOP push to make “theater kid” and its iterations a “curious little term of abuse on the right” has “just one wrinkle,” said Erik Forrest Jackson at The Atlantic: Trump himself is an “inveterate theater kid,” of which Jackson has “unique firsthand confirmation,” having conducted a 2004 interview with him about Broadway, in which “the man gushed.”

In the memoirs of former Trump Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham, she noted that the president’s “handlers designated an unnamed White House official known as the ‘Music Man’ to play him his favorite show tunes” selected to “pull him from the brink of rage,” said The New York Times. “My favorite Broadway show is ‘Evita’ by Andrew Lloyd Webber, starring Patti LuPone,” said Trump in 2004’s “Think Like a Billionaire.” The president “saw it six times, mostly with Ivana.”

Steam-powered catapults

Trump has “returned again and again to the concept of steam power,” said The Atlantic. In “nearly a decade of loudly complaining,” Trump has lamented that naval aircraft carriers use “electromagnetic systems to launch fighter jets instead of steam-powered catapults,” said The Guardian. He has even instructed the Pentagon to “redesign a new aircraft carrier to replace the modern system with the old-fashioned catapults he prefers.”

Per The Guardian, Trump has publicly regaled listeners with a story about demanding steam catapults “with variations, every year since 2017.” One possible explanation for his fixation is the fact that the president “just really loves ‘Top Gun’” and “doesn’t think fighter jets look anywhere near as cool when they take off from Ford-class carriers,” said New York magazine. Trump has even “made this link himself,” including during a 2022 rally. “It’s a beautiful thing to watch the steam, and the plane gets thrown out there,” Trump said. “Those pilots are the greatest, ‘Top Gun,’ right? They’re the greatest pilots. And they get thrown into the ocean and they just take off, and it’s beautiful to watch.”

William McKinley

Since declaring in a 2018 X post that “I am a Tariff Man,” Trump’s “veneration” for President William McKinley — who also referred to himself as such — “has only grown,” said The New Yorker. But Trump’s “admiration” for McKinley “seems deeper than just tariffs,” said NPR’s Asma Khalid on “All Things Considered.” McKinley, too, “realigned and consolidated the power of the Republican Party for decades,” and Trump has also hailed McKinley’s work “expanding America’s footprint around the globe.”

Trump additionally “honored” his predecessor by “undoing an Obama-era change” to rename Alaska’s Mount Denali back to Mount McKinley, said U.S. News & World Report. But for all his presidential enthusiasm, said The New Yorker, Trump’s “McKinleyism is not deeply informed.”

Windmills

Trump has “harbored a strange vendetta” against wind turbines “ever since” Scottish authorities “installed a wind project within sight of his golf course in Aberdeenshire more than a decade ago,” said The Daily Beast. Since then, Trump has “repeatedly shared claims” turbines “cause cancer, kill birds and whales, and destroy property values.” Trump has also directed “frequent criticism” toward “European countries’ reliance on wind energy,” suggesting they “aren’t worth the investment and have destroyed views in Scotland,” said E&E News

Why is it so significant?

It “must be the only artistic masterpiece that is also a crucial source for a major historical event”, wrote the medieval historian Patrick Wormald. The Bayeux Tapestry’s survival, largely intact, is miraculous in itself. A strip cartoon-style rendering of the Norman Conquest, from 1064 to the Battle of Hastings, it is rich, evocative and astonishingly vivid. The tapestry is “not merely a record of conquest, but an incomparable mirror of medieval life”, says the French scholar Lucien Musset. Colourful, graphically violent and occasionally ribald, it is rich in background detail, allowing us to look back nearly a millennium and see the world of the Anglo-Saxons and their Norman foes: their arms and armour, their ships, their cooking, their horses and dogs, their hairstyles (the English have flowing locks and long moustaches, while the Normans are cropped and clean-shaven).

How was it made?

It is not actually a tapestry, but an embroidery: a linen cloth 50cm high and 68 metres long, showing 58 scenes embroidered with woollen yarn of 10 colours, and captioned with brief Latin titles. When it first surfaced in history, in 1476, it was hung to decorate the nave of Bayeux Cathedral in Normandy every year at an annual feast. According to local tradition, it was made by William the Conqueror’s wife Matilda and her ladies-in-waiting, but most scholars now think it was, in fact, commissioned in the 1070s by William’s half-brother Odo, Bishop of Bayeux (and later Earl of Kent), who features four times (more than anyone except the main protagonists) and is seen rallying the troops at Hastings.

So is it a work of propaganda?

In outline, it tells the Norman version of the conquest, similar to that in the two main Norman chronicles of the period – framing it as a crusade against a perjurer. Harold Godwinson, Earl of Wessex, crosses over to northern France in 1064, is captured by Count Guy I of Ponthieu and is rescued by William. Harold then swears an oath over holy relics, before returning to England and assuming the English crown upon the death of Edward the Confessor (his sister’s husband, who died without a direct heir). William’s case was that Harold had made, and broken, a sacred oath to support his claim to the English throne (this is how he gained the papacy’s backing for his invasion). The tapestry shows Halley’s comet – a bad omen – appearing above the newly crowned Harold. However, the tapestry is thought to have been made in England, probably in Odo’s earldom of Kent, which was famous for its needlework: some designs match those in manuscripts in Canterbury. This could explain its sympathetic portrayal of the English.

How is it pro-English?

The Norman invaders are shown seizing the locals’ food, and burning a house while an English woman, holding her son’s hand, implores them to stop. Harold is portrayed without rancour, and with dignity, even heroism; he saves two Norman soldiers from a river while in France. The action starts with him, and he appears more times than William: one academic has even called it “the tragedy of Harold”.

So it's subversive?

Arguably. Looking at the scene of Harold’s oath, it could be interpreted as showing that it was extorted from him – as one early 12th-century English source argued. It could even be said to endorse Harold’s claim to the English throne. After his coronation, Harold is described as “Harold Rex”, whereas the Domesday Book is careful only to call him Earl Harold. The Conqueror, by contrast, is never called “Rex” (only “Dux”) in the tapestry, though this may be because the final section, presumably showing his coronation, was torn off and lost. The tapestry is, at the very least, enigmatic and ambivalent – it can be seen both as “a Norman brag and a Saxon lament”, says art critic Jonathan Jones.

What about the background detail?

Along the top and bottom run decorative borders featuring scenes from fables, and of farming and hunting, along with a few naked human figures (there are at least five human penises). In one unexplained scene, “a certain cleric” is shown touching the face of a woman named as Ælfgyva. A priapic naked man squats below. And when the story reaches the Battle of Hastings, carnage from the battlefield spreads out onto the margin: decapitated bodies, severed limbs, looters stealing armour from the dead.

Has it always been in Bayeux?

Almost always. Antiquarians started taking an interest in the tapestry in the 1700s, and in the early 1800s it went to Paris, where Napoleon displayed it to whip up enthusiasm for an invasion of England. The final caption – et fuga verterunt Angli (“and the English turned in flight”) – was added shortly before 1814, presumably for propaganda reasons. The Gestapo also took it to Paris during the Second World War: Heinrich Himmler then ordered it to be taken to “a place of safety” in 1944, but Paris was liberated before his order was executed. It then returned to Bayeux.

Why was the loan agreed?

For two main reasons: because its home, Bayeux Museum, is closed until October 2027; and because President Macron was determined to make it happen. Macron first proposed the loan in 2018; he joked that it has taken longer to sort out than Brexit. The Bayeux Museum’s curator initially called it “unthinkable”; the risk of damage in transit led 78,500 people to sign a petition blocking the loan. But Macron insisted – knowing, said Peter Ricketts, who coordinated at the UK end, that the exhibition “would be a sensation”. The Norman Conquest is, after all, just a detail in French history but central to Britain’s national story.

After their terms end, most U.S. presidents try to make their remaining time count. They often do so by building a presidential library and museum, as every commander-in-chief of the 20th and 21st centuries has done. Many of them also write an autobiography or presidential memoir, as former President Joe Biden is currently doing. But many ex-presidents have also undertaken more unusual tasks after leaving the White House.

Barack Obama

While former President Barack Obama’s presidential center recently opened in Chicago, the 44th president has been keeping busy in a variety of other ways. Most notable is Higher Ground, the production company he launched with Netflix in 2018 alongside his wife, Michelle Obama. The company began with film and television projects and has since branched out into documentaries and podcasts.

In April 2026, it was announced that Higher Ground would “transition to becoming independent when its current first-look deal with Netflix is up,” said Deadline, though the company will be “continuing to collaborate with the global streamer on existing projects.” The independence has allowed Higher Ground to work with other studios, including partnering with HBO on Larry David’s “seven-part sketch comedy series that’s an irreverent look at American history,” said NPR. The show features a cameo from the former president.

George W. Bush

After his presidency, George W. Bush mostly shunned the limelight, instead retiring to his ranch in Texas. But he took up several hobbies since leaving office, most notably painting. Bush’s artworks are “both more and less interesting than they initially seem,” said Artforum, and often feature world leaders he met during his time as president, including Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Beyond his brushstrokes, Bush is also an avid mountain biker and uses this to give back. He has “hosted a charity ride for veterans for years,” said Bike magazine, and in 2021 even released a short documentary about the ride. “Any day you ride with the vets is a good day,” Bush says in the video. Several veterans “who found community and healing in the sport of mountain biking were interviewed in the documentary,” said Bike.

Bill Clinton

It was Bill Clinton’s wife, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who had the more prestigious career after leaving 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. But the former president hasn’t kept to himself entirely these last 26 years — Clinton has remained largely active in global affairs. In 2009, he “arrived in North Korea” on a secret trip to “try to win the freedom of two American journalists,” said NPR. North Korean leader Kim Jong Il pardoned the journalists after his visit.

That same year, Clinton was also appointed as the United Nations’ special envoy for Haiti, thereby “building on the former United States president’s extensive engagement with the Caribbean nation,” said the U.N. Clinton’s work on the island helped “support the efforts of the Haitian authorities to jumpstart sustainable social and economic development.” He remains closely tied to Haitian affairs.

Jimmy Carter

When former President Jimmy Carter died at age 100 in 2024, many said it was his post-presidency for which he’d be most remembered. While Carter’s time in the White House was largely seen as unsuccessful, upon leaving Washington he “intended, without returning to public office, to continue to work toward the promotion of peace, progress, and human rights throughout the world,” said the American Historical Association (AHA).

Carter used his four decades after his presidency to “promote peace in the Middle East, to address international security and arms control, and to close the gap between what we know how to do in healthcare and what is actually achieved,” said the AHA, largely through the creation of the Carter Center. He also waged a “war against ‘neglected’ diseases — diseases in far-off lands that most Americans will never suffer from and may not have even heard of,” said NPR. These efforts helped lead to the near-eradication of the parasitic Guinea worm disease.

Dwight D. Eisenhower

When Dwight D. Eisenhower’s time in office came to an end, the former World War II general went back to the military — sort of. Eisenhower “reactivated his commission as a five-star general in the United States Army.” Aside from George Washington, Eisenhower is the “only United States president with military service to reenter the Armed Forces after leaving the office of president,” said the Eisenhower Library.

But Eisenhower’s reactivation was largely in name only, as he soon retired to a small farm near Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. On this farm, Eisenhower and his wife “raised Angus cattle, painted” and “traveled both for pleasure and to revisit the sites of past triumphs, as when they went to Normandy to film a documentary for the twentieth anniversary of D-Day,” said the University of Virginia’s Miller Center. Before his death, Eisenhower also “consulted frequently with President Lyndon B. Johnson after LBJ committed combat troops to Vietnam.”

Calvin Coolidge

Calvin Coolidge’s presidency has largely been forgotten in the 21st century, but he did take up a unique job after leaving the White House, becoming a journalist. Through the McClure Newspaper Syndicate, Coolidge “wrote a syndicated newspaper column between June 30, 1930, and June 29, 1931,” called “Calvin Coolidge Says,” marking a “rare example of a former president weighing in on current events after leaving the White House,” said the Calvin Coolidge Presidential Foundation.

Coolidge also served a variety of other roles post-presidency. These included the “president of the American Antiquarian Society,” as well as a “directorship on the board of the New York Life Insurance Company” and “chairmanship of the National Transportation Committee, formed by a group of banks, insurance companies and other organizations interested in railway securities,” said The New York Times.

William Howard Taft

William Howard Taft didn’t stay out of government long after his presidency ended in 1913; eight years later, the former president was appointed chief justice of the United States Supreme Court. He remains the only person to have held both roles. The Supreme Court marked a leap back into public life for Taft, who first “became a professor of constitutional law” at Yale University after leaving the White House, said Encyclopedia Britannica.

As chief justice, Taft’s most “most important contribution to constitutional law was his opinion in Myers vs. United States,” a 1926 ruling “upholding the authority of the president to remove federal officials,” said Encyclopedia Britannica. And despite having served as president, Taft considered the judicial branch a higher calling. “To Taft,” said the White House Historical Association, the Supreme Court appointment was his “greatest honor; he wrote: ‘I don’t remember that I ever was president.’”

President Donald Trump’s first term in office was marked by the cyclonic speed with which his White House’s revolving door spun for aides both incoming and outgoing. During his second term, Trump’s penchant for abrupt staffing changes has continued — if not apace, then at least with the same mercurial fickleness that characterized many of his first-term firings. Here’s who has already been shown the exit, shuffled into a new role or given little choice about their continued employment in the administration.

Attorney General Pam Bondi

Trump’s early-April 2026 announcement that Attorney General Pam Bondi was “transitioning to a much-needed and important new job in the private sector” offered “no specific reason for why she would be leaving,” CNN said. Bondi’s firing came “less than two months” after a “tense congressional hearing” in which she faced “aggressive questioning from politicians, with sometimes heated exchanges,” Al Jazeera said. While Trump may have been “frustrated” with Attorney General Pam Bondi’s “handling of some of his key priorities,” changing DOJ leadership “doesn’t guarantee the president the outcome he seeks,” NBC News said.

Deputy FBI Director Dan Bongino

Former Secret Service agent-turned-MAGA podcaster Dan Bongino spent less than one year as the FBI’s number two under Kash Patel before announcing in late 2025 his plans to leave the agency by the start of 2026. Bongino had previously spoken “publicly” about the “personal toll” the job was taking on him, Fox News said. In an interview with the network, Bongino said that he “gave up everything for this.”

Bongino’s assertions that sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein did commit suicide “frustrated many of Trump’s supporters” and led to a “contentious meeting between him and Bondi” in July, the BBC said. Bongino has since returned to podcasting, where he “won’t have the pressure of having to work in the reality-based world,” said MS NOW.

CBP ‘Commander at Large’ Greg Bovino

As the face of the Trump Administration’s Operation Metro Surge in Minnesota and Midway Blitz in Chicago, Customs and Border Patrol Commander At Large Greg Bovino played a key role in enacting the White House’s controversial immigration actions in both states. Bovino was “removed from his role” in January 2026 following the “deaths of two U.S. citizens” in Minneapolis and quickly returned to his prior position as CBP sector chief in El Centro, California, Fox News said.

Shortly after, he retired from federal work. Although he was “popular with direct subordinates for his bold and unapologetic leadership,” multiple DHS officials described Bovino as a “chronic institutional headache” whose behavior “alienated even those who generally shared his politics,” The New York Times said. Since his retirement, Bovino has found a “new target for posts on X: his former employers in the Trump administration,” who he has “taken to criticizing” for being “soft on immigration,” The Chicago Tribune said.

Secretary of Labor Lori Chavez-DeRemer

Former Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer quietly exited her cabinet-level role in the Trump administration in late April 2026 to “move into a private sector job” following “scrutiny over several misconduct scandals,” said Axios. Any allegations of wrongdoing are merely the work of “high-ranked deep state actors who have been coordinating with the one-sided news media” to “undermine President Trump’s mission,” Chavez-DeRemeber said on Instagram in an emphatic denial of the accusations against her.

Chavez-DeRemer’s departure came at the tail end of a “monthslong investigation into a whistleblower’s allegations of professional misconduct,” said The New York Times. The “likelihood” that the inspector general’s pursuit might “reveal embarrassing details” was “compounded by a parallel inquiry on Capitol Hill.”

National Counterterrorism Center Director Joe Kent

In resigning from the Trump White House this past March, former anti-terrorism official Joe Kent became the “most high-profile figure within the Trump administration to publicly criticize the U.S.-Israeli attack on Iran,” said the BBC. Rights groups had spoken out against Kent’s initial nomination to the NCTC over “extremist links of his in the past,” including with far-right figures such as Tucker Carlson and Nick Fuentes, said Liz Landers on “PBS News Hour.”

Kent, with a resignation letter rife with “potentially anti-Semitic undertones,” cast Trump as "someone swept up in events rather than driving them,” The Atlantic said. “I always thought he was weak on security,” Trump said to reporters in the Oval Office after Kent published his letter. “I didn’t know him well, but I thought he seemed like a pretty nice guy.” After reading Kenz's resignation letter, Trump said, “I realized that it’s a good thing that he’s out because he said that Iran was not a threat. Iran was a threat.”

Acting ICE Directors Todd Lyons and Caleb Vitello

Longtime Immigration and Customs Enforcement official Todd Lyons’ mid-April 2026 announcement that he plans to retire at the end of May 2026 adds to the “list of leadership shakeups at the Department of Homeland Security,” said NPR News. Though it was “not immediately clear” what prompted Lyons’ retirement announcement, the news came amid “continued scrutiny” of ICE’s “aggressive immigration tactics” and a “record-long funding lapse from Congress.”

Lyons had initially been tapped to lead ICE to replace previous Acting Director Caleb Vitello in 2025, after administration figures “expressed anger that the number of people being deported” was “not higher,” said NBC News. Vitello had been seen as “‘very popular’ among the rank and file during his month as acting director,” said a source to the outlet.

DHS Secretary Kristi Noem

As the first cabinet secretary to be fired by Trump in his second term, former Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem’s “tumultuous tenure” culminated in “two high-profile killings of U.S. citizens by federal agents” and a “pair of congressional hearings that displayed bipartisan frustration with her leadership,” The Wall Street Journal said. Prior to her firing, multiple DHS figures “privately questioned how much longer the secretary would remain in the post” given what they saw as a “series of missteps” on Noem’s part, said CNN.

Noem will be “moving to be Special Envoy for The Shield of the Americas, our new Security Initiative in the Western Hemisphere,” said Trump in his announcement about the firing. As Secretary, Noem was the “architect” of a “frenzied bid to snap up commercial warehouses across the country and turn them into Amazon-style migrant processing hubs,” The Daily Beast said. After her firing that plan has been “beset by community uproar, scrapped deals and Republican revolts.”

Secretary of the Navy John Phelan

“Months of simmering tension” between former Secretary of the Navy John Phelan and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth came to a head in late April 2026, with Hegseth dismissing Phelan “in a phone call” that took place “just minutes” before the Pentagon released an official statement on the firing, The Wall Street Journal said. The dismissal followed extended “infighting” among Pentagon leadership and “disagreements over how to revive the Navy’s struggling shipbuilding program,” The New York Times said.

Phelan’s was a “short tenure” for someone who “prior to being confirmed” was a “big Trump and GOP donor,” with criticism “largely centered on his lack of a military background,” said Military.com. Though military experience is neither “mandatory” nor its lack thereof “completely unusual,” Phelan was nevertheless the “first Navy secretary since 2006 to be appointed” without a Pentagon background.

National Security Advisor Mike Waltz

Trump’s May 2025 announcement that he had removed National Security Advisor Mike Waltz marked the “first major staff shakeup since the president took office,” said CNN. Waltz’s position in the administration had been “in limbo” after the White House notified him that “his time leading the National Security Council had come to an end” in the weeks leading up to the announcement.

Although Waltz was the official responsible for the White House’s infamous “Signalgate” security breach, “in the end, it wasn’t Signalgate that toppled Mike Waltz,” said Politico. It was instead “increasing ire” over “Waltz’s hawkish stance on Iran,” a position that, at the time, placed him “out of step with the administration.” But “as a concession prize, the onetime congressman was nominated to serve as United Nations ambassador.”

“Incel” is a portmanteau of “involuntary” and “celibate.” Over the past decade, the once-fringe community has gained prominence in popular culture, largely through the vector of online influencers like self-described incel and Nazi sympathizer Nick Fuentes. Incels are, typically, extremely online men who have given up on ever having sexual relationships with women and who have crafted an elaborate and insular worldview to justify and rationalize their lack of success or interest in dating.

Though some of these terms are used in other parts of the online “manosphere,” they go a long way toward helping understand the strange and toxic atmosphere of incel culture, which has been linked to acts of violence including the 2014 mass shooting perpetrated by Elliot Rodger.

Ascending

An incel who has “ascended” is someone who is able to “leave the bounds of inceldom and have sex with a woman (without payment being given),” said Safeguarding Network. Some incels use the term in a derogatory fashion, believing those who aspire to ascension are delusional.

Alpha and Beta

“Alpha,” or alpha male, is a term derived from discredited research about wolf packs by evolutionary biologists. An alpha is “in charge, has his pick of sexual partners and has ultimate control, both of themselves and others,” said The Conversation. A “beta” is “number 2 in the wolf pack or the baboon troop,” said The New York Times. An incel believes himself to be in the latter group, although some aspire to join the former.

Becky

A “Becky” is a comparatively plain or unglamorous woman, as compared to a “Stacy” who is more conventionally attractive and successful with men. “Incels feel they’re ‘owed’ sex and relationships from Beckys, as they’re seen as inferior” to higher-status women, said Education Against Hate.

Blackpilled and redpilled

This is the concept that forms the bedrock of the destructive incel ideology. It refers to a “nihilistic world view among incels that one’s romantic prospects are biologically determined; that inferior men have no chance of ever having sexual relationships with women,” said UN Women. The concept is akin to a gateway drug in terms of an individual’s descent into this community. Someone who is “blackpilled” accepts that they are hopelessly consigned to Beta status, as opposed to someone who is “redpilled” and merely recognizes the existence of these dynamics but believes that they can escape them by securing a higher status.

Chad

A “Chad” is someone who meets the standards of a prototypical alpha male. It refers to “​​muscular, popular men who are presumed to sleep with lots of women,” said Vox. If you consider yourself an incel, you definitely don’t think of yourself as a Chad. The term was appropriated from ’90s-era Chicago culture, where a “Chad” was a wealthy but basic North Sider who went to a Big Ten school and then worked in finance or law.

Foid

A combination of “female” and “humanoid,” the term “foid” is used by incels to degrade and debase women. The term is “derogatory and is used to reduce women to a subhuman group,” said the Anti-Defamation League. Another way of expressing this concept is to use the term “femoid.”

Gymcel

“An incel who is trying to ascend” and is doing so by “going to the gym as much as possible,” said Vice. Such a person is engaging in gymmaxxing and is thought to be redpilled rather than blackpilled, given their hope that transforming their body can allow them to join the Chads and Alphas on top of the social hierarchy.

Hypergamy

Another theory burbling around incel circles, “hypergamy” refers to the idea that “women are more sexually selective and will leave less suitable men for men who are more physically attractive and have a better socioeconomic standing,” said the Journal for Deradicalization and Democratic Culture. It is part of the community’s belief ecosystem and is meant to discourage its members from trying — and failing — to join or rejoin normie society.

Looksmaxxing

The phenomenon of looksmaxxing is brought to us by a “cohort of painfully online young men who obsess over physical self-improvement in the hope that it’ll improve their dating odds,” said GQ. Popularized by the racist, misogynist influencer Braden Peters, aka “Clavicular,” it refers to the idea of going to great lengths to look as perfect as possible. Looksmaxxers may use something called the PSL Scale, which “seeks to provide a supposedly empirical assessment of facial attractiveness,” said GQ.

Jestermaxxing

Another piece of incel jargon that has “broken containment to normies,” jestermaxxing is “being pushed by people who are chasing dollars, not just lols,” said Business Insider, including clippers who snip and caption existing videos for clicks and influence. It means “using humor to gain the attention of women,” said The Atlantic, and it is one of the many reasons that “we can shed the pretense that internet life is reasonable, level-headed or healthy.” The term is sometimes used interchangeably with “jestergooning.”

Mewing

Redpilled incels will sometimes engage in the practice of mewing, or “putting pressure on the roof of your mouth with your tongue to try and change the shape of your face,” said Vice, presumably to give yourself better or more chiseled cheek bone structure. To say that this idea is scientifically dubious is putting it lightly.

MGTOW

An acronym that means “Men Going Their Own Way,” it is an expression of a kind of male separatism and is representative of the hopeless nihilism of incel culture. It is an “online community of male supremacists who advocate self-empowerment by eschewing most relationships with women,” said the Southern Poverty Law Center. They “embrace a toxic form of traditional masculinity and define themselves by their lack of relationships and hatred of women.”

Mogging

A word that is sometimes attached as a suffix to others to create new jargon (like frame-mogging), “mogging” comes from the initialism AMOG, which means “alpha male of the group.” And to be “mogged is to be shown up by another more masculine male,” said NPR. Frame-mogging is a term associated with — who else? — Clavicular to describe being photographed with someone who is better looking than you.

Normie

“Normie” is not a term that is unique to incel culture, and it has a fairly well-established meaning in broader society. But for incels, it simply refers to someone outside of the community who lives a normal life as most people would understand it. Normies have not been blackpilled and are living a lie according to incel dogma.

Sexual Market Value (SMV)

Calculating your “Sexual Market Value” is a way of figuring out where you stand in what incels call the “sexual marketplace.” For incels, this is the “primary measure of an individual’s worth,” said the Journal for Deradicalization and Democratic Culture.

Soy boy

A “soy boy” is a man who subscribes to leftist or feminist beliefs about relations between men and women or lacks the qualities that incels ascribe to alpha males. “There is some reported connection” between the term and the scientifically dubious “idea that soy products increase men’s estrogen levels,” said The Independent. A similar idea is expressed by the term “simp.”

Stacy

The counterpart of a Chad, a “Stacy” is a woman deemed conventionally attractive in the warped worldview of incel culture. A “Stacy” is an “idealized, highly attractive woman that is considered unattainable,” by incels, said UN Women. In the original Chicago slang that produced Chad, the female counterpart was typically a Trixie rather than a Stacy.

Wagecuck

Wagecucks are men with conventional jobs and, presumably, conventional lifestyles and home lives. It refers to “someone who works for a living,” as opposed to the supposedly entrepreneurial influencer lifestyle promoted by people like Clavicular, said The New York Times. Removing oneself from the workforce is, however, unlikely to be a successful ascending strategy.

White knighting

An intellectual cousin of the idea of “virtue signalling,” another idea that migrated from far right to mainstream spaces, “white knighting” is an insult lobbed at men who defend women or espouse feminist or progressive ideas. Incels believe that “men who treat women more respectfully” are “putting on a mockable façade of chivalry,” said Jia Tolentino at The New Yorker

Taylor Swift is the biggest name in music right now, and she is also one of the defining entertainers of the 21st century. No other pop star has captured the global zeitgeist quite like the Pennsylvania country singer-turned-pop superstar. Swift broke dozens of records in 2024 and has already been continuing her success in 2025, which isn't new for her; she has been breaking records since the time she first came on the scene in the early 2000s.

Swift's globetrotting "Eras" tour became its own cultural phenomenon and defined her status as perhaps the most dominating musician of her generation. It was the highest-grossing concert tour in history and the first to surpass $1 billion in sales. But this was only the latest in a string of record-breaking successes for Swift, who has been setting precedents in the music industry since practically her first song, making waves at record stores, movie theaters and more.

"The Tortured Poets Department," was released in 2024 following massive anticipation. Swift's popularity only grew when she announced her next album, "The Life of a Showgirl," which was released Oct. 3. The album is largely inspired by her relationship with Kansas City Chiefs tight end Travis Kelce, whom Swift recently became engaged to.

First and only female artist to surpass 100 million RIAA album sales

It's no shocker that Swift's albums fly off the shelves, and she reached a major milestone in September 2025, becoming the first and only female artist to surpass 100 million certified album sales, as confirmed by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). The singer has currently sold 105 million RIAA-certified albums, according to the association's website. Her 2024 album "1989" was the one that "moved the most units with 14 million," said People.

Youngest artist to win Entertainer of the Year at the Country Music Association Awards

Swift "made history at 19 by becoming the youngest artist ever" to win the CMA's Entertainer of the Year accolade, said Prestige. This is one of several awards she garnered at the CMAs that year, including Female Vocalist of the Year and Music Video of the Year.

Most American Music Awards in history

With 40 awards, Swift has taken the lead as the artist with the most American Music Awards in history. She surpassed Michael Jackson, the male artist with the most awards at 26, and Whitney Houston, who has 22. She was also recognized with the AMA's "Artist of the Decade" award in 2019 and performed a medley of some of her most popular tunes at the ceremony that year.

Most weeks at No. 1 on the Billboard 200 for a solo artist

In January 2024, Swift saw her music reach the top of the Billboard 200 chart for the 68th week. This surpassed Elvis Presley's 67 weeks, giving Swift the most weeks at the top of the chart ever for a solo artist. While not consecutive, this means that Swift is behind only The Beatles, The Kingston Trio and the Rolling Stones to have the most No. 1 weeks, period.

First woman with 4 albums in Billboard chart top 10 simultaneously

When "Speak Now (Taylor's Version)" debuted in July 2023, it was Swift's fourth album to occupy the Billboard 200 chart's top 10 at the same time, alongside "Midnights," "Lover" and "Folklore." This made her the first woman to have four albums in the Billboard chart's top 10 simultaneously and only the second living artist to do so after Herb Alpert in 1966. Prince also previously achieved this after his death in 2016.

"It's a pretty amazing feat," Alpert said to The New York Times. "With the way radio is these days, and the way music is distributed, with streaming, I didn't think anyone in this era could do it."

Additionally, Swift set a record for most albums by a female artist to chart on the Billboard 200 in a single week with 11. According to Billboard, since 1963, Prince and The Beatles are the only other artists who charted more albums simultaneously.

Most No. 1 albums by a woman in history

Swift's re-recording of her album "Speak Now" debuted at number one on the Billboard 200 chart when it was released in July 2023. This was the singer's 12th album to debut at number one, breaking the record for most number one albums by a female artist in history. This record was previously held by Barbra Streisand.

Most Grammy nominations for Song of the Year

Swift is breaking records even with her nominations. The singer has earned eight Grammy nods for Song of the Year, the most in the history of the category. However, this marks one of the rare instances in which there is something she hasn't accomplished, as Swift has never actually won the award. Prior to 2024, she "shared the record with Paul McCartney and Lionel Richie, who have six nominations in the category," said Business Insider.

Longest song ever to reach No. 1

This may not be a record most people think of, but it stands nonetheless: Swift's "All Too Well (10 Minute Version)" is the longest song ever to top the Billboard charts at No 1. The song is slightly over 10 minutes long and beat out one of the most famous songs in history: Don MacLean's "American Pie," which is about eight minutes long.

First woman with new number one albums in five consecutive years

Swift is the only woman to chart a new number one album on the Billboard 200 in five consecutive calendar years with 2019's "Lover," 2020's "Folklore" and "Evermore," 2021's "Fearless (Taylor's Version)" and "Red (Taylor's Version)," 2022's "Midnights," and 2023's "Speak Now (Taylor's Version)," according to Billboard. The only other artists to achieve this feat are The Beatles, Drake, Jay-Z and Paul McCartney.

Swift also became the only act to have nine records sell half a million copies in one week in the U.S. since at least 1991, when Luminate started tracking the sales, per Billboard.

Second most Hot 100-charting songs ever

When "Speak Now (Taylor's Version)" dropped in 2023, all 22 songs from the album debuted on Billboard's Hot 100. This means Swift has released 212 Hot 100-charting songs in her career, the second most of all time after she surpassed the cast of "Glee," Billboard said. She's second only to Drake, making her number one for a female artist.

First woman to dethrone herself on Hot 100

Swift shook it off in 2014 when her song "Blank Space" debuted at the top of the Billboard Hot 100. The artist she was replacing: herself, as Swift's song "Shake It Off" had previously held the top spot on the list. This makes her the only female singer to dethrone herself on top of the list.

Only artist to win Album of the Year Grammy four times

Swift made history at the 2024 Grammy Awards when she took home the Album of the Year for "Midnights," becoming the first and only person to have won the award four times. She previously won AOTY for "Fearless" in 2010, "1989" in 2016, and "Folklore" in 2021. Her win for "Folklore," which she wrote and produced during the Covid-19 lockdown, made her the first woman to win AOTY three times.

Youngest artist to win Album of the Year

Not only has she won the award four times, but Swift also became the youngest person to win an Artist of the Year Grammy when she earned her "Fearless" award in 2010 at the age of 20. This is one of the few records Swift no longer holds, as Billie Eilish "won the Grammy for her debut album, 'When We All Fall Asleep, Where Do We Go?'" in 2020 at the age of 18, said Business Insider.

Most attended concert by a female artist in the U.S.

According to Capital FM, the opening night of Swift's Eras Tour in Glendale, Arizona, in March 2023, set a record for the most attended U.S. concert by a female artist with a crowd of 69,000. Madonna reportedly held this record since 1987.

Swift's tour went on to continue breaking numerous attendance records, including at Texas' AT&T Stadium, Tennessee's Nissan Stadium, and Pennsylvania's Acrisure Stadium. "Apparently, you have broken the attendance record for any event in Pittsburgh ever," Swift told the crowd at Acrisure Stadium, adding, "No group of people this big has ever gotten together for one thing in Pittsburgh ever."

First concert tour to gross $1 billion

One of Swift's biggest milestones was setting the record for the highest-grossing music tour ever after her "Eras" tour became the first to surpass $1 billion in revenue, according to the Guinness World Records. The international tour earned $1.04 billion as of the halfway point in December 2023, according to Pollstar. She broke the record set by Elton John with his "Farewell Yellow Brick Road" tour, which lasted from 2018 through 2023 and grossed $939 million. The tour, which ended in December 2024, generated over $2 billion total, which is "double the gross ticket sales of any other concert tour in history and an extraordinary new benchmark for a white-hot international concert business," said The New York Times.

Highest-earning female musician in the industry

In October 2023, Forbes reported that Swift became a billionaire, making her the highest-earning female musician in the industry, with an estimated net worth of $1.1 billion. She is also the first person to reach billionaire status with her music alone, driven in part by the success of her "Eras" tour.

Biggest vinyl sales week of modern times

Out of the 1.5 million copies in "Tortured Poets" first-week sales, 700,000 were vinyl records, breaking her record for the biggest sales week for an album on vinyl since Luminate began tracking data in 1991, Billboard said. Her latest album's sales beat the 693,000 sold by "1989 (Taylor’s Version)" in its first week in 2023.

One of the best-selling artists ever

Since the start of her career, Swift has sold an estimated 114 million albums worldwide, according to U.K. radio station Rayo. While the exact number is unclear, this makes her one of the best-selling artists of all time. She still has a long way to go to catch the number one act, The Beatles, who have reported sales of more than 230 million albums globally (though some reports say they've sold up to 600 million albums).

Most streams in a single day on Spotify

Spotify said "Tortured Poets" broke the record for most streams in a single day in the platform's history less than 12 hours after its release and was the first ever to amass over 300 million streams in a single day. The record was previously held by Beyoncé's "Cowboy Carter" album.

Relatedly, the opening song on the album, "Fortnight," broke Spotify’s record for the most streams ever gained by one song in a day.

Highest-grossing concert film of all time

Given the popularity of the Eras Tour, it shouldn't be surprising that the tour's movie became the highest-grossing theatrically released concert film ever. The film, shot during one of Swift's Los Angeles shows, reportedly "earned approximately $250 million in sales, making it the highest-grossing concert film of all time," said CBS News.

Historic Billboard 200 debut

The release week of "Tortured Poets" was a smashing success, with the album debuting at number one on the Billboard 200 chart in its first week. The album also "nabbed the record for largest streaming week ever for an album since the chart started measuring by units in December 2014," Billboard said. The first-week total reached 2.61 million units, with album sales accounting for 1.914 million. With this being her 14th chart-topper, Swift now ties with Jay-Z for most number one debuts among solo artists.

Most new albums to generate Hot 100 number ones

With "Fortnight" at the top of the Billboard Hot 100, Swift broke Rihanna's record for most albums with all-new material with at least one number-one hit on the chart, as "TTPD" brought her to eight. As her seventh song to debut at the top of the Hot 100, "Fortnight" helped Swift tie with Ariana Grande for most chart-toppers among women. Drake has the most overall, with nine, but "Fortnight" also ties Swift with him for the most Hot 100 number ones this decade, as both of them have seven.

Most views for a podcast on YouTube

Forget about music — Swift is busy breaking all kinds of records. She appeared on an episode of "New Heights," a podcast hosted by her fiancé Travis Kelce and his brother Jason Kelce, in August. The episode, during which Swift announced her 2025 album, earned the "most concurrent views for a podcast" on YouTube, said Guinness World Records, with 1.3 million people tuning in at once. The podcast episode has been viewed on the platform nearly 21 million times.

People agree that smoking is bad for you, but nicotine has far from gone up in smoke. Levels of American adults smoking cigarettes hit a record low in 2024, but nicotine products like vapes, patches and gum are alive and well.

Of the wide array of nicotine products, none have been picking up speed the way pouches like Zyn and On! have. These products are usually the size of a piece of gum and are held in the mouth between the gums and teeth, which slowly releases nicotine into the body. While mainly touted as a method to quit smoking, the pouches have made their way into the wellness spaces and are also being used as a tool to improve concentration.

How are nicotine pouches gaining popularity?

For those looking to quit smoking, nicotine pouches are considered to be the “least harmful nicotine option” because they are not known to “cause cancer, lung disease or other ailments,” by themselves, said The Wall Street Journal. But nicotine pouch usage is not exclusive to those trying to quit smoking.

The addictive chemical has a new lease on life, with many touting its benefits. Some studies have found that nicotine can improve cognitive performance, including attention, memory and learning. Nicotine has also been “linked to weight loss and reduced appetite,” as it “appears to influence the parts of the brain that control hunger and makes the body burn more energy,” Dipa Kamdar, a senior lecturer in Pharmacy Practice at Kingston University, said in an article for The Conversation. The pouches have similar effects to GLP-1s, which have been used for weight loss.

Nicotine pouches have since been touted as a powerful wellness compound, especially in the right-wing and biohacking spaces. It is a “life-enhancing, God-given chemical,” right-wing media personality Tucker Carlson said on Instagram. He claims that nicotine can treat erectile dysfunction and released his own brand of pouches called ALP, in collaboration with the tobacco giant Turning Point Brands. Over time, many media personalities have “advocated for nicotine use, not just as a way to get a buzz but as a cure for ailments ranging from whooping cough to atrial fibrillation,” said Salon.

The nicotine pouch hype has also skipped into the workplace. Rather than strictly drinks and snacks, the tech company Palantir began stocking nicotine pouches as a job perk, hoping to increase workers’ focus and productivity. Nicotine startups Lucy and Sesh have “installed branded vending machines in Palantir’s Washington, D.C., office,” said Fortune. This is “just one of the ways biohacking has taken the Silicon Valley tech space by storm.”

Is there merit to the benefits?

Any health benefits associated with nicotine are “frequently overblown or misinterpreted” and “outweighed by the problem of addiction,” said Stat. These effects are particularly dangerous as young people and those who have never smoked are picking up the habit. The chemical’s addictive nature can “become a gateway for someone to start using more harmful forms of nicotine, including cigarettes,” said the Journal. Most nicotine pouches on the market are also not FDA-authorized. Only certain Zyn and On! products have received authorization. Still, authorization differs from approval, as “all tobacco products are harmful and potentially addictive,” said the FDA.

Regarding cognitive enhancements, “people who already have cognitive difficulties have more room to improve, while those with healthy brain function are already performing close to their best,” said Kamdar. Nicotine is ”unlikely to offer any real benefit to people who don’t have cognitive impairments.”

What most experts agree on is that nicotine pouches are one of the better ways to quit smoking because most of the danger from cigarettes comes from the combustion of tobacco and not the nicotine itself. Evn though nicotine can cause other issues like nausea, vomiting, harm to blood vessels and an increased risk for heart attack and stroke. “Wellness trends come and go,” said Kamdar, “but addiction is far harder to shake.”

The United States has generally had a more forgiving set of regulations governing the use of additives, preservatives and other chemicals in food and drinks than the European Union (EU). The difference has begun to narrow, however, both because some U.S. states are banning ingredients that the federal government allows, and because the Health and Human Services Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., pledged to more aggressively prohibit some of these substances as part of his Make American Healthy Again (MAHA) movement.

Some substances that were once legal to use in foods in the U.S. but not in Europe, like partially hydrogenated oils as well as brominated vegetable oil (BVO), were banned in the U.S. prior to the second Trump administration. They included a food dye called Red No. 3, which was banned by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on January 15, 2025. In April 2025, Secretary Kennedy announced plans to work with the food industry to voluntarily phase out six other petroleum-based food dyes, all of which are already banned for use in foods in the EU.

Azodicarbonamide (ADA)

ADA is used in the U.S. to “whiten cereal flour and improve baking bread dough,” said CBS News, but is banned for use in food by the EU, where it is considered a carcinogen. ADA has become increasingly controversial, however, and some companies have rolled back its inclusion in certain products.

In 2014, for example, Subway announced that it would no longer use ADA in its bread products, which turned out to be the leading edge of a trend. The American Bakers Association announced in 2026 that most of its members had already phased out the use of ADA, with the remainder doing so by the end of the year. The FDA is currently reviewing information about ADA.

Butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA)

BHA “is a preservative used in cured meats and other foods,” said the Environmental Working Group, a U.S.-based nonprofit. It is “subject to severe restrictions in Europe” but continues to be added to American food products under the FDA’s GRAS (Generally Regarded as Safe) principle, said The New York Times. The National Toxicology Program deemed it a likely human carcinogen decades ago. In February 2026, the FDA ordered a new safety review of BHA, “pointing to long-standing concerns that the food additive might cause cancer in humans,” said NBC News.

Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT)

BHT is an “antioxidant that helps stabilize vegetable oils so they stay fresh longer and is often used in crackers and cereals to extend their shelf life,” said Tasting Table. The antioxidant’s presence in the popular cracker Wheat Thins, for example, is the reason you won’t be able to find them in Europe. Due to “concerns related to potential endocrine-disrupting properties,” BHT is banned for use in foods in the EU, said the European Commission. In August 2025, the FDA launched a “postmarket assessment of the safety of BHT as used in food and food contact materials,” said the FDA.

Potassium bromate

Potassium bromate is a substance that is found “usually in the form of fine crystals or powder, to strengthen dough” in more than 100 products sold in the U.S., said CBS News. It has been used for more than a century in breadmaking, but the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada and most other countries in the world consider it a human carcinogen.

While Secretary Kennedy’s HHS has not taken any direct action against potassium bromate, he has stated that he wants to eliminate the program under which it is used in the U.S., under the FDA’s GRAS designation. Critics say that GRAS allows companies to include ingredients that were “greenlit for use not by the FDA but by the food and chemical industry,” said CNN.

Propylparaben

The chemical is deployed in more than “50 products in U.S. grocery stores,” said Consumer Reports, “including many packaged corn tortillas, baked desserts and cake icing.” Propylparaben helps “stop the growth of microorganisms in most packaged foods,” said The Cleveland Clinic, but may “interfere with your endocrine system, which includes glands and the hormones they send out to tell organs and tissues what to do.” The EU banned the inclusion of propylparabens in food in 2006. A 2024 FDA review did not lead to any new regulatory action.

Titanium dioxide

The “naturally occurring oxide of titanium,” titanium dioxide “has been used for decades to impart white color to many foods, from baked goods and sandwich spreads to soups, broths, sauces, salad dressing and food supplements,” said the European Commission. The EU banned its use in food products in 2022, citing the “possibility that the use of titanium dioxide as a food additive might cause DNA or chromosomal damage.” In the U.S., the “chemical seems to be largely surviving the food-dye purge” spearheaded by Kennedy, said The Atlantic, although some companies, including the maker of Skittles, are phasing it out voluntarily in expectation of future regulatory action.

President Donald Trump has called himself the “peace president,” but throughout his second term in office he has demonstrated an ongoing willingness to use the military in overseas operations. Ecuador and Iran represent the latest conflicts the United States has engaged in, but they are just two of several countries to become entangled with the U.S. military once Trump reentered the White House

Ecuador

In March 2026, the Trump administration launched a military operation in another country, though not against its government: The White House “announced it is collaborating with Ecuador to combat ‘terrorists’ in the South American country,” said Al Jazeera. Joint military efforts have already started in Ecuador, with operations launched against “designated terrorist organizations.”

Several questions remain, as “both Ecuador and the United States haven’t specified who they’re targeting, locations of operations or the scope of military actions,” said USA Today. But Trump’s decision to send in the military marks an “embrace of past American strategies fighting drug traffickers in Latin America.”

Iran

Trump has been jawing at Iran since retaking office over the country’s alleged attempts to develop a nuclear weapon. Following a bombing campaign in June 2025 that destroyed several of Iran’s nuclear facilities, in February 2026 the U.S. “joined Israel and attacked more than 1,000 targets in Iran,” said Reuters. This full-scale assault killed several of Iran’s top officials, including Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

While Republican officials and members of the Trump cabinet have variously called the Iran conflict a “mission” or “defense operation,” Trump himself has repeatedly used the term “war.” Trump’s calculation “has been that he can launch military operations with the loss of few American lives and minimal disruption to the economy,” said The New York Times, but the “opening days of the war in Iran are challenging that assumption.” No American ground troops “have yet been sent to Iranian soil,” but “the administration has not ruled out deploying soldiers.”

Venezeula

As with Iran, Trump also pushed to remove the leader of Venezuela, President Nicolás Maduro, alleging that he was a national security threat. Trump accomplished this goal in January 2026 when the U.S. “launched an incursion” into Venezuela’s capital, Caracas, that captured Maduro and left the “country in a state of uncertainty over its political and economic future,” said Time.

Maduro was brought to the United States to face charges of narco-terrorism, but Trump “has never formally declared war on Venezuela, despite overseeing an aggressive military campaign on the South American country,” said Time. The White House has “justified its attacks using the president’s Article II constitutional powers, which give the president the authority to defend the country against threats.” Maduro’s vice president, Delcy Rodríguez, has since taken over Venezuela. Meanwhile, Trump “has offered conflicting statements on the future of U.S. involvement in the country,” said the Council on Foreign Relations.

Syria

In response to an attack by the Islamic State militant group, Trump in January 2026 “carried out large-scale strikes against Islamic State group targets in Syria,” said BBC News. These strikes were “conducted in an effort to combat terrorism and protect U.S. and partner forces in the region.” The initial strike involved more than 90 munitions fired at more than 35 Syrian targets, according to BBC News.

It later came out that the Islamic State’s assault was performed by a “member of Syria’s security forces slated for dismissal over his extremist views,” said the Times, though the Islamic State itself “has not claimed responsibility for the attack.” While White House officials have continued to say they will seek vengeance, the “Syrian leadership has pledged continued cooperation with the United States and its allies to combat ISIS in the country,” said the Council on Foreign Relations.

Caribbean territories

While not an attack against one specific country, more than 40 U.S. strikes against alleged drug trafficking boats “have been carried out in the Caribbean and eastern Pacific since September 2025,” said NBC News. Democrats in Congress have criticized the strikes, which have reportedly left over 130 people dead, though Trump “has repeatedly argued that the strikes are preventing illicit drugs from entering the U.S.”

Though most Caribbean nations have criticized the use of U.S. military force, at least one has sung a different tune: Trinidad and Tobago “came out strongly on Washington’s side” with a “full-throated endorsement of President Donald Trump’s belligerent drug policy in the region,” said Bloomberg. This makes the nation one of the only Caribbean locales to take Trump’s side.

Yemen

From March to May 2025, the United States “launched naval and airstrikes against Yemen’s Houthi rebels in what was code-named Operation Rough Rider,” said Time. This was, up to that point, Trump’s largest military operation of his second term. The strikes were aimed at a variety of Houthi targets in the country, including “radar systems, air defenses, and missile and drone launch sites” in response to the Houthi’s attack on international ships in the Red Sea.

At least one of these attacks by the U.S. “caused dozens of civilian casualties and significant damage to port infrastructure,” said Human Rights Watch, and the event should be “investigated as a war crime.” This assault, in the town of Hodeidah, targeted the port through which 80% of Yemen’s humanitarian assistance arrives, Human Rights Watch reported. U.S. officials have denied any wrongdoing.

Iraq

A more minor military incursion took place in March 2025, when the military “conducted a precision airstrike in Al Anbar Province, Iraq,” that killed the Islamic State’s second-in-command, Abdallah Makki Muslih al-Rifai, according to the U.S. Central Command. Al-Rifai was “one of the most important ISIS members in the entire global ISIS organization. We will continue to kill terrorists and dismantle their organizations,” Gen. Michael Kurilla of the U.S. Central Command said.

After the Iran conflict broke out in February 2026, Trump administration officials also had discussions “with Kurdish leaders in northern Iraq and northwestern Iran about potentially arming groups opposed to the Iranian regime,” said NBC News. This would be the latest in a decades-long saga of military action between the U.S. and Iraq.

Somalia

Since February 2025, just weeks after taking office, Trump “has been conducting strikes in Somalia to target ISIS and al-Shabaab,” said NewsNation. There have been “more than 100 strikes launched, mostly using drones.” As with Ecuador, Somali officials seem receptive to the military usage.

The operation “reinforces the strong security partnership between Somalia and the United States in combating extremist threats,” Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud said in a post on X. Somalia “remains resolute in working with its allies to eliminate international terrorism and ensure regional stability.” An “initial assessment by the Pentagon indicated that ‘multiple’ operatives were killed in the operation,” said Deutsche Welle. It also stated that “no civilians were harmed in the strikes.”

One of the very best things about this job is having a spark of an idea and turning it into something more. That is exactly what happened when I found myself idly pondering the demise of my favourite thing in the world (after my children and Jack Russell terrier): books – or, more precisely, English literature. I was an unapologetic swot at school. I swooned over Shakespeare, found profound depths in Joyce (yes, really), and became obsessed with the literature of America’s Deep South. So when the government announced its National Year of Reading 2026 campaign, it seemed the perfect springboard for exploring what schools are doing to foster a love of reading and the study of English literature. The answer, reassuringly, is quite a lot.

Katie Sanderson spoke to several prep schools about how they nurture a love of books in the early years, while Elizabeth Burrows reports on how the school library is being reimagined for the 21st century. It’s out with dusty tomes and sepulchral stacks; in with architectural spaces, robotics suites and tech-savvy librarians. We also asked a fantastic cohort of librarians and English teachers to recommend and review their favourite books about books. Do take a look – there are some real gems in our Top Reads feature.

I delved into the decline and fall of English literature and had the pleasure and privilege of speaking to some extraordinarily engaged, impassioned and articulate literary leaders. Each had an abundance to say, particularly about the place of English in their schools. This was not a conversation about simply getting kids to read. It was about students genuinely engaging with great literature – grappling with its language, its ideas – and taking on that very grown-up, knotty challenge of what it means to be human, which is what the best works have always demanded. What was most cheering was encountering such energy and belief. Even in a world increasingly dominated by screens, the fervour that literature can spark is still very much alive and kicking in our classrooms.

This issue also includes our Best of the Best Prep Schools – a competition that gets fiercer every year, not just because we received a record number of entries but because so many of prep schools are knocking it out of the park with the education they provide. Indeed, despite the doomsday scenario painted by the media about schools closing, some prep boarding schools are bursting at the seams – Dorothy Lepkowska reports on those getting it right against the odds.

I hope you enjoy this issue.

Amanda Constance is the editor of The Week’s Independent Schools Guide. Read the full publication below or click here.

Let’s make space for childhood

By Caolan Wukics, head of boarding, Holmewood House

Australia’s legislation banning social media for under-16s has reignited a conversation I have with parents almost weekly: how do we help our children grow up in a world where smartphones seem designed to capture every spare moment of their attention?

At Holmewood House, we’ve taken a clear position. Our boarders enjoy a largely phone-free environment – and I use the word ‘enjoy’ deliberately, because that’s precisely what we see happening.

Here’s how it works in practice. Boarders can access mobile phones for communication three times a week; Monday, Wednesday and Friday evenings, for around 30 minutes. Phones must not have social media apps installed. At weekends, phone access is at staff discretion and similarly limited. Laptops and computers aren’t allowed in bedrooms.

The reaction from new boarders is telling. Initially, some are uncertain and understandably so, given how embedded these devices have become in daily life. But within days, something shifts. House staff suggest a picnic, outdoor games, or arts and crafts. Children rediscover the simple pleasure of being bored and finding their own solution. It’s genuinely liberating to watch.

What does an evening look like without screens? After supervised prep, you’ll find children making the most of our 32 acres: football on the pitch, den-building in the woods, painting in our creative room (where they’re positively encouraged to leave their mark on the walls). There’s baking in the kitchen, board games in the common room, conversations that meander and deepen because there’s nowhere else to be.

We’re not anti-technology – far from it. Our pupils use computers throughout the school day, and we have thoughtful discussions about digital literacy, social media and AI. But we believe childhood benefits from boundaries, particularly around bedtime. Research shows that 45 minutes of blue-light exposure delays melatonin release, making sleep harder. Our screen-free evening routine has helped earn us recognition as a BSA Sleep Champion, though what matters more is that children wake genuinely rested.

The deeper benefit reveals itself in relationships. Without the option to retreat behind a screen, children learn to navigate the rhythms of community life: sharing space, reading social cues, building the kind of friendships that form when you’re truly present with one another. They develop imagination, independence and conversation skills – qualities that will serve them far beyond school.

When I meet prospective families, I’m straightforward about our approach. I ask parents whether their child genuinely needs social media apps, which children shouldn’t access until they’re 13 anyway. The response is overwhelmingly positive. Parents tell me they find it diffcult to enforce boundaries at home. They recognise that helping children establish healthy habits now, before the teenage years when screen battles intensify, is invaluable.

This isn’t about creating some romanticised, pre-digital childhood. Boarders can phone home using the house mobile and landline whenever they need. The common room has a television (though, like most of their generation, they rarely watch it). There’s even a Nintendo Switch for rainy afternoons. But these are moments in their week, not the gravitational centre.

What we’re really offering is something increasingly precious: time. Time to discover interests that emerge from curiosity rather than algorithms. Time to develop independence through real-world experiences. Time to build the kind of childhood memories that aren’t mediated by a screen.

I’ve noticed a growing trend across schools “Parents consistently tell us that our phone-free boarding is a significant draw” to limit screen time and extend childhood, protecting pupils from inappropriate content whilst fostering genuine inquiry and interaction. Some schools use Yondr pouches to lock phones away during the day. We’ve simply removed them from the boarding environment almost entirely.

The results speak for themselves. We see children who are present, engaged and connected to one another in meaningful ways. We’re alert to research about screens affecting attention spans and the ability to form deep relationships. Our approach isn’t about fighting technology, it’s about giving children the space to grow at their own pace.

Parents consistently tell us that our phone-free boarding is a significant draw. In a world where screens compete for our children’s attention at every turn, families appreciate a place where childhood can unfold more naturally, where children use their imagination, play games and participate in activities without constant digital distraction.

When I watch boarders at supper – laughing, chatting, fully engaged with one another – I’m reminded why this matters. We’re not preparing children for a world without technology. We’re just giving them the foundations to use it wisely. And that strikes me as an education worth having.

Banning phones is easy but not effective

By Dr Robert Harrison, director of education & integrated technology, ACS International Schools

When the education secretary writes to every head teacher in England insisting schools must be phone-free environments for the entire school day, I understand the impulse. When she says phones shouldn’t be used as calculators or for research during lessons, I recognise the frustration driving it.

But I’ve also watched this debate drift from legitimate concern into something approaching moral panic. And I worry that an outright ban – however satisfying – mistakes avoidance for protection.

The truth is that a blanket ban would simply create a phone-free bubble for seven hours, then send students home at 3.30pm with a cheery ‘good luck’. Parents would be left to manage their children’s digital world alone, often without the tools or support to do so effectively. Meanwhile, we will have spent the school day pretending that the digital world doesn’t exist.

This is the equivalent of teaching road safety without ever letting children near a street.

The evidence supporting bans is far less conclusive than the headlines suggest. The University of Pennsylvania study showing improved grades? That was in India, where smartphones represent fundamentally different patterns of access and ownership. The LSE research from 2016? Frequently cited, rarely read in full. The effects were modest and concentrated among specific groups. We don’t have robust evidence that school-hours bans improve long-term outcomes. What we may be creating instead is a generation skilled at hiding phone use rather than managing it.

At ACS International Schools, we take a different approach that’s neither permissive nor punitive. We absolutely limit phone use during the school day. But we do so through consultation with teachers, parents and students, not through inflexible campus-wide prohibition.

Our experience is that one size doesn’t fit all. Pre-teens have different needs (and capabilities) than 17-year-olds with revision apps and UCAS correspondence to deal with. Campus layouts matter. After-school activities matter. School climate and student engagement matter. Transportation matters, too, for students travelling significant distances and where parental contact is a legitimate need.

So we build consensus. At the start of each year, we engage families in an open discussion about digital boundaries and resilience. Students help shape the expectations they’ll be held to. This isn’t democracy for its own sake, but it’s recognition that rules imposed without buy-in become rules to circumvent.

In practice, this means protected spaces where phones can be secured in lockers or pouches, or checked-out by classroom teachers for legitimate academic use. Times and places for interaction not mediated by technology are the norm. We monitor individual behaviour and intervene when needed. But this isn’t done through surveillance, it’s through the ordinary attentiveness and relationship management that characterise good schools.

Does it work? Our students aren’t perfect digital citizens. But they’re practising, and they’re developing what we have labelled (in a nod toward Ethan Mollick) ‘co-intelligence’: the capacity to work ethically and productively with technology. When they leave our schools, they don’t suddenly encounter the digital world for the first time. They will have been navigating it, with adult guidance, for years.

I understand why black-and-white statutory bans appeal. But the problems smartphones create don’t stay within school hours. Students do not separate their lives into neat digital and analogue compartments. A balanced approach values both technology-free educational spaces and technology-informed social-emotional learning that reflects the real digital lives of today’s young people.

Threatening schools with Ofsted inspection for non-compliance isn’t collaboration but trying to outsource a societal problem to the classroom. We need genuine collaboration amongst schools, parents, government and the technology companies whose business models depend on capturing adolescent attention. Parents must engage with their children’s online lives and not outsource concern to school policy. Governments must hold platforms accountable and not just hand teachers another set of rules to enforce.

Schools should focus on developing responsible digital citizens, not confiscating mobile phones. Our job isn’t to create sanctuaries from the modern world. It’s to prepare young people to be ready to navigate it with wisdom, discernment, and confidence. That requires practice which is supervised, structured and intentional, not the convenience of avoidance masquerading as protection.

This article first appeared in The Week’s Independent Schools Guide Spring/Summer 2026, edited by Amanda Constance.

Educating children with special educational needs has been dubbed a ‘national crisis’ with soaring numbers being diagnosed with conditions like dyslexia, ADHD and autism.

A staggering one in five of all pupils – over 1.7 million – are estimated to have such special educational needs and disabilities, known commonly as SEND, according to the latest Department for Education figures.

Councils are increasingly being crippled by the costs of provision and meeting the legal and financial requirements of educating children with SEND under education, health and care plans (EHCPs), which more and more children are being issued with.

In mainstream independent schools, the numbers of children with SEND have also mushroomed, driven by the lack of state provision and by the same escalating rates of diagnosis.

Where once a special educational needs department might have been something of a peripheral add on, it is now central.

Rachel Mackenzie, head of learning support at Roedean School near Brighton – which is experiencing “a rising number of diagnoses, in particular of autism, ADHD and dyslexia as well as anxiety related needs” – says there had “definitely been a real cultural shift in independent schools over the past decade” with SEND “visible, openly discussed and celebrated”.

At open days, schools report SEND is a frequent and regular topic. “Parents increasingly want clear, practical information about learning support, assessment processes and how the school supports individual needs within a high-achieving environment,” she explains.

At Wellington College in Berkshire, Headmaster James Dahl says all schools were dealing with “increasing numbers of children with educational psychologist reports or children with EHCPs”.

“Of course, it is challenging for all schools whenever you have more stuff to deal with and the same human resource or financial resource, and you have to meet that demand,” he says.

At the co-ed boarding and day school, Dahl says “more people were working in our academic support department than ever before, and people with more specialisms including an ADHD specialist and an autism specialist”.

“You go back 25 years and you maybe had one person who had done a course on dyslexia and that was your academic support department.

“The burden is heavy and unfortunately most schools in this country – state and independent – don’t have the financial or human resources to be able to deal effectively with the wave of diagnoses that are coming through the system,” he warns.

At Hanford School in Dorset, Headmistress Hilary Phillips says one reason diagnosis had increased was because we are “a lot better at diagnosing now”, although she urged real caution in diagnosing children too early when other factors might be involved. “More pupils are getting such a diagnosis as they are going through the system when it could just be a developmental stage. It could be the experiences they had at home or it could be how they have been brought up.”

Hand in hand with this, she believes it is very welcome that the past stigma some parents felt about having their child labelled has dissipated, partly because “younger parents are much more comfortable and open and aware that this is a thing”.

And Phillips says that while small schools like Hanford, an all-girls prep, benefited from small class sizes, meaning SEND children could be helped more, schools with classes of 28-30 “had no chance of addressing their needs”.

However, schools also warn that while provision and resources in independent schools tend to be far better, both sectors are hampered by the sharp rise in diagnosis because of the need for external help.

“We all want to respond as quickly as we can but the state and the independent sector have the same issues – there are a certain amount of professionals out there and we are all using them if we are going to an external source.

“With these increased diagnoses, we have the same number of people trying to deal with this huge volume of children,” she says.

And at Roedean, Rachel Mackenzie says the biggest pressure at the all-girls’ day and boarding senior school is “often not money but people”, pointing to a “national shortage of qualified SEND specialists”.

And she warns: “Nationally, this is leading to burnout among staff who are juggling teaching with learning, pastoral and behavioural demands.”

At Stowe School in Buckingham, special educational needs co-ordinator (SENco) Caroline Bagshaw says the co-ed senior school was seeing increased numbers of children with special educational needs – both pupils with diagnosed needs applying but also existing pupils being diagnosed after concerns were flagged by staff or parents.

Bagshaw believes that increased awareness of conditions like ADHD and autism continues to drive greater diagnosis.

“Teachers are trained to meet the needs in the classroom and, of course, the more they are trained to meet those needs, the more they are becoming upskilled and the more they notice children with undiagnosed needs.”

Stowe has “almost doubled the size of learning support in classrooms in the last 20 years”, with learning support assistants available in every lower set from third to fifth forms in English, maths, physics, biology and chemistry across every week, she explains.

Rachel Mackenzie at Roedean says that “increased levels of flexibility and individual attention for SEND pupils” marked out many independent schools but she adds: “I would argue that state and independent schools face many of the same pressures around SEND, but the challenges play out differently because their structures, funding models, and expectations diverge.

“Whilst state schools typically experience higher volumes of pupils with complex needs, tighter statutory responsibilities and chronic funding constraints, they often struggle with long waits for external assessments, limited specialist staff and large class sizes.

“Independent schools have smaller classes, strong pastoral teams and the ability to buy in specialist support quickly, but there is often a greater level of parental expectations of personalised support.”

At Wellington, over 10 per cent of the pupils have an ADHD diagnosis, although official figures just a few years ago estimated the nationwide figure at only 5 per cent.

“We have seen a rise in ADHD and autism diagnoses over the last five years. I have no doubt that the figures we see at Wellington reflect what is happening nationally,” says James Dahl. “It might be that we have a higher proportion than is the case but, talking to colleagues in the state sector, I suspect the 5 per cent figure is an under-estimation.”

Meanwhile, medical intervention for children with SEND is a strong bone of contention.

“I have seen the positive benefits of medication with neurodevelopmental conditions like ADHD, and also the judicious use of medication in and around young people with chronic anxiety or depression, being an important part of their road to recovery,” says Dahl.

At Stowe, where Caroline Bagshaw says parents “agonised” over medication for conditions like ADHD, children on medication are closely monitored by a consultant paediatrician.

She says: “I think it can be eye opening for some children for whom it helps to start to concentrate or focus, but it is not a panacea”.

Experts also agree that Covid affected the SEND picture, with Rachel Mackenzie at Roedean saying “it shifted SEND needs and the way they were discussed”.

And James Dahl says: “I don’t think we are there with understanding the nuances and complexities of what’s been happening in the last 20 years – and how we cope with this is arguably the biggest challenge facing the education sector.”

This article first appeared in The Week’s Independent Schools Guide Spring/Summer 2026, edited by Amanda Constance.

The numbers don’t make for pretty reading. Between 2011 and 2021, the number of students studying English literature at university fell by a third, and the decline has continued. Across UK universities, undergraduates studying any type of English degree dropped by 19 per cent between 2019-20 and 2023-24.

English literature A-level, the precious pipeline feeding universities, has also withered, falling out of the top-ten most popular A-levels in 2022. In the summer of 2025, 112,000 students took maths A-level, compared to just 58,000 who did English. Joanna Burton, head of policy for higher education at the Russell Group of 24 leading universities, told The Times: “A decline in the uptake of English A-level in recent years has had a knock-on effect on degree numbers.”

Blame is cast widely: our addiction to screens, the collapse of reading for pleasure and the rising cost of higher education. As journalist James Marriott writes in his Substack essay, The Death of English Literature: “£9,535 per year to acquire a finer appreciation of moon imagery in DH Lawrence is a hefty ask in the present economic climate.” Students are opting for degrees with clearer career pathways such as economics, business, maths, engineering and medicine. Ten years after graduating, engineers earn on average £20,000 more than English graduates (£54,800 versus £34,300). One English emeritus professor told The Times he felt “despair” that “a subject I considered as important as a religion is now apparently failing the marketability test”.

And there is anguish and confusion, that what Marriott calls the “prince of the humanities” has fallen so far. English literature was once the most prestigious of degrees, freighted with intellectual ambition. Yet even my own children describe their experience of the subject as “lame”. So where did it go wrong?

‘A hollowing out of content’

Elizabeth Stone, Headmaster of Winchester College, points to fragmented attention spans. “The idea that you have to sustain focus for an extended period of time to read a short story, let alone a novel, is going against all the circumstances in which our young people are now living. They are swimming in different waters,” she says. Children might spend as much as six to nine hours a day on screens, consuming mostly short-form video in formats that are typically 25 to 30 seconds long.

“In an environment where they are spending hours every day training their mind to be highly distracted, is it any wonder they struggle with the long cross-country run that reading a novel requires?” she asks. “That quick hit is just antithetical to reading.”

While this fragmentation is global, Stone is also critical of the UK’s English literature curriculum. “The way children are asked to study English can quickly become pedestrian and formulaic,” she says. Teachers tell her that teaching excerpts rather than whole texts is the most efficient way to prepare students for exams. There is “a hollowing out of content to make it teachable”.

She dismisses claims that the English literature GCSE is dominated by ‘irrelevant, dead, white men’ as “rubbish”. She vehemently believes that Shakespeare, Goethe and Voltaire are for everyone. “They have endured because they speak to deep universal truths.” To argue that anybody cannot access them due to their age, gender or skin colour is simply “patronising”, she says. She does think, however, that “some resonance is needed” and supports a mix of classic and contemporary writing, insisting students should encounter texts that reflect their own lives.

Her deeper concern is structural. We are in an environment when every course ends with “a high-stakes exam assessment”, she says. The result is a “reverse engineering – what you test for gets taught”.

Within the current system, it is easier in a subject such as maths or physics to come up with a clear and precise definition of what the answer is. If you are preparing a child for a public examination “your job is to be very definitive – that really impacts the ways these things have to be taught”.

In English, subjectivity complicates matters. Stone references a 2018 report by Ofqual which revealed marking in English literature across GCSEs, AS and A-levels showed a roughly 50 per cent agreement rate with ‘definitive’ marks.

“To my knowledge nothing has been done to address that,” she says. “Students might look at that and think, ‘you know what, if I put the same level of effort into economics, I can predictably get a decent grade but in English it’s 50⁄50’. That’s a really important factor.”

‘An economic case for the humanities’

Matthew Oliver, head of English at Bede’s in East Sussex, agrees that career utility is central to the subject’s decline. “When we are charging students for degrees, it’s quite natural that they will be making pragmatic and economic decisions.” English teachers, he says, must “make an economic case for the humanities”, but also persuade pupils of the wider benefits of studying English literature.

“If one believes that the sole purpose of education is to enable you to get a job that earns you over £100,000 a year very quickly then, possibly, English literature would be seen to be a very limiting degree – if that is your sole measure of success.”

Literature is “almost designed to be difficult”: complex, demanding, and no longer the primary way “we communicate ideas about culture and society. The reason to choose a book needs to be asserted more strongly.”

And schools have to offer a combination of the best of traditional classical literature and cutting-edge contemporary literature, says Oliver. “All English teachers would make a case for why we need to teach Shakespeare or the 19th century novel – but I also must insist that we need to teach very contemporary texts: we need to see literature as offering a response to a world that we live in now.”

To demonstrate the subject’s career relevance, Oliver invites alumni into classrooms to talk about how “communication and the handling of language is so central to many professions”. Recent guests have included a lawyer who spoke of “the absolute centrality of handling nuance, of being able to think critically”, a STEM policy advocate explaining how funding depends on persuasive writing, and a marketing professional setting real-world communication challenges. Oliver also approaches guests from all over the world who have done an English degree to talk to pupils about their careers. An amazing array of guests has joined pupils online, including a Guardian journalist, a Michelin-starred chef from Spain and a fashion writer from Shanghai.

“All our students are seeing there are many routes that English can take you,” says Oliver. He believes engaging pupils with English begins with relationships. Teachers at Bede’s are expected to recommend books personally to each pupil – gift-wrapped novels are common. “That for me is the measure of a good English teacher – do you know your pupils well enough to recommend a book to them?” says Oliver. Small class sizes are essential and at A-level, students receive Oxbridge-style one-to-one supervisions where they are expected to discuss and expand on their independent coursework assignment. And all students are encouraged to debate, perform and write creatively. “I want to look at the room and make sure I am engaging everyone in some way,” Oliver says. This term, his class is staging a 1990s acid-house version of “Henry IV Part I”, with Falstaff in an Adidas tracksuit.

Oliver thinks the complexity of literature can be a draw if taught well. The danger, he says, “is reducing the text to some information. It isn’t solely information – it’s teaching us about the complexity of being human.” Students are often “stunned”, he says, by a writer who has found “the most fitting expression possible for a complex and knotty human feeling.”

There is a gap between what we can feel and how we can express it, he says. “If we can close that gap so we become proficient and confident in expressing what we really feel, does that make us lead better lives? I think it does.”

And one of the real advantages of independent schools is having freedom to design a curriculum. “I get to choose what we study,” says Oliver.

While Oliver believes the “canon is still relevant as an idea”, he thinks some exam boards have been “quite narrow at GCSE” and wants to teach the best of literature in English – whether that’s a Nigerian novel, an American play or a text in translation.

“We must give the sense that literature is still being written about the world we live in now,” he says. So, if his pupils are studying the urban poverty of “Jane Eyre” or “David Copperfield”, Oliver might also get them to read “Shuggie Bain” by Douglas Stuart or “Only Here, Only Now” by Tom Newlands.

“What I insist upon is the freedom to combine what we believe to be the best of our canonical classical texts with something that is contemporary and brilliant. I think that combination is incredibly powerful.”

The real sweet spot, he says, is when “a canonical text strikes a particularly contemporary and timely note.”

For example, he says, “‘Henry IV Part I’ – it wouldn’t necessarily strike anyone as a text to talk about contemporary Britain, but if you are talking about masculinity, about privilege, about morality – we could do a lot worse than start with that play.”

It’s the freedom to choose a text or a play that is so vital, says Oliver. When we can “make an informed choice that suits our moment, our purpose, our cohort – that’s when it ignites that passion in pupils.”

‘The only way to live other lives’

At Highgate School in north London, there is plenty of passion for English literature. Odette Orlans, head of English, notes that children arriving in Year 7 “used to come in excited by English and stories – now their experience is learning things like fronted adverbials”.

“We should start with joy,” she says. “Every child loves being read to. Prepping for any test can take the joy out of something.”

And there is clearly immense pleasure in learning English literature at Highgate – numbers of A-level students are steadily rising every year, and students go on to read English literature at Oxbridge year after year.

Highgate achieves this by making reading “a whole school focus – it’s a consistent message pupils are getting from everywhere, not just the English department”, says Orlans.

For example, the Head always gives book recommendations in assemblies and ‘Highgreat Reads’ are prestigious school reading lists. A place on these lists is hotly fought. ‘Book Battles’ will take place between pupils and teachers who fight for their book to be included and the gathered assembly gets to vote which title gains a place on the hallowed list.

The Lyttelton Competition, a poetry declamation prize, is one of “the most prestigious in the school”. Every child in the school must enter with the 20 finalists performing at an evening finale event. “It’s a big deal,” says Orlans.

The school has also resisted individual screens for pupils – unlike so many other independent schools. “So we’ve never had that fight on our hands,” Orlans says.

“Screens have their place,” she says. She loves being able to show NT Live in class, and moments such as “listening to Virginia Woolf’s voice on YouTube” is “incredible” – but the default is pen and paper.

“I think it’s amazing. I don’t want to be teaching classes where pupils are on screens.”

But Orlans also believes that the reason so many pupils are excited about English literature at Highgate is quite simple: “We choose good texts and we teach them well.”

At GCSE, teachers can choose to teach “what they are passionate about and what will work well for their class”. There are some strictures in place. “We say they must do a play, a novel, a collection of poetry and we say that one of those set texts has to be by a woman,” says Orlans.

“We teach in a co-ed school and a co-ed world – study must reflect that.”

At A-level, “we try to mix things up”, she says. Students have to study works by women and non-white authors alongside canonical texts on the Eduqas syllabus.

Orlans is not anti the canon – far from it: “It’s cultural literacy,” she says – but thinks it’s important to broaden study, too.

A-level coursework pairs pre- and post- 2000 novels; students recently studied Chinua Achebe’s “Things Fall Apart” alongside Andrea Levy’s “Small Island”, and Orlans is currently teaching “Mrs Dalloway” by Virginia Woolf alongside Kazuo Ishiguro’s “Klara and The Sun”.

It’s clearly an engaging mix for students, aided by frequent theatre trips. “We often choose to teach a play based on what is on in London,” says Orlans.

Among the many stories Orlans relays of visiting authors, essay writing competitions and lively lunchtime literary debates, one moment captures the spirit of English study at Highgate. While studying Virginia Woolf’s “To The Lighthouse”, a Year 12 class recreated its famous big dinner party scene down to the food, characters and costuming – and not one script, but two. The first read-through was Woolf’s words; but the second? Their own script of what was meant but left unsaid in that iconic modernist scene. If that isn’t excitement about literature, it’s hard to know what is.

Winchester doesn’t even do English GCSE. “We do it in an unexamined way that really makes literature sing,” says Elizabeth Stone. All Wykehamists study ‘Div’, an unexamined inter-disciplinary humanities curriculum with literature at its core. Div is timetabled throughout a Wykehamist's school career – at A-level it is the equivalent of an additional subject. “It is a deep commitment to deep thinking,” says Stone.

Pupils all study English literature “for the love of it, with freedom to immerse themselves without being skewed by the narrow demands and pedestrian edicts of an exam board”, says Stone.

“Importantly”, she adds, students read whole novels. And there is a wider spread of content; this year’s sixth formers are studying Chaucer alongside contemporary writer, actor and comedian, Tom Basden – “developing cultural literacy and broadening intellectual awareness and connecting texts with art, religion and politics.”

When the school trialled GCSE English literature, “the only tangible effect was that the children who had done English literature GCSE chose the A-level in significantly smaller numbers”, says Stone.

“Div is so spiritually liberating,” she says. “We see it as a point of distinction; it is the mark of the Wykehamist that they are original thinkers.”

And originality is needed at a time when top grades alone no longer distinguish students. “The exam arms-race has maxed out. You have to bring something different to the table,” says Stone.

But literature should never be only about employability. “Children are more than economic units,” Stone says. “We want them to flourish and come fully alive.” In a largely unchurched generation, books offer a space to explore meaning, empathy and identity. And what better medium to do that than through the words on a printed page. “It’s like dreaming with your eyes open – the only way to live other lives,” says Stone.

If English literature is to survive, it may be by reclaiming precisely that truth.

This article first appeared in The Week’s Independent Schools Guide Spring/Summer 2026, edited by Amanda Constance.

Paramount Skydance appears to have won the bidding war to purchase Warner Bros. Discovery. If the $110.9 billion deal goes through, it will place a vast media kingdom in the hands of Paramount CEO and staunch Trump administration supporter David Ellison, with his father, billionaire Larry Ellison, also likely to play a role. This includes nearly unprecedented access to a variety of news organizations and Hollywood tentpoles.

CBS News

CBS is already under the auspices of Paramount as the company’s flagship network. Under Ellison’s tenure, the Tiffany Network has undergone major changes; Paramount’s prior owners controversially announced the cancellation of “The Late Show with Stephen Colbert,” with some, including Colbert, alleging this came at the behest of FCC Chairman Brendan Carr. After Ellison purchased Paramount, he “subsequently made additional pledges to the FCC’s Carr to win support,” said NPR.

Ellison also “promised the cessation of diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives throughout Paramount and the addition of an ombudsman to field complaints of ideological bias,” said NPR. Under Ellison, Paramount named Bari Weiss, the founder of the right-leaning site The Free Press, the new editor-in-chief of CBS News. Weiss “contended CBS and much of the rest of the media has been too reflexively hostile to conservatives and the president, and she’s sought to revamp the newsroom.”

CNN

A Paramount-Warner Bros. merger would give the Ellisons command of another major news network: CNN. Following the revamping of CBS by Bari Weiss, the “concern is that similar changes could be in store for CNN,” said the Los Angeles Times, with Weiss potentially playing a major role at that network too. CNN, even more so than CBS, has been in President Donald Trump’s crosshairs, and he has “personally called for the ouster of hosts at the network who have questioned his policies.”

Employees at CNN should not “jump to conclusions about the future,” CNN CEO Mark Thompson said in a memo in an attempt to calm the waters. Ellison has also said CNN will remain editorially independent. Still, reporters have “expressed a combination of fear and concern,” seven current CNN employees said to NBC News. The mood inside CNN is “shaken” and “depressing,” the employees added, as “no one wants to work for the Ellisons. And if Bari is going to be running CNN, expect people to leave.”

HBO Max/Paramount+

The merger would give the Ellisons control of two major streaming services, HBO Max and Paramount+. These platforms will be “combined into one streaming service if regulators approve” the deal, said CNBC, citing a conference call from Ellison. This would create a streaming behemoth unlike any in Hollywood today, as the “service would have about 200 million subscribers given existing totals.”

No details have yet been given on any potential price increases for the merged streamer, but HBO is “likely to be a sub-brand within the larger service,” said CNBC, though Ellison has said he doesn’t want to disrupt HBO’s programming. The “streaming environment has already become more consolidated in recent years,” said The Washington Post, most notably in the form of Hulu and Disney+. Disney “offers streaming bundles to customers who want to subscribe to both and another with ESPN+.”

Warner Bros. Studios

Besides CNN, Warner Bros. Studios is likely the gem the Ellisons are going after the most, as Warner Bros. owns the “second-biggest trove of movie properties after Disney,” said The New York Times. This includes major Hollywood franchises like “The Lord of the Rings,” “Batman” and “Harry Potter,” with HBO Max currently developing the latter into a television series.

While most think of Warner Bros. as a film studio, the combination with Paramount could “cause a major reset of the TV studio business,” said The Hollywood Reporter. The two studios have “more than 100 series currently airing or about to premiere and another 25 to 30 more either greenlit for future dates or in development.” The two studios’ “output touches almost every part of the TV landscape,” and this could remain true for the foreseeable future if the deal closes.

Paramount Pictures

With the Ellisons’ current Paramount projects looking to get absorbed into Warner Bros. Studios, questions have swirled about theatrical releases, especially among movie fans. The combined company has “no intention to pull back on production. We obviously intend to make 30 movies a year, basically 15 films from Paramount, 15 films from Warner Bros,” Ellison told reporters.

Given this intention, the major question is “how do you pull off a major studio release schedule of 30 titles considering the most that have unspooled recently by a major studio was Universal’s 20 titles last year (a total that included Focus Features),” said Deadline. Some in the movie industry don’t think it’s possible, and “‘there aren’t 30 dates on the calendar’ is a common criticism heard among many studio sources.”

DC Studios

Within Warner Bros., there is one entity that is being watched closely amid merger talks: DC Studios. While “Superman” director James Gunn is currently at the studio’s helm with plans for an extended DC universe, a merger “may result in changes to whatever plans DC Studios has for its superhero franchises,” said Forbes. This could include potential changes to the upcoming “Superman” sequel, as well as plans for characters like Batman.

If Ellison inks the deal, he will “obtain a newly minted DC superhero cinematic universe that’s already flying high at the box office and enjoying immense critical and mainstream audience approval,” said Forbes. But when it comes to Gunn, he could end up butting heads with Ellison; it is “no secret he’s not a fan of the current presidential regime, and he’s already been targeted by MAGA once,” said Comics Beat. Even so, keeping a “steady supply of hit DC superhero movies would seem to be a desired outcome no matter who buys the studio.”

Cable networks

A unified Paramount-Warner Bros. would also open up the floodgates to a wide variety of cable offerings. While cable has largely ceded way to streaming in recent years, the Ellisons are “betting they can wring some life out of” these networks, said the Times. Paramount currently owns major channels like MTV, Comedy Central, Nickelodeon and BET. A purchase of Warner Bros. would add HGTV, the Food Network, Discovery, TLC, Adult Swim, Turner Classic Movies, Cartoon Network, TBS and TNT to its list.

But this consolidation is providing “another source of fear that more massive job losses are on the horizon for a division that has already faced steep cuts in recent years,” said Variety. Most of Paramount’s current cable channels “run with skeleton staffs.” As of now, Ellison has said he does not plan to sell any cable channels if a deal goes through.

Amazon’s fawning documentary “Melania” opened in January to withering reviews and receipts unlikely to offset its $75 million budget. But losing tens or even hundreds of millions of dollars on a movie isn’t easy or particularly common.

For our list, we took a list of the movies that lost the most money since 2000, adjusted for inflation, and highlighted the top eight with Rotten Tomatoes critical scores of less than 30%. This avoids ensnaring perfectly serviceable movies that never found an audience, like 2012’s “John Carter,” or ones caught up in culture-war drama, like Disney’s 2022 “Strange World.”

‘Mortal Engines’ (2018, $219M loss)

Young adult dystopias have been a cash cow ever since “The Hunger Games,” but they aren’t guaranteed success. In “Mortal Engines,” a cataclysmic war has led cities, including London, to mount themselves on wheels (don’t ask how this works because it’s never explained), prowling around “absorbing” smaller towns for fuel and resources.

In one settlement set to be devoured by London, Hester (Hera Hilmar) is waiting to exact revenge against Thaddeus Valentine (Hugo Weaving) for killing her mother, and young historian Tom Natsworthy (Robert Sheehan) joins her incipient rebellion. After a promising first act, director Christian Rivers’ film “devolves rapidly into a generic YA story with bland characters, poorly set up motivations and plans, and a general lack of personality,” said Tom Bedford at Film Inquiry. (Prime Video)

‘Pan’ (2015, $199M loss)

This dreadful prequel of sorts to J.M. Barrie’s classic children’s story is set in Blitz-era London, where an orphaned Peter (Levi Miller) is sold by the crooked orphanage housemother Barnabas (Kathy Burke) to pirates and whisked off in some kind of floating steampunk vessel that dodges Spitfires en route to the magical world of Neverland.

There, Peter is forced to mine fairy dust and meets a young James Hook (Garrett Hedlund), and together they fight their evil overlord Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman). Featuring bizarre anachronisms (at one point the Neverland child laborers sing Nirvana’s “Smells Like Teen Spirit”), it is an “embarrassing pastiche” whose plot mechanics and mind-numbing CGI effects “leech the wonder out of the material and leave it bone dry,” said Andy Crump at Paste Magazine. (HBO Max)

‘The Adventures of Pluto Nash’ (2002, $168M loss)

This 2002 Eddie Murphy vehicle features one of the lowest Rotten Tomatoes scores (currently 6%) of any major studio release ever — and deservedly so. Set in 2087 on the moon, it involves nightclub owner Pluto Nash (Murphy) trying to defend his establishment against encroachment from greedy casino owners led by Mogan (Joe Pantoliano).

He eventually goes on the run with one of his waitresses, Dina (Rosario Dawson). The reviews were so bad that “anyone involved with ‘Pluto Nash’ has tried to absolve themself of any responsibility,” said Nick Rogers at Midwest Film Journal. (Tubi)

‘X Men: Dark Phoenix’ (2019, $167M loss)

The 12th installment in Marvel’s “X-Men” franchise and another box office bomb whose struggles were telegraphed by production and release delays. Sophie Turner plays a young Jean Grey, who may have been responsible for the car crash that killed her parents and orphaned her years ago.

Under the tutelage of Professor Charles Xavier (James McAvoy), her telekinetic powers become difficult to control after she is struck by solar flares while rescuing the space shuttle Endeavor. She flees as factions vie to use her powers for their own ends. The “worst movie ever in the X-Men series,” director Simon Kinberg’s film is so wretched that it “suggests the X-Men series is played out and beyond saving,” said Peter Travers at Rolling Stone. (Disney+)

‘Jupiter Ascending’ (2015, $159M loss)

Expectations were understandably high for a big-budget science fiction film from “The Matrix” creators the Wachowskis. Mila Kunis plays Jupiter Jones (one of the film’s least silly character names), a Chicago housecleaner who discovers that she shares identical DNA with a dead intergalactic monarch and may be the heiress of her malevolent empire.

Channing Tatum is Caine Wise, a half-wolf, half-human being who joins forces with Jupiter to save the human race from its destiny of getting harvested for a liquid that makes the galaxy’s rulers immortal. An unwatchable movie that is “inane from first frame to last,” it is festooned with “squiggly CG aliens and actors in costumes that would be laughed out of a Greenwich Village Halloween parade,” said David Edelstein at Vulture. (Prime Video)

‘Ben-Hur’ (2016, $157M loss)

It’s not at all clear why Lew Wallace’s 1880 novel, “Ben-Hur: A Tale of the Christ,” needed a fifth film adaptation (to say nothing of a lackluster 2010 limited series). Jack Huston plays Jewish prince Judah Ben-Hur, who is betrayed to the Romans by his adopted brother, Messala (Toby Kebbell), and sold into slavery and then returns years to Jerusalem seeking revenge.

This somehow involves competing against Messala in an elaborate and brutal chariot race, with Morgan Freeman serving as Ben-Hur’s trainer Ilderim. This “Ben-Hur” is an “epic fail,” and a film ”that should be seen on a plane, on the 6-by-8 screen on the back of an airline seat, probably at 2 a.m. on a transatlantic flight, accompanied by a complimentary sachet of salty cashews, a vodka and tonic and then a meal of mechanically reconstituted chicken in a fillet-style serving,” said Peter Bradshaw at The Guardian. (Prime Video)

‘The Alamo’ (2004, $156M loss)

Disney’s historical epic was plagued by production delays after its original director Ron Howard departed the project. Emilio Echevarría plays the Mexican General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, who led the brutal, 13-day, 1836 siege of the rebel-held Alamo fort.

Dennis Quaid and Billy Bob Thornton play, respectively, Sam Houston and Davy Crockett in a film that bombed spectacularly at the box office despite competent execution of the titular battle. For better or worse, “every generation gets the movie it deserves,” said Keith Uhlich at Slant Magazine, including this “candidate for worst movie of the year.” Its depiction of Mexicans proves that “racism can be as much an unintentionally passive act as an intentionally active one.” (Prime Video)

‘Stealth’ (2005, $155M loss)

Lt. Ben Gannon (Josh Lucas), Lt. Kara Wade (Jessica Biel) and Lt. Henry Purcell (Jamie Foxx) are fighter pilots assigned in the near future to fly a new stealth strike fighter for the U.S. Air Force, which they inexplicably use to bomb a terrorist meeting in Myanmar and then to avert a vague nuclear catastrophe in Tajikistan before a showdown with some kind of nefarious AI embedded in an unmanned version of the craft.

The plot makes zero sense, nor is it ever explained why these three pilots are used like some kind of global SWAT team. The film is an “offense against taste, intelligence and the noise pollution code” with a story that “doesn’t merely defy logic, but strips logic bare, cremates it and scatters its ashes,” said Roger Ebert at the time. (Prime Video)

When “Today” co-host Savannah Guthrie’s 84-year-old mother, Nancy, was kidnapped on February 1, 2026, it was the first major kidnapping to spark a media frenzy in many years. Such episodes, prior to the ubiquity of surveillance cameras and advances in forensics, were much more common, including these watershed events.

Charles Lindbergh, Jr. (1932)

The abduction and murder of famed aviator Charles Lindbergh’s infant son on March 1, 1932, was at the time considered the “crime of the century.” Lindbergh’s 1927 journey from New York to Paris was the first successful solo transatlantic flight and made him a household name.

“Awareness of the case was such that anyone seen with a small blonde child was looked at twice,” said Kase Wickman at Vanity Fair. Despite a frantic search that involved more than 100,000 people, the boy had likely been killed the night of the kidnapping, and his body was discovered 72 days later near the family’s home in Hopewell, New Jersey. A German immigrant named Bruno Richard Hauptmann was tried, convicted and executed for the crime.

Adolph Coors III (1960)

On February 9, 1960, 44-year-old Adolph Coors III, the grandson of the company’s founder, vanished. His car was found on the Turkey Creek Bridge near Denver, where he had been abducted by an escaped murderer, Joseph Corbett, looking for a quick get-rich scheme.

“The attempt went awry though and ended right there on that bridge” when Corbett shot Coors to death, said Colorado Public Radio. His wife, Mary, received a $500,000 ransom demand the next day, and FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover dispatched an enormous operation to find the beverage heir. Coors’ body was discovered on September 15, 1960, and the FBI later traced a car matching a witness description to Corbett. Corbett was convicted and sentenced to life in prison but released on parole in 1980.

Frank Sinatra, Jr. (1963)

19 year-old Frank Sinatra, Jr., the son of one of the most renowned musicians and actors of his generation, was kidnapped from a hotel in Lake Tahoe, California, on December 8, 1963. Two men, Barry Keenan and Joe Amsler, tied up Sinatra, Jr.’s friend, John Foss, and spirited the singer to Canoga Park, California, where they contacted his father and issued a demand for a $240,000 ransom, which Sinatra delivered early in the morning on December 11.

A third conspirator, John Irwin, spilled the beans to his brother, who contacted the police. The three men were sentenced to life in prison, though none served even five years. At his trial, Keenan “testified that the crime was a hoax, a publicity stunt coordinated with people tied to the family,” an allegation that was later disproven, said Esquire.

Paul Fronczak (1964)

A woman posed as a nurse at Chicago’s Michael Reese hospital and made off with a 1-day-old infant named Paul Fronczak on April 27, 1964, triggering what was then the largest manhunt in the city’s history. Two years later, the FBI found a child that they believed to be Paul in New Jersey and he was returned to his parents, Dora and Chester Fronczak.

But in 2012, Fronczak took a DNA test that proved he was actually Jack Rosenthal, an Atlantic City child who had vanished in 1965 along with his twin sister, Jill (who has still not been found). In 2019, it was revealed that the real Paul Fronczak had been raised as Kevin Baty by a woman named Lorraine Fountain. By then, both Baty and Fountain had passed away, and the original kidnapper remains unknown. Rosenthal still goes by Paul Fronczak and published a memoir in 2022.

John Paul Getty III (1973)

Getty III, the grandson of petroleum magnate John Paul Getty, was abducted by Italian gangsters in Rome on July 10, 1973, when he was 16. The kidnappers demanded $17 million, but the elder Getty initially refused, suspecting his wayward grandson of complicity and saying “If I pay one penny, I’ll have 14 kidnapped grandchildren.”

He only agreed later to dispatch $2.2 million — after he received his grandson’s ear in the mail — the highest amount that could at the time be considered tax-deductible. Getty III struggled with drug and alcohol abuse and suffered a stroke in 1981 that would leave him disabled for the rest of his life until his death in 2011. The story was made into a 2017 film, “All the Money in the World,” as well as a 2018 FX limited series, “Trust.”

Patricia Hearst (1974)

On February 4, 1974, 19 year-old Patricia Hearst, the heiress to William Randolph Hearst’s media dynasty, was kidnapped from her apartment in Berkeley, California, by members of the Symbionese Liberation Army (SLA), a far-left radical group. Two months later, she participated in a bank robbery, after which she was considered a fugitive until her September 1975 arrest.

Hearst maintained that she was coerced, but she was convicted and sentenced to 35 years in prison. “Hearst’s decision to stay with her kidnappers was a deeply symbolic transgression, one that articulated the anger so many felt against the American establishment,” said Smithsonian Magazine. She was released in 1979 after President Jimmy Carter commuted her sentence, and she went on to perform in a number of Hollywood films, including the 1990 film “Cry-Baby.”

Shin Sang-ok (1978)

On January 11, 1978, South Korean actress Choi Eun-hee was abducted in Hong Kong by North Korean agents and taken to the North Korea’s capital, Pyongyang. Six months later, North Korea succeeded in kidnapping her husband, renowned director Shin Sang-ok, in Hong Kong as well.

Held for eight years at the behest of North Korean dictator Kim Il Sung’s son and heir apparent, Kim Jong Il, Shin was forced to make seven films for his captors, including “Pulgasari,” a movie known as the “socialist Godzilla.” Kim “sought to create a film industry that would allow him to sway a world audience to the righteousness of the Workers’ Party of Korea,” said The Guardian. In March 1986, Shin and Choi escaped while in Vienna, Austria, where they were ostensibly seeking funding for a new project.

Aldo Moro (1978)

On March 16, 1978, during Italy’s so-called “Years of Lead,” former Prime Minister Aldo Moro was kidnapped by the far-left terrorist group The Red Brigades while he was trying to broker the inclusion of the Italian Communist Party (PCI) in a coalition government. He was executed by the Brigades on May 9, and his body was discovered in the trunk of a car in Rome.

There are still “unanswered questions” about the episode that remains “arguably the darkest episode of Italy's postwar history,” said The Guardian. Widespread revulsion at the assassination led to a crackdown on the Red Brigades and the beginning of the end of the group’s influence.

Abilio Diniz (1989)

Diniz, the co-founder of the Brazilian grocery chain Pão de Açúcar, Diniz was kidnapped on the morning of December 17, 1989, when the country was holding its first democratic presidential election after decades of autocracy. The 52-year-old Diniz was “dragged out of his Mercedes-Benz as he went to work and taken away in a station wagon disguised as an ambulance,” said The New York Times, and then held in a house in São Paulo before he was freed by authorities a week later.

The kidnappers were part of an ongoing abduction ring that had netted around $65 million. The group was connected to and included several members of the Chilean radical group the Movement for the Revolutionary Left.

Jaycee Dugard (1991)

11-year-old Jaycee Dugard was walking to a school bus stop in Lake Tahoe, California, when she was abducted by a couple, Phillip and Nancy Garrido. Phillip, already a convicted sex offender, and Nancy held Dugard for 18 years in a hidden backyard structure.

She was repeatedly raped and forced to carry two of Phillip’s children. The case attracted even greater attention when she was found in 2009. Authorities “discovered a hidden backyard compound made up of ramshackle tents and sheds, including a small, sparsely furnished two-room building” where she and her children were held, said The New York Times. Dugard founded a non-profit to help people recover from similar horrors and has understandably kept her daughters’ identities a secret. The Garridos remain in prison.

Elizabeth Smart (2002)

On June 5, 2002, 14-year-old Elizabeth Smart was abducted from her bedroom in the family’s Salt Lake City home by Brian David Mitchell and Wanda Barzee. Mitchell, who had religious delusions, had previously worked as a roofer on the family’s house.

Though the case drew widespread national scrutiny, Smart remained in captivity for nine months, suffering daily sexual assaults, until she was recognized in Sandy, Utah, on March 12, 2003, and rescued by police. “Smart had to summon tremendous physical stamina to survive her captivity,” said Margaret Talbot at The New Yorker. Smart founded a non-profit to combat sexual exploitation and is now married with three children. Mitchell remains in federal prison; Barzee was granted parole in 2018.

While millions will tune in to watch the Seattle Seahawks and New England Patriots battle it out in Super Bowl LX, just as many are excited for Bad Bunny’s highly anticipated halftime show. The Puerto Rican singer is the latest in a long line of superstar musicians to make their mark at the Big Game. From Prince to Katy Perry, Super Bowl halftime shows have a long history of memorable moments.

Historical firsts

While modern Super Bowls are thought of as platforms for major acts, this wasn’t always the case; the majority of early halftime shows were performed by college marching bands. The first major pop group to headline a Super Bowl was New Kids on the Block, who performed during the game in 1991. The boy band performed alongside a choir of kids singing songs like “It’s a Small World.” But while the show was historic, it was also not well-received, even by the band. “I don’t know how much pride I take in the actual performance,” frontman Donnie Wahlberg once told Playboy. “But I take pride in the fact that we were the first ones to do it.”

When pop stars began regularly performing at the Super Bowl, they were exclusively English-language singers — until 1999, when Gloria Estefan headlined the halftime show. Estefan had previously made an appearance at the 1992 Super Bowl show, and as “part of the ‘A Celebration of Soul, Salsa and Swing’ halftime show in Miami, Estefan performed her single ‘Oye,’ which blends Spanish and English lyrics,” said ESPN. Ahead of Bad Bunny’s performance, Estefan also had some advice for the Latino singer. “Enjoy every second because it really goes by so fast,” she said to E! News. “In those minutes, he’s gonna have the ability to impact the world.”

While the Super Bowl is a uniquely American phenomenon, another barrier was broken in 2000 when Phil Collins became the first non-U.S. citizen to headline the halftime show. The British singer, known for his work with the rock band Genesis as well as solo songs like “In the Air Tonight,” performed alongside Christina Aguilera and Enrique Iglesias. After this, the floodgates opened for a slew of British icons to perform at Super Bowls, including Paul McCartney, The Who and The Rolling Stones.

Record-breaking performances

Given the hype and cultural status of the Super Bowl, it should be no surprise that the halftime show is often one of the year’s most-watched events. Millions of people tune in annually, but one concert stands above the others: Kendrick Lamar’s 2025 performance is the most-watched Super Bowl halftime show in history. Lamar’s show was watched by an estimated 133.5 million people, according to Billboard. The rapper “came into the gig riding sky high” following a big Grammys weekend and “wowed viewers with intensely satisfying versions” of his songs, said The Mercury News, including his hit diss track “Not Like Us.”

And while The Weeknd’s 2021 performance didn’t include a diss track, it does carry another distinction: It’s the most expensive halftime show of all time. The total cost was reportedly a staggering $17 million. Performing at the Super Bowl is so desirable that the Canadian performer “used $7 million of his own money to fund his incredible production,” said the South China Morning Post. This is “on top of the estimated $10 million the NFL is believed to allow for a halftime show budget.” The high price shouldn’t be surprising; airing a 30-second commercial during the Super Bowl “costs about $8 million on average,” according to USA Today, and some companies are “paying $10 million or more.”

These shows are also known for incorporating many big-name artists into one act. This was never more apparent than during the 2022 halftime show, which featured the largest ensemble of performers at a Super Bowl. The show, which honored host city Los Angeles’ rap roots, was headlined by Mary J. Blige, Snoop Dogg, Dr. Dre, Eminem and Kendrick Lamar, with a surprise appearance by 50 Cent. The “spectacular, high-energy performance was a powerful celebration of hip hop and its evolution over the last three decades,” said Time, and also “marked the first time the halftime show lineup consisted entirely of hip hop headliners.”

Super Bowl superlatives

While Tom Brady is widely considered the football GOAT, there has been debate as to which halftime show can truly be called “the greatest.” However, many analysts consider the 2007 performance featuring Prince to be the best Super Bowl halftime show ever. There was a “great deal of anticipation for Prince’s performance,” said The Athletic, and the legendary singer delivered, as “no one before nor after has gotten close to him.” His rendition of his iconic song “Purple Rain,” which happened to occur during a rainstorm, created a “performance for the ages.”

Not all superlatives are positive; many shocking and unexpected moments have happened at halftime shows, too. The most jaw-dropping incident likely came during the 2004 show featuring Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake. During the pair’s performance, Timberlake accidentally ripped a piece of Jackson’s shirt, which “saw her right breast briefly exposed to 70,000 in-person spectators and more than 140 million TV viewers,” said The Guardian. The controversial moment “left Jackson, then 37, blacklisted from a significant portion of the music industry for years,” though she would later have a career resurgence.

And for as many halftime shows that have been lauded, there have also been some that have been questioned. The 2015 show, headlined by Katy Perry, is often considered the “campiest” in Super Bowl history. The show was filled with “Perry’s top songs, an entrance on top of a lion,” and costumes described as peak camp, said 303 Magazine. Given Perry’s history of concert performances, her Super Bowl outing “wasn’t too different than what we’ve seen from Perry previously.” But for many, it “seemed like they broadcast from one of Perry’s concerts instead of planning something new.”

Super Bowl shows have also had their fair share of daring, sometimes even death-defying moments. When it comes to stunts, many people think of Rihanna’s 2023 Super Bowl halftime show, when she entered the stadium from above on a platform suspended by cables. From there, the Barbadian singer carried out a 13-minute intense dance routine to rave reviews. But it was only when the show started that viewers realized Rihanna was also doing all of this while pregnant. Overall, the performance garnered critical acclaim, as Rihanna “graciously granted us a medley of her biggest hits,“ said Buzzfeed News.

Fresh from his online mauling at the hands of Ryanair’s Michael O’Leary, the world’s richest man can take some consolation. Elon Musk’s SpaceX is reportedly “lining up” four Wall Street banks to advise on “a record-breaking IPO”, and it could make the rocket group – already the world’s most valuable startup – the biggest flotation in history, valued as highly as $1.5 trillion, said the FT.

No final decision has been taken, but the float may come as soon as this year. SpaceX’s soaring valuation has been driven by its “cemented” status as the leading US developer of commercial rockets for space exploration – and its Starlink satellite service. Markets were already anticipating a feast of “US mega listings”, with two big beasts of generative AI – OpenAI and Anthropic – also plotting potential floats.

Still, don’t get too “starry-eyed”, said Katie Prescott in The Times. Both are growing at a rate of knots: OpenAI’s annualised revenues rose above $20 billion in 2025. But they’re spending billions more. Staying private would keep “a comfortable cloak of secrecy over their operations”, giving time “to unpick their devilishly complex corporate structures”.

Much of the secrecy around OpenAI has already been blown open by the “increasingly public legal beef” between CEO Sam Altman and Musk, said Bloomberg. Musk, who is suing OpenAI for $134 billion, accuses its management of violating original promises about its governance (he was an early investor) and he has been providing “a steady drip of juicy internal documents”. Altman counters that Musk wants to take OpenAI down to boost his own xAI business. Certainly, this suit “poses an existential threat to OpenAI”, said Danny Fortson in The Sunday Times. “It could prove decisive in the battle for who prevails in the multitrillion-dollar race for AI dominance.”

President Donald Trump has long bragged that he is the healthiest and strongest president in U.S. history, and while this claim has been almost universally met with skepticism, he isn’t the only one to make this assertion. White House officials during both of Trump’s terms have made grandiose statements about the president’s health. But at 79, some people are questioning how healthy the oldest person ever elected president truly is.

Harold Bornstein: ‘healthiest individual ever elected’

In 2015, prior to Trump being elected for the first time, his then-physician, Dr. Harold Bornstein, released a letter with a glowing endorsement of his health. Trump “has had no significant medical problems,” and if “elected, Mr. Trump, I can state unequivocally, will be the healthiest individual ever elected to the presidency,” Bornstein said in his letter. He also claimed that Trump’s blood pressure and lab results were “astonishingly excellent” and said Trump had lost 15 pounds during the prior year.

But several years later, Bornstein revealed that the letter was actually written by Trump. “He dictated that whole letter. I didn’t write that letter. I just made it up as I went along,“ Bornstein said to CNN. Bornstein also revealed that he wrote the letter “in just five minutes while a limo sent by the candidate waited outside his Manhattan office,” the doctor said to NBC News. However, Bornstein, who died in 2021, also claimed that he stood by the overall assessment of Trump’s health.

Ronny Jackson: Trump is in ‘excellent health’

During Trump’s first term in 2018, the then-White House doctor, Dr. Ronny Jackson, gave similarly glowing reviews to Trump’s health that prompted skepticism. There is “no evidence that the president has any issues whatsoever with his thought process,” and Trump has a “lot of energy and stamina,” Jackson said to reporters at a White House press briefing. Jackson also said that he administered a cognitive exam to Trump, which he passed.

The internet also met with further doubt the idea that Trump was 6’3” and 239 pounds, which put his body mass index “just below the 30.0 threshold for him to be officially described as obese, rather than merely overweight,” said The Washington Post. Jackson’s press conference occurred the same month a tabloid-style book, “Fire and Fury,” was released, which “led to speculation about Trump’s mental fitness for office,” said NPR. The release of the book led to the infamous moment when Trump called himself a “very stable genius” on social media.

Stephen Miller: Trump is ‘superhuman’

Many people in Trump’s circle have championed his supposed vitality in his second term, none more so than White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller. Miller, who is no stranger to controversial remarks, has claimed that Trump has near-godlike abilities. The president “can work harder and he has a better memory and he has more stamina and has more energy than a normal mortal,” Miller said in an interview with New York magazine. “The headline of your story should be ‘The Superhuman President.’”

But these “strenuous assertions came alongside signs that made Trump seem more mortal than ever, from his dismal approval rating to the growing likelihood that Republicans will lose control of at least one chamber of Congress,” said New York. The president seemed undeterred. If “you’re going to write a bad story about my health, I’m going to sue the ass off of New York magazine,” Trump told the outlet.

James Jones: Trump in better health than Obama

Former President Barack Obama is known for his vigorous fitness routine and healthy habits, but according to at least one doctor, Trump is the healthier person. Dr. James Jones, the White House physician’s assistant, chose Trump when asked in the same New York magazine interview who was in better health. When the question was asked, Trump, who was in the room, “stared across the desk, making eye contact with Jones. Jones didn’t hesitate. ‘President Trump,’ he said.”

Some may find this hard to believe, as Obama is a “fitness fanatic rumored to allow himself precisely seven almonds a night,” said New York magazine. But Trump’s EKG shows that he is “14 years younger. So age 65,” James said to the outlet. “His stamina demonstrates that. We get a view that nobody else does. Nobody can stay up with him. The rest of the staff is tired; we are too. And he’s not.”

Trump: ‘physical specimen’

Trump himself has compared his physique not only to Obama but also former President George W. Bush. Dr. Ronny Jackson claimed that Trump was the “best physical specimen” of the three presidents, Trump said during a 2025 speech in Norfolk, Virginia. Jackson believed that Trump was in the “best shape, the healthiest,” and the “best physical specimen,” Trump added.

This is not the first time Trump has championed his physicality in public, with another notable moment coming during his 2024 debate with former President Joe Biden. “I think I’m in very good shape. I feel that I’m in as good a shape as I was 25, 30 years ago,” Trump said during the debate, while also bragging about a series of cognitive tests he took during his first term.

Trump: meetings are ‘boring as hell’

Given Trump’s age, concerns arose during his second term when video appeared to show him falling asleep during a Cabinet meeting, his eyes closing as he apparently struggled to stay awake. But the White House — and Trump himself — said this was not the case and that he was only closing his eyes because he was bored.

The Cabinet meetings are “boring as hell; I’m going around a room, and I’ve got 28 guys — the last one was three and a half hours. I have to sit back and listen, and I move my hand so that people will know I’m listening,” Trump said to New York magazine in the same interview. “I’m hearing every word, and I can’t wait to get out,” he added. But this did little to assuage the mounting “speculation about the president’s ability to deal with chronic venous insufficiency and lead the country by past staffers, political strategists and the public,” said The Hill.

Trump: ‘I don’t want thick blood’

Further eyebrows were raised when Trump made more comments on his health during an interview with The Wall Street Journal. The most notable revelation was that Trump takes 325 milligrams of aspirin daily; the most common daily dosage is only 81 milligrams, according to the Mayo Clinic. But Trump takes a higher dosage because “aspirin is good for thinning out the blood, and I don’t want thick blood pouring through my heart,” the president said to the Journal, claiming this was what caused excessive bruising on his hands.

Beyond the aspirin, people around Trump “say they often have to speak loudly in meetings with the president because he strains to hear,” the Journal reported. Trump also “doesn’t get regular exercise, and he is known to consume a diet heavy on salty and fatty foods, such as hamburgers and french fries.” Despite this, Trump is in“exceptional health and perfectly suited to execute his duties,” Navy Capt. Sean Barbabella, Trump’s doctor, told the Journal.

The government is dropping plans to require workers to sign up for its digital ID card scheme, and allowing people to use other digital forms of ID to prove their right to work in the UK.

The scheme, originally framed by Keir Starmer as part of a “crackdown on illegal working”, has been watered down out of concern it “could undermine public trust and lead to a cabinet revolt”, said The Times.

Following the concessions on inheritance tax thresholds for farmers just before Christmas, this is the second major U-turn within a month, and the 13th since Starmer came into office. Here are some of the other major rowbacks since the 2024 election.

Winter fuel payments

Mere months after their election victory, Labour announced plans to reduce the number of pensioners receiving up to £300 in winter fuel payments by restricting eligibility to those receiving pension credit. This would have cut claimant numbers from 11 million to one and a half million, and saved the government about £1.5 billion a year.

Less than a year later, the government backtracked on their winter fuel policy, restoring the payments to pensioners with an income of £35,000 a year or less, meaning that around three quarters of pensioners (about 9 million) in England and Wales will still receive the payment.

The debacle was an “administration-defining mistake”, said the Financial Times. What was meant to be a fairly innocuous cost-cutting measure, and arguably “the right thing to do politically”, snowballed into protests and endless media coverage. It “dealt a blow to the government’s popularity from which it has yet to recover”, and then the rowback set the perception that “the government retreats under pressure”.

And, since the U-turn, even the revised expected savings have “evaporated”, said The Times. The wall-to-wall media coverage has increased awareness of pension credit, meaning 46% more pensioners now claim it, costing the Department of Work & Pensions millions more than before.

National insurance

Famously, the 2024 Labour election manifesto promised not to “increase taxes on working people”, with a pledge not to raise VAT, national insurance or rates of income tax.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves said, as she delivered her first Budget in October 2024, that “working people will not see higher taxes” and “that is a promise made and a promise fulfilled”. However, in that same Budget, she increased the rate of national insurance contributions from employers – not employees – from 13.8% to 15%, in a move that “risked indirectly hitting workers”, said The Telegraph.

That decision looked a “fairly clear violation of the pre-election promise”, said The Guardian. Paul Johnson, then director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, called it a “straightforward breach” of the manifesto.

Welfare reform

In March 2025, Labour unveiled plans for sweeping changes to the benefits system that it said would save £5 billion a year by 2030. The new “pro-work system” would make it harder for those with “less severe conditions” to claim disability benefits, said the BBC. It would also freeze extra health-related payments for current claimants and nearly halve the number of successful new claims.

But this “tweak of the assessment criteria” was met with “fierce opposition from campaign groups” and many Labour backbenchers, said The Independent. It was undoubtedly the “biggest rebellion” of Starmer’s premiership, said Sky News. More than 100 Labour MPs signed a “reasoned amendment” in opposition to the government's proposals, which would effectively have killed the legislation if it went forward as it stood. The main concerns of the mutineers were that the cuts were “too harsh” and would “penalise” the “most vulnerable”.

Starmer made a “dramatic climb-down”, hollowing out much of the bill’s “central planks”, and leaving his “political authority badly damaged”, said The Guardian.

Grooming gangs inquiry

At the start of 2025, the grooming gangs scandal was a “point of fierce political discussion”, said ITV’s Maya Bowles, as the government “repeatedly insisted” there was no need for a national inquiry, launching five “locally-led” investigations instead.

Widespread public interest in the scandal had been “sparked in part” by X posts from tech tycoon Elon Musk, as well as repeated calls for a national inquiry by both the Conservative Party and Reform UK, said the BBC. Musk shared a series of posts on X accusing Starmer of failing to prosecute the gangs and also called for safeguarding minister Jess Phillips to be jailed.

In response, the prime minister argued that those in favour of a national inquiry, instead of locally-led investigations, were “jumping on a bandwagon” and “amplifying” the demands of the far right.

Then in June, after “resisting calls for months”, Starmer launched a national inquiry – after a review of the whole issue by crossbench peer Louise Casey.

Anne Longfield will now lead the £65 billion three-year inquiry, after other leading candidates pulled out. Since June, four women have resigned from the inquiry’s survivors committee.

‘Day-One’ workers’ rights

One of the big promises of the Labour manifesto pledge to improve workers’ rights was reducing the qualifying period for unfair dismissal from two years’ employment to the first day of employment.

But in November, Business Secretary Peter Kyle announced that the qualifying period would be reduced to six months instead.

Labour’s Employment Rights Bill had become caught in parliamentary “ping pong” between the House of Lords and the House of Commons, slowed down by persuasive resistance from business owners. The government was forced to compromise to get the bill passed into law.

Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson told Sky News that “sometimes you do have to adopt some pragmatism if you want to make sure that you get the wider package through”.

“Help is on its way,” Donald Trump told the people of Iran on Tuesday as he urged them to keep protesting and “take over your institutions”. The US president had earlier declared that America was “locked and loaded”, ready to intervene militarily in Iran if the authorities started killing peaceful protesters en masse, and announced 25% tariffs, “effective immediately”, on any nation that did business with Iran.

More than 2,500 people, including security personnel, have died in the unrest, according to human rights groups, although many fear the true toll is much higher than that. The demonstrations, which seem to have partially subsided in recent days, began in the bazaars of Tehran on 28 December, fuelled by anger over Iran’s collapsing currency, and spread across the country.

The regime responded last week by imposing an internet blackout and stepping up its repressive tactics. In a defiant address last Friday, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei called protesters “troublemakers”, who were trying “to please the president of the US”. The regime warned that, in the event of a US attack on Iran, it would consider Israel and all US bases to be “legitimate targets”.

No clear alternative

The bravery of Iranian protesters in standing up to their “murderous regime” is extraordinary, said The Daily Telegraph. Alas, it has cost them dear. Security forces have fired on crowds, leaving hospitals overwhelmed. Bodies recovered by families show that some victims were shot at close range and in the eyes; parents have been told they can’t take children home for burial. We can only hope that these terrible scenes mark the death throes of the mullahs’ 47-year rule. Iran has suffered enough, agreed The Independent. “That the fall of the Islamic Republic would cause jubilation in Washington and Jerusalem is not a reason to oppose or regret it.”

It’s unclear where Iran’s protests will go from here, said The Economist. Some Iran-watchers fear it is entering a long period of internal strife that will consolidate the power of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its brutal militia, the Basij, resulting in months or years of martial law. Others think the IRGC is too weak to resist a full-blown uprising. The worry then, though, is that there’s no clear alternative to the regime, which could mean chaos. Although some protesters have been chanting the name of Reza Pahlavi, the former crown prince of Iran, he lives in the US and isn’t thought to have sufficient sway to return to Iran and take control.

Conditions are dire in Iran, said Alireza Nader and Nik Kowsar on Foreign Policy. Even once comfortably middle-class households now struggle to feed themselves properly. Tehran is facing rolling electricity blackouts and water rationing. But if these pressures are to precipitate regime change, Iran will first need a united opposition with a credible “day after” plan.

Rotting republic

Trump is in a similar position to Barack Obama in 2013, when he warned that the use of chemical weapons by the Assad regime in Syria would cross a “red line”, said Reuel Marc Gerecht and Ray Takeyh in The Wall Street Journal. Obama didn’t act on his words, but Trump must. Iranians would likely cheer US strikes on IRGC bases, and such interventions “could tip the balance” against the regime. The case for surgical strikes on Iran’s “machinery of repression” is overwhelming, agreed David Patrikarakos in the Daily Mail. The aim would not be to conquer or occupy, but to help “create the conditions for regime collapse from within”.

While the “moral imperative for targeting Tehran may be compelling”, US strikes would likely achieve little beyond temporarily disrupting the crackdown, said Suzanne Maloney in The New York Times. “Regime change is not a one-and-done matter.” Even taking out the regime’s top leadership wouldn’t make that much difference. “Tehran has patience and a deep bench.” Khamenei presides over a vast power structure of officials who have much to lose from the fall of the theocracy. Rather than intervening militarily, and risking retaliation from a desperate regime, the US should stick to cyberattacks and applying economic pressure.

It is division among the leadership, rather than the loss of legitimacy, that ultimately dooms tyrannical regimes, said William Hague in The Times. “So far, the Ayatollah, the IRGC and their cronies have stuck together.” But for how much longer will that last, asked David Ignatius in The Washington Post. Iran’s rulers must understand that these escalating protests keep happening because the republic “is rotting, politically and economically, and the whole country knows it”. While neighbouring nations are embracing a dynamic economic future, they’re clinging to a “repressive, retrograde regime” that can’t even provide basic services. That’s unsustainable.

Of all the tools and executive authorities available to President Donald Trump, perhaps none has been wielded with as much naked transactional ambition as his ability to effectively pardon any federal convict for virtually any crime. Domestically, Trump’s penchant for pardoning has seen commutations extended to celebrities and lawmakers alike, often coming with an explicit expectation of quid pro quo. However, Trump’s use of political pardons hasn’t stopped at the nation’s borders; the president is increasingly using pardons with an international theater in mind, letting the world know that crossing America’s justice system may not be as final an act as it once was.

Here are the influential foreign figures Trump has pardoned over his two terms in office.

Changpeng Zhao

Although Trump has extended clemency to several cryptocurrency-associated figures over the years, his October 2025 pardon of Binance founder Changpeng Zhao sparked the “most intense backlash of all crypto pardons,” said Benzinga. The move raised “immediate criticism” from lawmakers who said the pardon risked “serious ethical concerns.” Zhao, who was born in China before moving to Canada as a child, had previously pleaded guilty to charges that he enabled financial fraud and money laundering at the “world’s largest exchange for cryptocurrency or digital money on the internet,” CBS News said.

The “self-dealing aspect” of Trump’s pardoning of Zhao, in terms of the “benefit that it conferred on Trump and his family, and people in his inner circle,” is “unprecedented,” said former Justice Department pardon official Elizabeth Oyer to CBS. The pardon came amid the president’s pivot toward a “more friendly stance toward cryptocurrency than his predecessors,” the BBC said.

Juan Orlando Hernández

Elected as president of Honduras just two years before Trump, Juan Orlando Hernández, commonly known as JOH, earned his “place in infamy for the one-time U.S. ally in the war on drugs” in 2024 when he was convicted in New York City for cocaine trafficking, The Guardian said. Hernández’s actions “paved a cocaine superhighway to the United States,” Assistant U.S. Attorney Jacob Gutwillig claimed during the trial, in part by protecting certain traffickers “with the full power of the state.”

Trump’s December 2025 pardon of Hernández came after the former Honduran leader “sent the president a four-page letter casting himself as a victim of ‘political persecution’” while “comparing his fate to that of the American president,” The New York Times said. Speaking about the pardon, Trump affirmed a sense of kinship with Hernández, who was, he said, “treated like the Biden administration treated a man named Trump.”

Aviem Sella

While not a widely known figure himself, Israeli businessman and former IDF officer Aviem Sella played a central role in one of the biggest intelligence breaches in American history, serving as recruiter and handler for American intelligence analyst-turned-spy Jonathan Pollard. Sella was indicted in absentia on multiple espionage counts in 1987, but was not required to be extradited to the United States for what U.S. Attorney Joseph diGenova said was a “political offense,” said The New York Times.

Trump’s surprise pardon for Sella, delivered in the waning hours of his first term, was “requested” by Israeli officials to “close this unfortunate chapter in U.S.-Israel relations,” the White House said in a statement announcing the action. The pardon was “supported by the Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu, Israeli Ambassador to the United States Ron Dermer, the United States Ambassador to Israel David Friedman and Miriam Adelson.”

Ben Delo

Along with fellow BitMex founders Arthur Hayes and Samuel Reed, British tech entrepreneur Ben Delo pleaded guilty in 2022 to violating the Bank Secrecy Act, failing to enact requisite money laundering protections at the widely used crypto exchange. The Biden administration’s investigation and prosecution of BitMex and its founders was “among the first and most significant” legal actions to “target the crypto market,” said Bloomberg. Trump’s March 2025 pardon of Delo, along with a host of other finance and entrepreneurial figures, showed there’s “never been a better time to be a white-collar crook,” Axios said.

In a statement thanking Trump for the pardon, Delo said his company had been targeted for being the “most successful crypto exchange of its kind,” with him and his colleagues “wrongfully made to serve as an example, sacrificed for political reasons and used to send inconsistent regulatory signals.”

On Jan. 3, 2026, President Donald Trump authorized an attack on Venezuela that resulted in the capture of President Nicolás Maduro and his rendition to New York. Once there, he and his wife, Cilia Flores, were indicted by a federal grand jury on charges of drug trafficking and narco-terrorism.

While the episode was a departure from more recent, comparatively hands-off American policy in the region, it was very much aligned with a long post-World War II history of U.S. interventions designed to change unfriendly regimes into friendly ones. In addition to direct military interventions, the CIA supported numerous coups across the region during the Cold War.

Guatemala, 1954

The first major post-World War II intervention was in Guatemala. “Using psychological warfare, propaganda and economic pressure, the CIA helped create a rebel army that toppled the Guatemalan government” of Jacobo Árbenz in 1954, said Responsible Statecraft. The leader’s land reforms had been “met with fierce opposition from Guatemala's elite and the U.S. government, which had economic interests” tied to the United Fruit Company. As a ploy for stability, it didn’t work — Guatemala suffered through a 36-year civil war that began in 1960 and experienced multiple coups.

Cuba, 1961

In 1961, President John F. Kennedy authorized a covert program to train 1,400 Cuban exiles in Guatemala to invade and topple the still-young communist regime of Fidel Castro. A series of strategic errors, including the failure to keep the plans a secret along with a misappraisal of the Castro government’s military capabilities, led to an embarrassing disaster.

The exile force landed at the Bay of Pigs on the morning of April 17 and was immediately pinned down. More than 100 were killed and Kennedy was forced to bargain for the more than 1,200 survivors who were taken prisoner. A “major embarrassment for the United States and the Kennedy administration,” the Bay of Pigs fiasco “strengthened Castro’s power in Cuba and pushed him to pursue closer relations with the Soviet Union,” said The New York Times.

Brazil, 1964

In 1964, the U.S. threw its support behind a military coup to oust Brazilian President João Goulart. The U.S. “launched Operation Brother Sam, a plan to lend logistical support to the Brazilian military’s effort to take control of the Brazilian government,” said the Library of Congress, although “additional material support proved unnecessary” to complete the coup. The military would rule for the next 21 years as a close Cold War ally of the United States before a transition to democracy took place in 1985.

The Dominican Republic, 1965

In 1963, the U.S. had backed a coup against the democratically elected leftist government of Juan Bosch. In 1965, pro-Bosch military forces launched their own rebellion against the junta and the country was plunged into civil war. Under the pretext of protecting American citizens and preventing the emergence of another Castro-like regime, U.S. President Lyndon B. Johnson authorized the deployment of 42,000 Marines to the capital of Santo Domingo on April 28, 1965, where they collaborated with forces loyal to the junta and quickly defeated the rebels.

The following year, Bosch was defeated at the ballot box by junta-backed former president Joaquín Balaguer. During 12 years of “harsh rule” under Balaguer, “democracy was trampled, corruption ran rampant and social reform was denied,” said The Wilson Center.

Bolivia, 1971

While much less well-known than the 1973 coup in Chile, the CIA also provided support in 1971 to oust the leftist government of President Juan José Torres in Bolivia. Torres was replaced by a lengthy military dictatorship led by Hugo Banzer, during which “more than 14,000 Boli­vians were arrested with­out a judi­cial order, more than 8,000 were tortured — with elec­tric­ity, water, beatings — and more than 200 were exe­cuted or dis­ap­peared,” said Harper’s Magazine. The country remains politically troubled today.

Chile, 1973

The CIA backed the ouster of the democratically elected government of socialist President Salvador Allende in 1973. While the agency had a more prominent role in a failed 1970 coup attempt ordered by U.S. President Richard Nixon, the 1973 coup is widely considered one of the worst offenses of American foreign policymakers during the Cold War. Allende committed suicide that year when it was clear the coup had succeeded. His successor, General Augusto Pinochet, ruled with an iron fist for 17 years, leaving behind a trail of “40,175 victims, including torture, executions, detentions and disappearances,” said Amnesty International.

Nicaragua, 1979

A socialist government led by the Sandinista National Liberation Front took power in Nicaragua in 1979, and the recently inaugurated administration of Ronald Reagan wanted to overthrow the government as part of its Cold War policy of “rollback” against communist regimes. Reagan “approved an operation in which the CIA would aid Nicaraguan rebel insurgents — who were fighting the newly established socialist Sandinista government — with the goal of preventing the spread of Communism,” said The Miller Center. Because Congress refused to allocate money for Reagan’s Nicaragua venture, the campaign also led to the Iran-Contra scandal when the U.S. sold weapons to Iran and used the proceeds to back the Contras.

Grenada, 1983

The long shadow of the Bay of Pigs could be seen in the U.S. invasion of the tiny Caribbean island of Grenada, with a population of less than 100,000 people, in 1983. A socialist government had seized power in a bloodless coup in 1979, led by Prime Minister Maurice Bishop. Fearing a growing alliance with Castro’s Cuba and fixated on Bishop’s plans to build an international airport capable of accommodating Soviet aircraft, President Ronald Reagan planned for an invasion and finally got his opportunity when military hardliners deposed and later executed Bishop. On Oct. 25, 1983, Reagan dispatched a small combined military force to overthrow the regime. The intervention was “popular within the United States, serving as proof of concept that Reagan was a tough anti-Communist,” said The National Interest.

Panama, 1989

Before the Persian Gulf War, President George H.W. Bush authorized an invasion of Panama to topple the country’s de facto dictator, General Manuel Noriega. It was a dizzying turn of events, given that Noriega was only recently considered a reliable Cold War ally and CIA informant who had provided intelligence to the U.S. about leftist movements for decades. But his deepening involvement with Colombia’s Medellín Cartel and increasingly authoritarian rule triggered a crisis that Bush resolved with a swift invasion that began on Dec. 20, 1989, and concluded with Noriega’s surrender to U.S. forces just two weeks later. His overthrow was a “decisive assertion of U.S. military force for a new American president in a moment of global tumult,” said The New Yorker.

Haiti, 1994

In 1991, the democratically elected president of Haiti, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, was overthrown in a military coup. The resulting military junta compiled a horrific human rights record and instigated a mass migration of Haitians to the United States, which became a campaign issue in the 1992 presidential election. The new administration of Bill Clinton began preparing to overthrow the junta. Ultimately, the U.S. did not have to fire any shots. With “American planes in the air” carrying 3,900 paratroopers from the 82nd Airborne Division, the “generals buckled and agreed to leave” on Sept. 16, 1994. U.S. forces ended up facilitating the transfer of power back to Aristide rather than fighting the Haitian military. The intervention “has been all but forgotten by many Americans,” but may have been a “key contributor to many of the problems that now endure in Haiti,” said Time.

This article appeared in History of War magazine issue 146.

In May 1939, the US Senate debated a proposal to purchase the territory of Greenland from Denmark. The War Department was consulted, but ultimately vetoed the project based on its conclusion that the territory lacked suitable locations to build facilities for aviation and naval forces.

This event was one of a series of historical attempts to purchase the island stretching back to 1867.

Within the first week of his second term as President of the United States, Donald Trump was energising the mainstream media by declaring his intention to buy Greenland, a scheme that was met with hostility from the Danes.

While the Senate of 1939 debated from a viewpoint of political expediency, the Trump administration’s perspective was apparently more about economic than political benefit. Yet this search for economic gain has a historical precedent rooted in the United States’ wartime requirement for aluminium to feed its burgeoning aircraft industry.

By 1943 America was the world’s largest producer of aluminium with an output of 43 percent of global production. Aluminium is manufactured by refining bauxite ore into alumina, which is then smelted into pure aluminium through an electrolytic process that requires large quantities of the mineral cryolite.

Cryolite is a rare mineral of the sodium group with small deposits found in Spain, the United States and Canada; however, until the late 1980s the largest seams of cryolite anywhere in the world were located in western Greenland.

Greenland is situated in the Western Hemisphere which under the terms of President Franklin D Roosevelt’s Neutrality Act of November 1939 was protected by the policy of “joint defence of the Western Hemisphere”.

On 9 April 1940, the day that Denmark fell to the Nazi war machine, the Danish envoy to the United States, Henrik Kauffmann, in violation of his diplomatic status, signed an agreement authorising the US to act as defenders of Greenland and build military installations there.

American military investment in the autonomous Danish territory was not entirely based on altruism as they eyed the seemingly endless source of cryolite being excavated from the mine at Ivigtut on Greenland’s southwest coast.

A formal request for US assistance endorsed the political agreement on 3 May and an invitation to establish a consulate was accepted, and the United States Coast Guard (USCG) vessel Comanche sailed for Ivigtut with the newly minted US consul and staff onboard.

In June 1940 the USCG icebreaker Northland was also ordered to Greenland under the command of Edward ‘Iceberg’ Smith and continued sailing to and from Greenland in support of the US mission there.

In May 1940 en route to the island, Northland found itself caught up in the death ride of the German battleship Bismarck as it was attacked by aircraft from the British carrier HMS Victorious. Smith reported with typical understatement: “It is fortunate that there were no accidents and mistaken identities when all parties were more or less on a hair trigger.”

Much of Western Europe’s weather originates in Greenland, drifting east on Katabatic winds, and Danish and Norwegian meteorologists had built weather stations on Greenland’s mainly uninhabited east coast to monitor and forecast conditions, transmitting the resulting data.

After occupying Norway and Denmark, the Nazi authorities saw an opportunity to infiltrate the territory. As a result, German and Quisling personnel entered into the weather stations during the traditional summer rotation of staff, simultaneously establishing a small military presence.

The first US air base, designated Bluie West One, was under construction in July 1941, becoming Greenland Bases Command and the HQ of the US Army Air Corps and the USCG Greenland Patrol.

However, the facilities were rapidly relocated to the more suitable airstrip and weather station 30 miles (48km) north of the Arctic Circle at Sondre Stromfjord.

US personnel lived a monotonous existence, contact with the islands’ population being strictly forbidden, exemplified by reassurances to the American public by US Consul James Penfield: “Our Arctic soldiers live in model camps in a womanless world,” going on to proudly extol the available facilities: “Like other American camps, this one boasts a motion picture theatre, barber shop and an excellent library.”

There had been some sporadic military activity, with the British-controlled free Norwegian gunboat Fridthof Nansen boarding and capturing the German-controlled trawler Vesle Kari and taking prisoner the men at the weather station at Myggbukta, but there appears to have been an element of ‘live and let live’ between the opposing forces.

The harsh weather conditions of Greenland’s northeast coast enabled naval access for three summer months of the year, prompting Smith to create the Sledge Patrol in August 1941 to observe German weather stations and their personnel. Sledge Patrol was crewed by Danish meteorologists, hunters and trappers operating along a 400-mile (645km) stretch of the northeast coast.

Greenland’s southwest was surveyed by teams from the USCG cutter Cayuga, supported by Northland’s seaplane, and suitable air base sites at Narsarsuak and Kipisako were chosen for expansion.

On 9 April 1941 the US Secretary of State and Kauffmann signed an agreement conferring American protectorate status on Greenland and the US Navy took over operational control of the area from the coastguard.

After American (and therefore Greenland’s) entry into the war in December 1941, German military personnel were sent to the northeast coast to reestablish weather stations and provide protection for them. Yet they were confined to the east by rapid US expansion which brought storage depots, artillery positions and further ports and air bases.

During the early years of the conflict, German U-boat operations had wrought havoc with Allied shipping. The convoys plying their way across the Atlantic supplying Britain and the Soviet Union suffered grievous losses to the Kriegsmarine’s wolf packs, losses which were mitigated to an extent by Royal Air Force Coastal Command patrols.

The lack of range of Coastal Command aircraft left an undefended area known as the Mid-Atlantic Gap, rendering merchant shipping and their escorts without air cover and vulnerable to attack. Greenland’s air bases plugged this gap by mid-1943 and Allied shipping losses decreased correspondingly.

Cryolite exports to Canada, USA and Portugal reinvigorated the national economy and assured the success of the US military aviation industry which produced over 50,000 aluminium-skinned aircraft annually throughout the Second World War.

The cryolite mine at Ivigtut ceased operations in 1987, but the fact that Greenland continues to be rich in mineral deposits, including the largest sources of rare earth elements outside China, will continue to make it an attractive proposition for the US.

This article originally appeared in History of War magazine issue 146. Click here to subscribe to the magazine and save on the cover price!

It’s probably not a great sign for the relationship between labor and management that most of the workplace neologisms associated with Gen Z are about finding ways not to go to work, or to go to work but to have your mind be somewhere else. Gen Z is taking a lot of heat for these practices, but they might also be on to something profound about redefining our relationship between work and life into something healthier and more sustainable.

Acting your wage

When you’re “acting your wage” you’re pegging your effort to your salary. Someone stuck in a low-paying job, or someone who believes they should’ve received a promotion, and thus a wage, may engage in this practice. It sounds similar to the “quiet quitting” trend that got so much attention in the aftermath of the Covid pandemic, when employees were briefly in the driver’s seat of a very tight labor market. “Acting your wage” means “doing the core requirements of your role without going above and beyond to please your employer or clients,” said Business Insider.

Bare minimum Mondays

A tool to manage the so-called Sunday Scaries — when the looming arrival of the workweek causes anxiety that ruins your Sunday — “Bare minimum Mondays” means starting out on the first day of the week with small, achievable tasks and low expectations, punctuated perhaps by completing some household tasks that went unaddressed over the weekend. Coined by Tik Tok influencer Marisa Jo, the practice might help ease some into the workweek but also “could lead workers to procrastinate to avoid stress,” said CNBC.

Boreout

Boreout is like burnout, but instead of feeling exhausted and overwhelmed, an employee is apathetic and uninterested in the work they’re doing. It goes beyond the occasional feeling of disengagement and means that “boredom becomes a regular feature of work, a chronic condition that can zap people’s motivation,” said Inc. Someone suffering from boreout might also model the so-called Gen Z stare, a blank expression designed to communicate disinterest or contempt.

Career cushioning

The employee using a sick day or a personal day might actually be on a job interview, engaging in what is known as “career cushioning.” Employees who are dissatisfied with their work or just want to have multiple options available in a time of economic upheaval and AI-driven disorientation want to have multiple jobs lined up, just in case. That’s because even “those employees who have experienced steadiness in employment can feel nervous about their future within their company,” said U.S. News & World Report.

Coffee badging

A term that arose out of struggles between companies and employees over returning to the office in the wake of the Covid pandemic, “coffee badging” refers to someone who shows up to work to be seen quickly, swipe their badge and perhaps pour themselves a coffee in front of their co-workers before jetting back home for the day. It’s a way of maintaining the “freedom to work remotely while adhering to the rules,” said Yahoo Finance.

Downshifting

For most people, the career ladder is climbed in only one direction. But a new trend has emerged, particularly as AI cuts into career mobility opportunities for college-educated workers: downshifting, part of a larger trend of career minimalism.

It can mean either reducing hours and commitment in an existing job, avoiding management positions in what’s known as conscious unbossing, or even moving into trade work. Today it is “increasingly common to see interior designers become bakers, ex-bankers opening up cheese shops and marketing officers taking up electricians’ tools,” said The Conversation.

Microbreak

The hours-long, three-martini lunch has been dead for years, but younger workers are changing the workplace in even more significant ways. One is the practice of taking very short breaks, or microbreaks, during the workday rather than — or even in addition to — a long, somnolent lunch break. Microbreaks are “effective energy management strategies and help employees bounce back from fatigue,” said Forbes. They can also help address many other pathologies of workplace culture against which Gen Z seems to be rebelling.

Quiet firing

The counterpart to “quiet quitting,” this practice is often seen in remote workplaces in which an employee is being ignored by their boss, and not receiving the support, mentoring or guidance they need to succeed. Sometimes supervisors will even “allow employees to have truly toxic or miserable experiences at work as a way to squeeze them out,” said Gallup.

Rage applying

When someone is particularly aggrieved about something at their current job, they may engage in “rage applying,” which means firing off multiple applications for new positions elsewhere. In a world in which employers are increasingly using AI to sift through applications, or even posting fake jobs, this approach might not be particularly effective, but it “can be cathartic for dissatisfied employees,” said Xref.

Resenteeism

A play on the word “absenteeism,” and another sibling of “quiet quitting,” it refers to workers who show up to the job but don’t want to be there and therefore don’t work hard or effectively. The rise of resenteeism is part of a “widening perception gap between organizational leaders, employees and their managers,” said Forbes. If this is how employees are feeling, a company is clearly doing something fundamentally wrong.

Snail girl

A "snail girl” is the counterpart to the Millennial “girlboss” archetype. Instead of pursuing career ambitions at all costs, a snail girl prioritizes work-life balance and works to live rather than lives to work. It’s the “antidote to years of perpetually hustling,” said Fortune, although the practice isn’t necessarily a “death knell to ambition.” It is also sometimes rendered as someone being in their “snail girl era” to suggest that the condition is temporary.

Taskmasking

Also known as “productivity theater,” taskmasking is a way for employees to look like they are busy or engaging in work when they are actually checked out or even doing other things, like watching Netflix or running errands. It might be someone who is logged into Slack and occasionally responding to messages but who fundamentally isn’t there. For in-person settings, that might mean “moving quickly though the office while carrying a laptop or clipboard,” said The Guardian. This is also known as live action role-playing or “larping” your job.

Toxic productivity

The obsession with constantly working and the accompanying paranoia about whether you’re doing enough, even on nights and weekends, is known as “toxic productivity.” It’s a term that many Gen Z workers think applies to their Millennial and Gen X colleagues and supervisors who seem to value career advancement above all else. It’s a phrase used by those who believe that while “working hard and chasing dreams is a good thing, pursuing it in unhealthy ways as we sacrifice our well-being and mental health is not,” said Trill Mag.

“Overall, it feels like last year was the prologue and this year is the first chapter, one in which the storylines can really get some momentum behind them,” said Russh.

The magazine was describing horoscope forecasts for the coming year, but it could just as easily have been talking about how politics and the global economy will be shaping up in 2026.

Last year, The Week accurately predicted Donald Trump’s tariffs, the first signs of an AI stock market bubble, the rise of the far-right in the UK and Europe, and a ceasefire in Gaza. So what could 2026 have in store?

Politics

UK local and devolved elections in May are being seen as a make-or-break moment for Keir Starmer and the Labour government.

Squeezed from the right by Reform UK and from the left by a revived Green Party and the new Your Party (as well as Plaid Cymru in Wales and the SNP in Scotland), it is already looking like being a torrid night of results for Labour. Across the board, the party faces “potential collapse” and, for the first time in a century, losing control of its Welsh heartland, said Parli-Training. Were that to happen, Starmer could be forced out of Downing Street by the summer, with Health Secretary Wes Streeting and Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood among the favourites to replace him.

US midterm elections are also looking pretty bleak for the incumbent Republicans. With Donald Trump’s approval ratings continuing to fall, Democrats have opened up a double-digit lead in voting intention for the congressional races in November, said the Marist Poll.

“Everywhere Republicans look, they see big political trouble,” said Axios, with poll after poll showing support among swing voters down “on just about everything Republicans do, other than fighting crime and shutting the southwest border”.

In Europe, all eyes will be on the Hungarian parliamentary election in April, where Viktor Orbán’s 16-year rule could end. Elsewhere, global research firm BMI sees a “greater likelihood of victories by the centre-right/right-wing opposition” in Brazil, Colombia and Peru, “while Israel could also see a political shift”.

The opaque process to select the next UN Secretary-General also takes place over the coming year, with the successful candidate formally taking up their post on 1 January 2027. Among those already declared or expected to throw their hat in the ring is Michelle Bachelet, former president of Chile and former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Jacinda Ardern, former PM of New Zealand, and Kristalina Georgieva, managing director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Economics

Following a bumpy year in which Trump’s tariff war played havoc with trade but markets continued to post record returns driven by AI investment, the outlook for the global economy in 2026 remains “dim”.

That is the assessment of the IMF’s latest World Economic Outlook, which “makes for sobering reading”, said Love Money. Growth is forecast at 3.2% next year, with “much of the drag” stemming from “US tariffs and the wider shift towards protectionism, which is sapping international trade, undermining confidence, and rattling markets”.

Interest rates (in the US, UK and elsewhere) are expected to continue to fall, however, while fears persist that this is the year the AI bubble could finally burst. Analysis from financial services firm Wedbush, reported by Investing.com, predicts tech stocks will be “up another 20% in 2026 as this next stage of the AI Revolution hits its stride”.

“Don’t count on the AI bubble popping immediately – but don’t count it out, either,” said Mashable, with chip maker Nvidia’s next quarterly earnings report, due in January, being a key moment to watch out for.

Conflicts

Despite repeated attempts to agree an end to the war between Russia and Ukraine, fighting continues to rage in what is now Europe’s bloodiest conflict since the Second World War.

With Kremlin forces making slow but steady gains but at a terrible cost to life, the “arithmetic of attrition suggests that 2026 will bring either glacial progress, a conflict frozen from exhaustion, or some sort of deal”, said The Economist. “Two other scenarios are possible: a Ukrainian frontline or political collapse, aided by Kremlin subversion; or Russia’s economy buckling as aerial attacks shut down its oil industry”, but “either of the two would have massive consequences for Europe, and the world”.

Other conflict hotspots include India/Pakistan following a deadly skirmish in 2025, Congo/Rwanda, and the ongoing civil war in Sudan. Tensions are mounting between China and Taiwan, although 2027 is seen as the more likely date for an invasion as it marks the centenary of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army.

Donald Trump continues to threaten conflict against Venezuela but if he is persuaded to back down, manages to maintain the Gaza ceasefire and negotiates an end to the war in Ukraine, he could be in the running for next year’s Nobel Peace Prize announced in October.

On the pitch and out of this world

Fresh from winning the inaugural Fifa Peace Prize, Trump will be looking to use the 2026 men’s football World Cup – this year jointly hosted by the US, Canada and Mexico – to push his Maga agenda even further.

Sixteen venues across the continent will host the biggest-ever edition of the tournament, with the number of teams increasing from 32 to 48 and the tally of games upped from 64 to 104. While it is still six months until the first ball is kicked, sports statistics platform Opta Analyst has crunched the numbers and predicted that Euro 2024 champions Spain are the most likely to win the Jules Rimet trophy, followed by France, England, Argentina and Germany.

Before that, there is the small matter of the Milan-Cortina Winter Olympics taking place in February.

A little further from home, the Nasa-led Artemis II mission will attempt the first manned orbit of the Moon in over half a century. The four-person crew will embark on a 10-day flight to “explore the Moon for scientific discovery, economic benefits, and to build the foundation for the first crewed missions to Mars”, said the BBC Sky at Night Magazine.

Originally planned for April 2026, the mission could now launch as early as 5 February. And while it “won’t land on the lunar surface” it will take astronauts 5,000 nautical miles past the Moon and “further into space than any human has gone before”.

The outgoing year was a mixed one in the fight against global warming. While some countries, including the UK, continued to make positive steps towards net zero, the return of Donald Trump to the White House exacerbated an already fraying international climate consensus. But a series of scientific breakthroughs in 2025 holds out some hope for a greener future. Here are seven of the most promising:

Carbon dioxide satellite tracking

A novel satellite-based method to track fossil fuel CO2 emissions with greater precision than ever before marks a “significant advancement for climate monitoring”, said Open Access Government. “Traditional methods” such as “ground-based measurements and bottom-up inventories, are often resource-intensive and prone to inaccuracies”.

Researchers at Tsinghua University used nitrogen dioxide – which has a shorter atmospheric lifetime and enhanced detectability – as a “proxy” for CO₂, to successfully trial a “more reliable and scalable solution for monitoring emissions”.

Automated food waste upcycling

AI-powered food waste management uses real-time data and predictive analytics to monitor, categorise, and reduce food waste. Food scraps can effectively be upcycled into resources for “composting and biogas systems”, said The Sweaty Penguin environmental podcast.

One of the 10 environmental tech breakthroughs for 2025 compiled by the World Economic Forum and published in science journal Frontiers, this technology can also support “nutrient cycling” by enabling food waste to be returned to soil systems. Automated waste sorting can also “separate food waste from plastic waste, reducing plastics and organics going into landfills, producing quality compost for agriculture, while helping slash methane, CO2 and nitrous oxide emissions”.

Gene variant protects rice from rising temperatures

After more than 10 years, Chinese researchers led by plant geneticist Yibo Li of Huazhong Agricultural University have discovered a naturally occurring gene variant that can preserve both the yield and quality of rice from excessive heat. Rising temperatures are a “major and growing threat to rice production”, said Science, citing a 2004 study that found yields fell by 10% for every degree Celsius average night-time air temperature rose.

The impact of this “major breakthrough” could “ultimately be even broader than rice” as the same gene variant can be found in other cereals, such as wheat and corn, that are at a similar risk from heat, said Argelia Lorence, a plant biochemist at Arkansas State University.

Sodium batteries make electric flight possible

The sodium-air fuel cell – designed by a team led by Yet-Ming Chiang, a professor of materials science and engineering at MIT – works by combining liquid sodium with oxygen drawn from the air in a continuous reaction. The device is “based on well-established electrochemical principles”, said The Times, but “unlike conventional batteries, which must be recharged, it is designed to be refuelled, with its energy-rich material being replaced as it is consumed”.

While still in the experimental stage, sodium batteries could eventually lead to electric-powered flight which is more sustainable and much cheaper even than non-petroleum aviation fuel. In laboratory tests, the MIT sodium-air fuel cell prototype delivered more than five times as much energy per kilogram as the lithium-ion batteries currently used in electric cars. It also produces sodium hydroxide as a by-product which could be used to absorb CO2 from the atmosphere or turned into sodium bicarbonate which could help de-acidify the ocean, a problem caused by carbon emissions. It is an “essentially free” by-product, “producing environmental benefits at no cost”, said Chiang.

Microplastic referencing

The dangers of microplastics to the environment and human health are well documented, but tracking microplastic pollution remains complicated. Now, in a world first, the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre has developed reference material to measure polyethylene terephthalate (PET) particles, commonly found in packaging and textiles, in water.

Already being used to update key EU regulations such as the revised EU Drinking Water Directive, the JRC’s reference material “lays the groundwork for coordinated global action” on microplastics, said Open Access Government.

Clean energy from toxic waste

Bio-tar – the thick liquid by-product produced when heating biomass and organic matter – has long been viewed as toxic to the environment and an unavoidable cost of renewable energy production. But new research by scientists at the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences has found that instead of being treated as waste, bio-tar can be converted into “bio-carbon”, a “novel material with applications ranging from water purification to clean energy storage”, said Science Daily.

“Turning bio-tar into bio-carbon not only solves a technical problem for the bio-energy industry, but also opens the door to producing advanced carbon materials with high economic value,” said senior author Dr Zonglu Yao.

Green concrete

Manufacturing Portland cement, the key binding ingredient in concrete, currently contributes around 8% of global CO2 emissions. The development of “novel cement-free green concrete technologies” offer an “alternative by eliminating Portland cement altogether and instead using binders derived from industrial byproducts or construction and demolition waste”, according to a World Economic Forum report.

This process “not only eliminates emissions from traditional cement production but also creates a permanent storage route for captured CO₂”. Together, these advances “cut demand for extracted raw materials and ease pressure on planetary boundaries related to climate change, land-system change, and biogeochemical flows”.

Donald Trump ramped up the pressure on President Nicolás Maduro by ordering a “total and complete” blockade of oil tankers subject to US sanctions heading to or from Venezuela. He accused Maduro’s government of using “stolen” oil to “finance themselves, drug terrorism, human trafficking, murder and kidnapping”.

Referring to the US deployment to the region of a dozen warships and more than 14,000 troops, Trump wrote that Venezuela was “completely surrounded by the largest armada ever assembled in the history of South America”.

Oil prices jumped in the wake of Trump’s blockade order, which came days after US forces had seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela. Since September, the US military has killed around 100 people in more than two dozen strikes on alleged drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean and Eastern Pacific.

Trump has also threatened to strike drug-related targets inside Venezuela. Caracas denounced his “warmongering threats” and called on oil workers to organise a worldwide protest “against the piracy of those who believe they have a licence to plunder the world’s resources”.

Drug blockades

Trump is tightening the screws on Caracas, said The Wall Street Journal – and not before time. While Maduro is accusing the US of piracy, he’s the one who “stole Venezuelan democracy” by refusing to cede power after losing the 2024 presidential election. More than eight million Venezuelans have fled his police state. Trump isn’t concerned about Maduro’s authoritarianism, said The Guardian. Nor is this about tackling drug cartels: Venezuela isn’t a big supplier of drugs to the US. Trump is driven mainly by the desire to stem refugee flows and get rid of the socialist Maduro, a long-term target.

The US blockade carries some risks, said The Washington Post. It could provoke a marine confrontation that drags the US into a land war in South America. And by reducing the regime’s main source of revenue, it could exacerbate a humanitarian crisis. Still, it’s a more “legally defensible” strategy than the US air strikes on alleged drug smugglers. Given that about 80% of Venezuela’s oil is sold on the black market, and that most tankers stopping there are sanctioned, Trump “can argue that he’s merely stepping up enforcement”. His first-term effort to oust Maduro failed because “his attention drifted”. Will he stay the course this time?

Squeezing Venezuela’s oil trade

Maduro is vulnerable, said Andrew Neil in the Daily Mail. Venezuela has the world’s largest-known oil reserves and used to be one of the region’s richest countries. But more than 25 years of hard-left rule, initially under Hugo Chávez and then his protégé Maduro, have driven it to ruin. Its poverty rate is now about 80%. People talk about the danger of civil war if Maduro is ousted, but this isn’t a divided country. Nobel Prize-winner María Corina Machado would have coasted to victory had she not been barred from standing in last year’s election. In a recent poll, nine out of 10 Venezuelans said they believed that the man who won that vote by a landslide – Machado’s chosen candidate, Edmundo Gonzáles – is their rightful president.

Trump is hoping that his “drip-drip pressure campaign” can bring about a coup without the need for direct US military force, said Tom Rogan in the Washington Examiner. US navy jets are wearing down Venezuelan defence units by forcing them to remain at a state of high readiness, and CIA assets inside the country are no doubt encouraging top officials to move against Maduro. It’s the right approach. If Maduro is ousted, there’s a good chance that there will be an insurgency involving narco-traffickers and at least some unreconciled elements of the old regime. Given Venezuela’s “abundance of deep jungles and sprawling favelas”, the US doesn’t want to get entangled in any counter-insurgency campaign.

Trump is squeezing Venezuela’s oil trade, said Keith Johnson in Foreign Policy. Activity in its ports has sharply reduced and multiple inbound tankers have turned around mid-voyage in recent days. Some oil is still flowing, said a report in the Financial Times. US-based Chevron, which accounts for about a quarter of Venezuela’s oil production, still has a licence to sell oil; tankers not included in the US’ expanding list of sanctioned vessels can still ply their trade. If the US keeps tightening the noose, though, it will create enormous difficulties for Maduro’s regime. “But given that the ‘Bolivarian Revolution’ started by Chávez has survived for a quarter of a century, few are willing to bet on the Venezuelan regime collapsing” without direct US military action.

Lack of storage capacity

Trump says the US military build-up will continue until Caracas returns “all of the oil, land and other assets they previously stole from us”. Under Chávez, Venezuela expropriated assets belonging to US oil companies. Trump hasn’t given any further details about how the US blockade on sanctioned tankers will be enforced.

Until recently Venezuela produced about 0.8% of global crude oil output, exporting some 900,000 barrels a day. Most of this ended up in China. Last week, Venezuela’s state oil company, PDVSA, said that crude exports were “continuing as normal”, but experts believe it will soon have to halt production owing to a lack of storage capacity.

Australia’s government announced plans to strengthen the country’s gun control laws, following Sunday’s terrorist attack at Bondi Beach, in Sydney.

In the 20-minute rampage, a father and son opened fire on a crowd of about 1,000 people who had gathered to celebrate the first day of the Jewish festival of Hanukkah. The father, Sajid Akram, 50, had licences for six firearms, the number recovered at the scene. He was shot dead by police; his son, Naveed Akram, 24, was arrested and taken to hospital. They appear to have been inspired by Islamic State.

The victims of the attack – Australia’s deadliest mass shooting since 1996 – included two rabbis, a Holocaust survivor and a ten-year-old girl. Many more might have died had it not been for the heroism of a bystander, Ahmed al-Ahmed, who crept up behind Sajid Akram and seized his rifle. This week, the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, announced extra funding for measures to protect the country’s Jewish community.

‘Indelibly stained with tragedy’

This attack on ordinary Jewish people, as they marked the first night of the “Festival of Lights”, was shocking in its malevolence, said The Australian. Bondi is home to many of Australia’s 117,000 Jews; the beach is also a place where people from all creeds and backgrounds congregate. Now, it will be “indelibly stained with tragedy”.

Australia ranks as one of the world’s safest nations, said The Independent. Its gun laws – tightened after the mass shooting in Tasmania 29 years ago – are already among the strictest anywhere. If Jews aren’t safe there, they may now reasonably ask “where in the world they can be safe”.

Australia’s government has suggested that the shooters “weren’t part of a wider cell”, said The Sydney Morning Herald. But the discovery of Islamic State flags in their car, and the revelation that the two men had recently travelled to the Philippines, parts of which are rife with “Islamic extremism”, may be telling.

In 2019, the younger man was actually investigated by Australia’s security services, owing to his links to Islamic State members, said The Times. But he was deemed not to be a threat – an assessment that has “proven to be tragically flawed”.

The global surge in antisemitism

There was a celebratory atmosphere at Bondi on Sunday, said The Economist. “Children wearing face paint crowded a petting zoo. Families held balloons and bubble wands.” Yet as the sun began to dip, two men armed with long-barrelled rifles began firing from a footbridge into the crowd; and the death toll could have been even higher, had they detonated the improvised explosives later found in their car.

It was an appalling tragedy, made worse by its predictability, said Limor Simhony Philpott on UnHerd. Australia’s Jewish community has endured a five-fold surge in antisemitic incidents since the start of the war in Gaza in October 2023. Jewish schools, synagogues and homes have been firebombed; protesters have chanted “Fuck the Jews” outside the Sydney Opera House. In the summer, Australia’s government kicked out Iran’s ambassador, after accusing Tehran of orchestrating antisemitic attacks on its soil. But it has done little else to curb antisemitism. Instead it has alienated Israel, its former ally, by making the misguided decision to join the UK and others in recognising a Palestinian state.

This attack reflects a broader crisis for the world’s Jewish population, said Jonathan Sacerdoti in The Spectator. In the past two years, there have been murderous attacks on Jews on five continents. This summer, there were two in cities in the US, and on Yom Kippur in October, two people were killed in the attack on the Heaton Park synagogue in Manchester.

When it comes to antisemitic terror, violent words can lead to violent actions, said Dave Rich in The Guardian: hence the anger felt by many Jews when they see banners at pro-Palestine marches demanding an “Intifada revolution” or bearing Hamas symbols.

The frightening reality, said Daniel Finkelstein in The Times, is that calls to “Globalise the intifada” and the like have made Jews the target of “warped killers” who think that, by unleashing terror, they are “doing the world a favour”. I will carry on lighting candles in the days ahead, and singing the Hanukkah songs. “But I admit that this year, for the first time in my life, I do feel just a little fear as I do it.”

Reform UK has received a record £9 million donation from Christopher Harborne, a British-Thai cryptocurrency mogul, according to the latest quarterly declarations to the Electoral Commission.

It’s the largest-ever single donation by a living person to a British political party. News of the gift comes at a time when Reform is leading in the national polls, but has been forced onto the defensive over a series of other, less welcome, stories.

‘Toxic’ and ‘divisive’

Last week Nigel Farage denounced what he called “a false story” in the Financial Times, which reported that he had told donors that he expected “a deal or merger” between his party and the Tories ahead of the next general election. “The idea I’d work with them is ludicrous,” he said. Reform also faced more questions about Farage’s alleged behaviour at school.

Twenty-eight former pupils and teachers now claim to have witnessed racist or antisemitic behaviour by him at Dulwich College in south London. Richard Tice, Reform’s deputy leader, said Farage’s accusers were peddling “made up twaddle”.

Farage has admitted that he was “offensive” at school, but insists he never made comments “with malice”. He angrily accused the BBC of “double standards and hypocrisy”, saying it should apologise for all the politically incorrect programmes it broadcast during the same era, such as “The Black and White Minstrel Show” and “It Ain’t Half Hot Mum”.

Farage faced separate accusations of racism last week over a campaign video in which he lamented the “cultural smashing of Glasgow”, citing the recent finding that nearly one in three school pupils in the city speak English as a second language. The comment prompted Keir Starmer to call Farage a “toxic, divisive disgrace”.

This week, it emerged that Farage had been reported to the police over claims of falsified election expenses. A former member of his campaign team, Richard Everett, says the Reform leader exceeded the £20,660 local election spending limit during his successful bid for the Clacton constituency last year by about £9,000, because some costs – including the refurbishment of a Reform-themed bar in the campaign office, and the loan of an armoured Land Rover used in a rally – weren’t declared. A Reform UK spokesman denied any wrongdoing.

This article appeared in History of War magazine issue 153.

In September 2025 President Donald Trump signed an executive order renaming the Department of Defense to the 'Department of War', reverting to the original name established during the Revolutionary War. While such a change would officially require Congressional approval, the president cited a tradition of military strength and preparedness as essential to US national security.

"The Founders chose this name to signal our strength and resolve to the world," the order declared. "The name 'Department of War', more than the current 'Department of Defense', ensures peace through strength as it demonstrates our ability and willingness to fight and win wars on behalf of our nation at a moment's notice, not just to defend."

The department originally underwent a rebrand during a radical reorganisation of the US military after the end of the Second World War.

As the free world continued to count the cost the war, the most devastating armed conflict in human history, and the early vestiges of the Cold War loomed, President Harry Truman told the American people of his intent to reshape the US military establishment.

In the autumn of 1945 he declared: "I stated that I would communicate with Congress from time to time during the current session with respect to a comprehensive and continuous program of national security. I pointed out the necessity of making timely preparation for the nation's long-range security now – while we are still mindful of what it has cost us in this war to be unprepared."

Among Truman's priorities were a reorganisation of the American armed forces hierarchy to achieve efficiency, co-ordination and unity of command while reinforcing the venerable concept of civilian control of the military.

In December 1945, Truman added: "I recommend that the Congress adopt legislation combining the War and Navy Departments into one single Department of National Defense. Such unification is another essential step – along with universal training – in the development of a comprehensive and continuous program for our future safety and for the peace and security of the world."

The National Security Act of 1947 did in fact create the National Military Establishment (NME) with a framework that separated the US Air Force from control of the US Army and established the position of Secretary of Defense.

This new cabinet post would ostensibly supervise the subordinate offices of the individual branch secretaries. The incumbent was required to be a civilian or to have been retired from the military for at least ten years. This second proviso was later modified to seven years.

Another significant component of the 1947 act was the establishment of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, composed of high-ranking military officers, the Central Intelligence Agency (preceded by the Office of Strategic Services, or OSS) and the National Security Council, an advisory body for the president in consideration of domestic, foreign and military policy.

Two years later the NME was formally renamed the Department of Defense. The entire executive initiative had been prompted not only by the command challenges of the Second World War but also in preparation for a potential war with the Soviet Union. Truman's perspective demanded an enhanced national military preparedness and response capability.

While the change of designation from War Department to National Military Establishment and then Department of Defense might be construed at first glance as an effort to quell the connotation of belligerence held with the word 'war', it was in fact necessary to differentiate the new structure from the previous alignment that had endured in various iterations since the 18th century.

Some sources claim that the change from NME to Department of Defense was necessary to eliminate the negative sound when the acronym was pronounced aloud. It simply sounded too much like 'enemy'.

The War Department had been created on 7 August 1789 during the first session of the Congress in the administration of President George Washington. Its purpose was clear: replacing the Board of War and Ordnance that had been created in the midst of the American Revolution in 1776.

The War Department was initially also known as the War Office in a nod to the British influence in North America. The fledgling US Navy was given a separate cabinet post in 1798 and encompassed the command of the US Marine Corps.

Therefore the National Security Act of 1947 effectively separated the Department of the Army from the Department of War and created the Department of the Air Force as a separate branch of the military.

The amended National Security Act, which Truman signed on 10 August 1949, brought the secretaries of the Army, Navy and Air Force directly under the Secretary of Defense and established the post of chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The president explained that the revisions constituted a "unification… increased efficiency and economy and greater coordination of our military forces".

In fact, some observers conclude that the comprehensive restructuring fostered an unprecedented era of inter-service rivalry as exemplified in the competition between the Air Force and Navy as the primary custodian and potential deliverer of the American nuclear weapons arsenal during the burgeoning years of the Cold War.

However, such a rivalry may well have been unavoidable and the effectiveness of the realignment remains the subject of debate as it continues to function today.

This article originally appeared in History of War magazine issue 153. Click here to subscribe to the magazine and save on the cover price!

The Tory leader, Kemi Badenoch, accused Rachel Reeves of lying to the public so that she could fund increased welfare spending with tax rises in last week’s Budget. Reeves faced calls from the Conservatives, the SNP and Reform UK for her resignation.

In a speech on 4 November, the chancellor had raised expectations of tax rises by warning that the UK’s productivity was weaker “than previously thought”, and that this would have consequences for the public finances. But it emerged last Friday that the Office for Budget Responsibility had told the Treasury on 31 October that the downgrade in productivity would be offset by larger tax revenues from higher wages, meaning that Reeves was actually on course to meet her fiscal targets with £4.2 billion to spare.

Downing Street rallied to Reeves’s defence, insisting that there had been “no attempt to deceive in any form”. She also denied the charge, arguing that she had needed to put up taxes to increase her buffer against unexpected costs. On Monday, the OBR’s chair, Richard Hughes, resigned over his organisation’s accidental early publication of its analysis of the Budget.

Reeves is guilty of “staggering mendacity”, said The Daily Telegraph. In the run-up to the Budget, she spun a “tale of doom and gloom” while neglecting to mention the OBR’s forecast about tax revenues. There was no urgent need to raise £26 billion in taxes; she just pretended there was so that she could buy off Labour MPs with an extra £16 billion in welfare spending. It’s outrageous that the OBR chief Richard Hughes had to resign after this “Budget fiasco”, rather than Reeves, said the Daily Mail. Polling shows that Labour is now even less trusted with the public purse than the Tories were under Liz Truss. If the chancellor “had an ounce of honour”, she’d stand down.

“Liar” is a strong word, said The Independent, and not one that can be fairly applied to Reeves in this case. While she could have been more transparent and perhaps overdid “the gloom”, she didn’t utter any falsehoods. What’s more, Reeves was right to point out that she needed to increase her fiscal headroom, and that the OBR’s £4.2 billion surplus didn’t take account of U-turns on the winter fuel allowance and disability benefits. A more valid charge against the Budget is that the combination of tax hikes and higher welfare spending is “not what Labour said it would do, nor was elected to do last year”.

Much has been made of convicted child sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s alleged ties to Donald Trump, but the president is only one of numerous people with connections to the disgraced financier. The latest revelations, courtesy of a massive batch of Epstein’s emails released by the House Oversight Committee, show that many famous public figures had significant ties to Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019.

While these communications do not necessarily prove guilt, they have raised more questions as the Epstein scandal continues to brew. Notably, all of these email exchanges “took place years after Epstein became a registered sex offender in 2008,” said USA Today.

Lawrence ‘Larry’ Summers

Summers, a former Treasury secretary during the Clinton administration who was also once president of Harvard University, was shown to have corresponded with Epstein over at least seven years. While it was previously reported that the men knew each other, the emails “indicate the two met for dinner frequently, with Epstein often trying to connect Summers to prominent global figures,” said BBC News.

Summers, a Democrat, largely used the email communications to criticize Trump’s agenda but also talked to Epstein about nonpolitical issues. On one occasion, he “appeared to seek advice from Epstein about a romantic relationship he was interested in initiating with a female economist,” said USA Today. After the emails were made public, Summers announced he was stepping back from most of his public positions, including resigning from the board of OpenAI and his professorship at Harvard. “I am deeply ashamed of my actions and recognize the pain they have caused,” Summers said to The Harvard Crimson.

Steve Bannon

Presidential adviser-turned-MAGA-influencer Steve Bannon was found to have been “workshopping legal and media strategies to protect Epstein from the legal and publicity quagmire that enveloped him in the last year of his life,” said The Guardian. Bannon, who served in Trump’s administration during his first term, was “devising responses to the gathering storm of public outrage about Epstein’s criminal history” in an effort to help Epstein craft a defense. Both of the men were also “strategizing how best to promote Bannon’s right-wing populist agenda and the political fortunes of its standard bearer, Donald Trump.”

There was also evidence that Bannon used Epstein to strengthen his ties with global figures. In one notable exchange from 2018, Epstein emailed Bannon to let him know “‘there are many leaders of countries we can organize for you to have one-on-ones’ with if Bannon agreed to spend eight to 10 days in Europe,” said Politico. In at least one email, Bannon, who has declined to comment on the relationship, also refers to Epstein as an “amazing assistant.”

Noam Chomsky

Like Summers, famed linguistics professor Noam Chomsky was known to have had a relationship with Epstein. When asked about the pair’s relationship in 2023, Chomsky told The Wall Street Journal his “first response is that it is none of your business. Or anyone’s. Second is that I knew him, and we met occasionally.” However, the new emails reveal that the pair’s relationship may have been more involved than previously thought. This is part of a new light that is being cast on Epstein’s “deep involvement with prominent scientists and scholars,” said Scientific American.

This includes allegations that the association between Chomsky and Epstein “went deeper than the occasional political and academic discussions the former had previously claimed to have with the latter,” said The Guardian. This includes being close enough to discuss potential vacation plans. Chomsky also “reportedly acknowledged receiving about $270,000 from an account linked to Epstein while sorting the disbursement of common funds,” though the 96-year-old has maintained that none of the money came directly from Epstein himself.

Kathryn Ruemmler

Another politically adjacent name who moved to the private sector, Kathryn Ruemmler was White House general counsel during the Obama administration before taking a job as the top lawyer for investment bank Goldman Sachs. When Ruemmler “needed to vent about Donald Trump’s rise in politics, she turned to their mutual acquaintance Jeffrey Epstein,” said Business Insider.

As with other Epstein associates, the new emails “suggest a deeper relationship between Ruemmler and Epstein than was previously known,” said Business Insider. Ruemmler “confided in Epstein when a rival law firm tried to poach her, when looking for a New York City apartment and when she was being vetted for consideration as attorney general.” Goldman Sachs has stood by Ruemmler as this information has come out. These emails “were private correspondence well before Kathy Ruemmler joined Goldman Sachs,” a spokesperson for the bank told CNBC. Ruemmler herself told The Wall Street Journal in 2023, “I regret ever knowing Jeffrey Epstein.”

Peter Thiel

While Peter Thiel is best known as the cofounder of PayPal and technology company Palantir, the billionaire has found himself ingrained in conservative politics through his association with figures like Vice President JD Vance. But the new emails show that Thiel may have had a close relationship with Epstein as well. In at least one instance, Epstein appeared to invite Thiel to his private Caribbean island, writing, “Dec visit me Caribbean.”

This island “near St. Thomas in the Caribbean has long been the subject of speculation about which possible conspirators may have visited the island, which Epstein allegedly used to conceal his criminal behavior,” said Politico. Epstein also previously “put $40 million into two funds managed by Valar Ventures, a New York firm that was cofounded by Mr. Thiel,” said The New York Times. Thiel has said he never visited Epstein’s island and has denied any wrongdoing.

Peggy Siegal

Peggy Siegal is one of the most recognizable entertainment publicists and has spent decades crafting a media empire. But she has also generated a fair share of controversy due to her “longtime association with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein,” said The Hollywood Reporter in 2019. Siegal reportedly “helped facilitate Epstein’s return to elite social circles after his conviction through private gatherings she organized at his Upper East Side home.”

But the recent tranche of emails reveals that Siegal and Epstein may have had a closer relationship than many previously believed. In at least one newly revealed email, Epstein wrote to Siegal “with an ask: Could she reach out to media mogul Arianna Huffington to enlist her help in clearing his name?” said Politico. Epstein also asked Siegal if Huffington, the cofounder of HuffPost, could send reporters to investigate one of his most notable accusers, Virginia Giuffre. Siegal “offered to send the message to Huffington on her own behalf if Epstein fixed the grammar,” but both Siegal and Huffington have said nothing ever came of the request.

After days of frantic diplomacy, Donald Trump claimed this week that his negotiators had made “tremendous progress” towards ending the Ukraine War. The Ukrainian leadership indicated that it had accepted the “core terms” of a US-backed peace plan – and Trump said that his envoy, Steve Witkoff, would be dispatched to the Kremlin for talks with Vladimir Putin next week. However, significant doubts remained, both about the exact terms of the deal, and about Russia’s position. On Wednesday, Russian officials indicated that the deal was not acceptable.

Last week, Trump had piled great pressure on Kyiv to sign up to a 28-point plan that the US had drawn up following Witkoff’s talks with Russian envoys in Miami. That proposal echoed Moscow’s maximalist war aims, by calling for Kyiv to cede the rest of the Donbas region, and to limit its army to 600,000 personnel. It caused alarm among Ukraine’s European allies, whose 19-point counter-proposal is believed to form the basis of the deal Kyiv later accepted.

Pro-Russia bias

Effectively, the US-Russia peace plan amounted to a demand for Ukraine’s “outright surrender”, said The Times. It would have handed over Ukraine’s “fortress belt” in the Donbas, which it has spent years defending, and denied it meaningful security guarantees. If Zelenskyy had bowed to Trump’s ultimatum to agree to its terms by Thanksgiving, 27 November, or lose access to US weapons and intelligence, he’d surely have had to resign.

This peace plan was reportedly leaked by Moscow, said The Economist – and AI analysis suggests it was translated from the original Russian. Either way, it again “betrayed” Trump’s pro-Russia bias, and his indifference to Ukraine; as did his dismissive suggestion that Zelenskyy can “fight his little heart out” if no deal is struck, and his grousing on social media that “UKRAINE ‘LEADERSHIP’ HAS EXPRESSED ZERO GRATITUDE FOR OUR EFFORTS.”

Sobering question

There was a “grim familiarity” to events last week, said The Guardian. As in August, when Trump hosted Putin in Alaska, Kyiv and its European allies had been excluded from talks which would decide their future, and were left scrambling to improve a Moscow-friendly deal.

Europe’s leaders were confronted with a sobering question, said Michael D. Shear in The New York Times: was the US about to force Ukraine to “capitulate”, to the detriment of Nato and the benefit of Putin – “all without even bothering to consult with them”? It looked that way for a while; but by Tuesday, the crisis had been averted by European leaders who have honed their “how-to-handle-Trump playbook” during a year of similar episodes. Rather than lashing out, they “embraced” the plan to keep Trump onside, while insisting that it was only a starting point for negotiations. “The goal was to slow the process and eliminate some of the provisions they saw as crossing Europe’s red lines.”

The Europeans succeeded in shrinking the 28-point plan to 19 points, said Roger Boyes in The Times. But several of Russia’s key demands remained: no Western military presence in Ukraine, no Nato membership. And the fundamental questions – how to divide the land, and security guarantees against future invasions – remained apparently unresolved. As usual with Trump’s “drive-by diplomacy”, nothing adds up.

‘Miserable choice’

With the knotty questions about territory yet to be resolved, Russia is “trying to pour cold water on the prospects of an imminent peace breakthrough”, said Samuel Ramani in The Daily Telegraph. It continues to bombard Ukrainian cities; its officials have dismissed the new proposals as “not constructive”.

For Kyiv, the risk now is that Putin will talk Trump into backing favourable terms for Russia, said Tim Ross et al in Politico. That would leave Zelenskyy with a “miserable choice”: either take an offer “cooked up by Trump and Putin”, or hope that his European allies finally make good on their bold promises of help.

Sooner or later, though, he’ll have to make a deal, said Gideon Rachman in the FT. During four years of war, Ukraine has sustained hundreds of thousands of casualties. Millions of its citizens have fled abroad, and its economy lies in ruins. A bad settlement could imperil its future as a “genuinely independent” nation. But make no mistake: “the continuation of the war is also deeply damaging to Ukraine”.

This article appeared in History of War magazine issue 152.

CIA analysts gathered around U-2 spy plane photographs taken of Cuban military facilities. With horror, they realised they had just discovered Soviet medium-range and intermediate-range nuclear missiles – weapons that were capable of targeting most of the continental US.

The next morning, National Security Advisor McGeorge Bundy briefed President John F Kennedy. A naval quarantine of Cuba, and the closest the world has ever come to all-out nuclear conflict, followed.

The Cold War pivoted on the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. The USA and the Soviet Union looked into the terrifying void and decided to collaborate on limiting horizontal (the number of nations with access to nuclear weapons) and vertical (the size of nuclear powers’ arsenals) proliferation.

International agreements followed, including the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks, gradually bringing the world closer to safety. However, Serhii Plokhy, Cold War historian and author of The Nuclear Age, told History of War that our contemporary nuclear age has become significantly more dangerous.

“None of these treaties have continued. We are back to where we were before the Cuban Missile Crisis.” he explains. “We have entered the second nuclear arms race, and it’s more dangerous than the 1950s, because there are more players and no regulations in place.”

In the past, nuclear powers have pondered using force to limit proliferation. Advisers in Kennedy’s administration considered using covert special operations deployments to stop China from acquiring nuclear weapons.

This planning has escalated to deadly action in the post-Cold War nuclear age, including the invasion of Iraq and US strikes against Iran’s nuclear facilities in 2025.

Yet the main danger may not lie in the proliferation of nuclear weapons to other nations. “Today, we think that the world will end if Iran acquires nuclear weapons,” says Plokhy.

“We have been in Iran-type moments in history many times, and the world didn’t come to an end because there was no monopoly on the use of nuclear weapons. Whatever country acquires them exists in a world with other players that are much more powerful.”

The proliferation of nuclear weapons to other nations has diluted the nuclear monopoly, an essential condition for mutually assured destruction, but that alone has not made the world safer.

Plokhy explains: “The balance of nuclear weapons continues between the U.S. and Russia, who are the nuclear superpowers more than three decades after the Cold War, but the balance of fear has disappeared.

During the Cold War, countries that had nuclear weapons were equally as concerned about the dangers of nuclear conflict. However, “Russia behaves as if it’s the only country with nuclear weapons,” Plokhy explains.

Vladimir Putin appears to have lost his fear of nuclear destruction because economic weakness has backed him into a corner; Russia has not yet fully recovered economically from the collapse of the Soviet Union.

“There is an enormous imbalance between the economic and nuclear power of Russia,” says Plokhy. “Nuclear power has become the only card they can play in the global arena and during the Russo-Ukrainian war.” Other nuclear powers have recently taken actions to assert their nuclear readiness, which could lead to a resurgence of Russian fears.

Plokhy indicates that the West also needs to show conventional military readiness: “If Russian drones attack NATO countries and NATO countries don’t send their drones into Russia, that causes a problem with the balance of fear. Russia is not the only country that can send drones into the territory of other states.”

As nuclear powers seek to return to a safe world, Plokhy positions the Cold War not as a “horribly dangerous period in international relations”, but as a “success story” from which “new generations can relearn the lessons that helped their grandparents to survive”.

He explains: “If we look at the Cold War through that perspective, we can ask questions like: ‘Was it just luck that we survived, or did we do something right?’ One of the things that was done right was the balance of fear necessary for equilibrium in international relations.”

Plokhy makes it clear that regenerating the right kind of nuclear terror can make the world a safer place. Whether that will happen before another event like the Cuban Missile Crisis brings the world back to the brink remains to be seen.

This article originally appeared in History of War magazine issue 152. Click here to subscribe to the magazine and save on the cover price!

The biological world is always expanding as research is constantly being done. Because of this, many findings often fall under the radar despite having the potential to change the world. Here are some of the most groundbreaking discoveries in biology from the past year.

Slowing Huntington’s disease

Scientists have found a way to slow the progress of Huntington’s disease, a deadly neurodegenerative disorder, by 75%. The disease is largely hereditary and causes a gradual decline in mental and physical functions. Until now, there have been very minimal treatment options.

The new gene therapy treatment, called AMT-130, is “delivered deep into the brain during an eight- to 10-hour surgery,” said Scientific American. A “safe virus” that has been genetically altered to contain a specific DNA sequence is “infused,” where it “acts like a microscopic postman” by “delivering the new piece of DNA inside brain cells,” said the BBC. The treatment “turns the neurons into a factory for making the therapy to avert their own death.” AMT-130 is still in clinical trials and not yet widely available. “We’ve had so many failures, and there’s been a lot of heartbreak over many years in this community,” neurologist Victor Sung said to Scientific American. “So to have something that at least really appears to be having [an] impact is really significant.”

Understanding cell mechanisms

Researchers may be able to see what proteins are doing inside cells more accurately, according to a study published in the journal Nature Communications. The new method uses “natural proteins produced by a cell as tiny sensors to report on their environment and interactions,” said an article by Cornell University. It does so “without traditional invasive techniques that could interfere with a cell’s normal biology and skew research results.” The scientists were able to track flavoproteins, which are in many organisms and contain magnetic properties that can be detected using a technique called electron spin resonance spectroscopy.

Being able to understand the cell’s internal functions is “mainly useful for understanding new biological mechanisms, such as those that could be involved in disease states like cancer or during infection,” Brian Crane, a professor in Cornell’s Department of Chemistry and the author of the study, said in the article. “One could conceivably track the assembly of a virus using this method to understand how and where its components are built within cells.”

Kangaroo IVF

Scientists, in a hopping success, were able to produce the world’s first kangaroo embryo using IVF. This could be a significant step toward protecting endangered species in Australia. The researchers “assessed how kangaroo eggs and sperm developed in a laboratory, before injecting a single sperm directly into a mature egg, using a technique known as intracytoplasmic sperm injection,” said CNN.

While the eastern grey kangaroo is not endangered, other marsupial species are. “Our ultimate goal is to support the preservation of endangered marsupial species like koalas, Tasmanian devils, northern hairy-nosed wombats and Leadbeater’s possums,” Andres Gambini, who led the research, said to CNN. Australia has a higher extinction rate than any other continent on Earth in recent history, largely because many species are endemic to the region.

Oldest microbial DNA

Researchers “sequenced the DNA of various mammoths — including 440 that had never been sequenced or published before,” as well as “identified DNA from 310 different microbes living on or in the animals’ tissues,” said Smithsonian Magazine. The findings were published in the journal Cell.

While much of the bacteria appeared after the mammoths’ deaths, the scientists also “identified six ‘host-associated’ microbial groups that likely colonized the mammoths when they were still alive” over one million years ago. Host microbes may have “shaped how these Ice Age herbivores digested food, resisted infections and coped with shifting climates,” said Earth.com. “The same methods could be applied to other frozen or well-preserved remains, from ancient horses to extinct cave bears.”

Virtual scientists

Future research could be done in a virtual lab, according to a study published in the journal Nature. Researchers trained AI large language models (LLM) to “mimic top-tier scientists in the same way that they think critically about a problem, research certain questions, pose different solutions based on a given area of expertise and bounce ideas off one another to develop a hypothesis worth testing,” said Stanford Medicine. This essentially led to the creation of a virtual lab, which “consists of an LLM principal investigator agent guiding a team of LLM scientist agents through a series of research meetings, with a human researcher providing high-level feedback,” said the study.

The researchers then had the “lab” devise a new vaccine basis for Covid-19. It created a method using nanobodies that was potentially viable. These types of labs could allow for research to be done quickly, especially when done in collaboration with humans. “Good science happens when we have deep, interdisciplinary collaborations where people from different backgrounds work together, and often that’s one of the main bottlenecks and challenging parts of research,” said James Zou, an associate professor of biomedical data science and lead author of the study.

Of all the scandals that have plagued Donald Trump throughout his lifetime in the public eye, his extensive and well-documented relationship with disgraced financier and sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein presents the most clear and immediate danger to the president. While Trump has long denied any wrongdoing, the public contours of his association with Epstein paint a compelling — if frustratingly incomplete — picture of two men with years of shared history. Despite the president’s repeated claims that he and Epstein were mere social acquaintances who suffered a falling out of sorts over a young woman in Trump’s former employ, the steady drip of Epstein-related material from Congress, coupled with Trump’s conspicuously ardent reactions thereof, suggest a much more robust bond.

As the president fends off a growing bipartisan push for full governmental transparency on a scandal that shows little sign of abating, here is what we know about Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein’s long, complicated friendship.

1980s

While it’s unclear exactly when and where Trump and Epstein first met , Trump in a 2002 New York magazine interview said he’d known “terrific guy” Epstein “for fifteen years,” placing their initial point of contact in the mid-to-late 1980s. This was “around the time” of Trump’s 1985 purchase of his Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach, Florida, where Epstein “was also living,” said Forbes. “In my mind,” Epstein was Trump’s “best friend, you know,” former Trump Plaza Hotel and Casinos COO Jack O’Donnell said to CNN in 2025.

1992

Trump and Epstein are filmed together during a party for a segment of Faith Daniels’ talk show, “A Closer Look,” about Trump’s life post-divorce from first wife Ivana. This “most widely circulated footage” of the pair shows the two men “evidently assessing” the women at the event, which included NFL cheerleaders in town for a game, Rolling Stone said. At one point, Trump is “seen gesturing to a woman” and tells Epstein, “Look at her, back there .… She’s hot,” NBC News said. Trump later “said something else into Epstein’s ear,” prompting the financier to “double over with laughter.”

That same year, Florida-based businessman George Houraney flew 28 women to Trump’s estate for a “Calendar Girl” competition. Aside from the women, The New York Times said, the “only guests were Mr. Trump and Jeffrey Epstein.” Describing the incident to the Times, Houraney claims he said, “Donald, this is supposed to be a party with VIPs. You’re telling me it’s you and Epstein?’”

1993-2000

Trump and Epstein’s relationship continued through the ’90s, with the pair appearing in a photograph with Trump’s children Eric and Ivanka at a Harley Davidson Cafe opening in 1993. That same year, Epstein was photographed attending Trump’s second wedding to model Marla Maples. “I wish now I took more of him with Trump,” photographer Dafydd Jones said to CNN.“I had the job of photographing the Trump wedding, so I stood with the press and photographed him.”

In the subsequent four years, Trump would fly seven times on Epstein’s infamous aircraft, according to flight logs released during the trial of accomplice sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell.

1997 also saw Trump photographed alongside Epstein at a Victoria's Secret party in New York City. In 2000, Trump, Epstein, Maxwell and soon-to-be Trump spouse Melania Knauss posed for a series of pictures together at a party at Mar-a-Lago also attended by Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former Prince of England, who was stripped of his royal titles this year for sexual abuse and his relationship with Epstein.

2000-2006

At the dawn of the new millennium, Trump and Epstein’s apparent friendship appeared to be going strong. In 2000, though, the seeds of discontent between the two patricians were planted when Virginia Giuffre, then a teenager working as a Mar-a-Lago spa attendant, was hired away from Trump by Maxwell and Epstein as a masseuse. Giuffre, one of Epstein and Maxwell’s “most well-known sex trafficking accusers,” took her own life in early 2025, The Associated Press said. While her allegations were not part of Epstein’s criminal prosecutions, she has become “central to conspiracy theories about the case.”

By 2002, however, Trump was still singing Epstein’s public praises, describing him as a person who was a “lot of fun to be with” and who “likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side,” to New York magazine.

The next year, the pair connected again for Epstein’s 50th birthday, for which Trump penned a poem written out and formatted to look like the body of a naked woman. Trump, who initially denied The Wall Street Journal’s report on the card’s existence, signed the message “Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.”

In 2004, whatever friendship existed between Trump and Epstein seems to have suffered a fatal blow when both men competed to purchase the enormous Maison de l’Amitie, an exclusive Palm Beach property that ultimately sold to Trump for more than $41 million. Two weeks after Trump obtained the property, Palm Beach police “fielded a tip that young women were seen coming and going from Epstein’s home,” said The Washington Post. Several months later, the local police received another complaint about Epstein, and by 2006 a grand jury had indicted him for solicitation.

2007

Trump finally “severed ties” entirely with Epstein in 2007, allegedly after the then-indicted financier “hit on the teenage daughter of a Mar-a-Lago member,” thereby damaging the “Trump brand of glitz and glamour,” The Miami Herald said. In 2025, Trump insisted that he’d made Epstein a persona non grata for “taking our people” from Mar-a-Lago, and has “long maintained” that his relationship with Epstein ended before the latter’s 2006 indictment, NPR said. But journalists who viewed Mar-a-Lago’s membership log said Epstein’s account at the club wasn’t closed until October 2007, “more than a year after he was indicted and released on bail,” said The Daily Beast.

2010

During a filmed deposition, Epstein is questioned about his relationship with Trump, and asked whether the pair had “socialized in the presence of females under the age of 18?” Epstein demurred from answering the question, citing his constitutional rights.

2015-2019

Now-shuttered media publication Gawker obtained and published Epstein’s infamous “black book” of contacts, as well as the passenger logs for Epstein’s private aircraft, in 2015. Mentioned alongside international notables like Mick Jagger and Prince Andrew, Trump’s name, among others, appeared circled in the book by Epstein’s (since-deceased) housekeeper, “supposedly to identify them as potential ‘material witnesses,’” Vanity Fair said.

The following year, an unidentified plaintiff using the name “Katie Johnson” sued both Trump and Epstein multiple times, alleging the pair raped her in 1994 when she was a 13-year-old aspiring model. The suits were all eventually withdrawn or dismissed, and to date, it is “still not clear who Katie Johnson was, or if she ever existed,” said the San Francisco Chronicle.

In 2019, Epstein was arrested and held on federal sex trafficking charges. In response to questions about their relationship, Trump said he “was not a fan of his” in an effort to “further distance himself from his former friend,” said Rolling Stone. One month later, Epstein would be dead from an apparent jail cell suicide that has provided fresh fuel for Epstein-associated conspiracy theories in the years since.

2019-2024

Trump was reportedly “shocked” at Epstein’s jailhouse death, and “believed conspiracy theories would inevitably follow,” said The Daily Beast. Trump had the “same reaction I did,” former Attorney General Bill Barr said to congressional investigators during a deposition in the summer of 2025. “How the hell did that happen, he’s in Federal custody?”

The following year, Trump surprised observers with an “unusual detour” to offer “warm words” for Maxwell, who had been arrested that past July, the Times said. Asked whether he thought Maxwell might publicly name names connected with Epstein, Trump said, “I haven’t really been following it too much. I just wish her well, frankly.” The remarks “renewed attention” on the Trump-Epstein relationship, the Times said, particularly after the president had “sought to distance himself from the disgraced financier.”

In 2024, just days before Trump was to win reelection, model Stacey Williams alleged that Trump had inappropriately groped and fondled her during a visit to Trump tower with Epstein, whom she was casually dating at the time. “I had this horrible pit in my stomach that it was somehow orchestrated,” Williams said in an interview with The Guardian. “I felt like a piece of meat.”

Now

Since returning to the White House for the second time, Trump has gone out of his way to portray himself as maximally transparent regarding Epstein, even as his efforts highlight the degree to which his administration seems unwilling to act accordingly. Schisms within the Justice Department over the White House's handling of the case quickly threatened to overshadow the administration’s attempts to rerelease tranches of largely-public Epstein-related material to select right-wing influencers. At the same time, the White House’s conspicuous efforts to court a now-imprisoned Maxwell, and her congruent efforts to secure favorable treatment, have only accentuated Trump’s associations with her and Epstein.

In early November of 2025, after weeks of congressional wrangling and dueling public statements, lawmakers on the House Oversight Committee released huge swaths of Epstein-related items, including evidence that the disgraced sex trafficker remained in close contact with many in Trump’s orbit long after he and the president had fallen out. In the aftermath of those revelations, both the House and Senate passed a bill to release the extent of the government’s Epstein documents, with key exceptions for protecting witnesses, issues of national security and other sensitive matters. In a post on Truth Social, Trump confirmed he’d signed the bill into law, but stressed that “Democrats have used the ‘Epstein’ issue, which affects them far more than the Republican Party, in order to try and distract from our AMAZING Victories.”

The Duke of York has been marched down the honours hill, and persuaded to give up his royal titles after continued accusations about his association with the sex abuser Jeffrey Epstein.

It is a remarkable fall from grace for the late Queen’s favourite son, who was once second in line to the throne and widely feted as a Falklands War hero. Here’s how he went from popular prince to public pariah:

1999: first meets Epstein

Andrew is introduced to Epstein by Ghislaine Maxwell. The British socialite, daughter of press baron Robert Maxwell, was Epstein's girlfriend at the time and had met Andrew when she was at university.

The trio quickly develop a “close friendship”, according to The Independent. Andrew is said to have invited the couple to Balmoral, his mother’s Scottish residence, that same year. In June 2000, Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell are guests at a party hosted by Queen Elizabeth II at Windsor Castle and, that December, Epstein joins Andrew at a shooting weekend at Sandringham, the royal family’s Norfolk estate.

2001: infamous Virginia Giuffre photo taken

According to Virginia Giuffre, then known as Virginia Roberts, this is when she first meets Andrew. In a lawsuit filed in 2019, she said that, after a sweaty night of dancing at London’s Tramp nightclub, Andrew had sex with her at Maxwell’s townhouse – where the now-infamous photo of the three of them was allegedly taken. On two other occasions – in Epstein’s New York flat and at an “orgy” on Epstein’s private Caribbean island – she is forced to have sex with Andrew, she alleged. At the time, she is 17, and a minor under US law.

2008: Epstein jailed for sex offences

Epstein is charged by Florida prosecutors with “soliciting prostitution” and “soliciting prostitution with a minor”. He pleads guilty, after making a controversial plea deal that gives him immunity from other federal sex abuse charges, and is sentenced to 18 months in prison.

2010: Epstein released

Shortly after Epstein’s release from prison, Andrew is photographed walking with him in New York’s Central Park. Andrew later claimed his sole purpose in meeting Epstein then was to end their friendship.

2015-2016: Andrew linked to Epstein in court documents

In 2015, Buckingham Palace denies “any suggestion of impropriety with underage minors” on the part of the prince, after he was named in US court papers related to an Epstein legal case.

A year later, Andrew is again named as part of a defamation suit brought by Giuffre against Maxwell, with Giuffre claiming she was paid $15,000 (£11,180) to have sex with the prince. But these court documents are sealed, and not released until 2019.

2019: Epstein dies; Newsnight interview

In August, the court documents from the Giuffre v Maxwell case are unsealed on public interest grounds. The next day, Epstein is found dead in the New York jail cell where he had been awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. He has apparently committed suicide.

In November, Andrew gives a wide-ranging interview with BBC Newsnight’s Emily Maitlis. He says he has "no recollection" of ever meeting Giuffre, and could not have sex with her in March 2001 because he was at Pizza Express with his daughter on the day in question. He also refutes Giuffre’s description of him sweating while dancing because, he said, he has been unable to sweat since serving in the Falklands War.

The interview is widely seen as disastrous. Four days later, Andrew announces that he will be stepping back from public duties,

2021-2022: Giuffre sues; royal status downgraded

In August 2021, Giuffre files a civil suit against Andrew in the US, alleging that she was forced to have sex with him in the early 2000s. Andrew’s status as a member of the royal family is downgraded in early 2022, after a US judge rules that the case can go ahead. Andrew is stripped of his military affiliations, his royal patronages and the use of his HRH title, after more than 150 veterans write to the Queen.

In February, Andrew settles the civil case brought against him by Giuffre with an out-of-court payment of £12 million but no apology and no admission of liability.

2025: Guiffre dies; Andrew gives up titles

In April, Giuffre dies by suicide, aged 41, at her farm in Western Australia. In a statement, her family say that “she lost her life to suicide, after being a lifelong victim of sexual abuse and sex trafficking”.

In October, the Mail on Sunday publishes a newly unearthed email proving that Andrew continued contact with Epstein after the 2010 New York meeting at which he’d claimed to end the friendship. The mail, dated 28 February 2011, says “we are in this together”. The BBC says the allegations are “intensely damaging” for the prince.

Just days later, after a “discussion” with the King and the Prince of Wales, Andrew gives up the use of his Duke of York title, as well as all his other remaining honours, including his membership of the Order of the Garter. It’s understood that he will not attend royal family events over Christmas. For the time being, he will continue living at Royal Lodge in Windsor Great Park.

In Giuffre’s memoir, published posthumously in late October, she claims that Andrew considered it “his birthright” to have sex with her. The release of the memoir adds to the “air of gloom at Buckingham Palace, which has tried to distance itself from Prince Andrew” and “heaps further pressure on the institution of monarchy”, said ITV News.

The Conservatives used their annual party conference to outline key policies they would implement if they were elected.

New economic ‘golden rule’

Kemi Badenoch’s keynote speech confirmed a new “golden rule” designed to cut government borrowing and taxes. Half of all savings in any future Tory government would go towards reducing the gap between spending and tax revenues, and the other half would fund economic policies such as tax cuts.

Stamp duty

The party will abolish the “unconservative” stamp duty tax that people pay when buying a property. The “surprise announcement” from Badenoch yesterday was “warmly welcomed” by conference attendees, said Sky News, and would be paid for by £47 billion of planned spending cuts.

Young buyers’ tax rebate

A £5,000 tax break would be offered to young people who get their first full-time job, to put the money towards a deposit on their first house. Funds would be “diverted” into a “long-term savings account”, said ITV News. But it isn’t yet clear what would happen for first-time workers “not looking to buy a home”.

Sentencing Council

Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick said the Tories would scrap the Sentencing Council, described as “not fit for purpose”, in favour of offering ministers the power to issue guidelines to English and Welsh courts. Former Tory ministers “expressed disbelief” at the plan, said The Guardian. Ex-attorney general Dominic Grieve said it was “bonkers”.

Energy bills

A future Tory government would cut energy bills by 20% by axing the carbon tax and wind farms. The party has promised the measure would save the average family £165 a year, while there are also plans to scrap Great British Energy – a Labour initiative.

Digital addiction is a broad term for unhealthy behaviors related to spending too much time on the internet, in particular when a person cannot stop these behaviors despite experiencing negative consequences. The addiction can take many forms and is becoming more common.

The basics

Digital addiction can come in many forms, including excessive interaction with social media, internet gaming, online gambling, online shopping and online pornography. As with gambling and pornography, the internet can amplify addictions by increasing accessibility. Some people can be especially vulnerable to falling into digital addiction, like “those with high levels of internet use for socialization, education and entertainment,” said Psychiatry.org.

Those who struggle with digital addiction may “compulsively” feel the urge to check notifications or need to “spend increasing amounts of time online to achieve satisfaction,” said Northwestern Medicine. They may also tend to lose track of time while on the internet and feel “restless, moody, depressed or irritable” when attempting to cut back on phone or internet usage.

Addictive by design

It is not surprising that the internet has become so addictive. After all, it was designed that way. Many social media apps use what is called the Hook Model to keep users on their apps. In this model, the app will first trigger a person to interact, like with a notification. This, in turn, will prompt someone to enter the app. Then, the app will use a variable reward system to prompt a user to remain there. “Even if users open a social media app because of a notification, they’ll likely engage with other parts of the app as they seek additional rewards,” like endless scrolling content, said ADDitude. In a vicious circle, the users will like, save and share content that gives the app’s algorithm knowledge about what keeps them hooked.

Another way websites and apps keep people hooked is through gamification, which turns internet interactions into a game. Social media is not the only area of the internet using gamifying techniques; online shopping also employs the method. The way the shopping app Temu prices and promotes products is “deliberate,” with the company “pushing the exact consumer psychology buttons necessary to keep shoppers shopping,” said the BBC. “Customers are encouraged to keep shopping with the introduction of bonuses and coupons that mimic the rewards you might accumulate in a video game.”

Population problem

While some populations use the internet more than others, digital addiction is “not limited to a specific demographic group, and it is increasing across diverse populations,” said Psychiatry.org. More than 50% of Americans believe they are addicted to their phones, and up to 60% of teens show signs of cell phone addiction, according to research from 2024. In addition, at least 10% of American social media users are addicted to it.

Teens and young adults are some of the groups most addicted to the internet, but there has also been a stark rise in addiction for baby boomers. A recent report found that approximately 50% of the mostly baby boomer–polled sample “reported spending more than three hours daily on their smartphones” and “roughly 20% spent more than five hours per day,” said Newsweek. This suggests that a “notable portion of the Baby Boomer generation exhibits patterns associated with digital addiction,” the report said.

The consequences

Digital addiction can significantly affect a person’s mental health. Excessive internet use can lead to anxiety and depression, exacerbated by the isolating nature of the addiction. It can also cause “dishonesty, anxiety, aggression and mood swings,” said the Addiction Center. Digital addiction can affect physical health as well and lead to “body aches, carpal tunnel syndrome, insomnia, vision problems and weight gain/loss.” In the worst cases, it can lead to suicide.

Teens, in particular, “may frequently fall behind on schoolwork, stay up late and fight with parents,” said ADDitude. Adults may neglect their jobs and other responsibilities in favor of spending time on the internet, which could lead to unemployment and even homelessness. Those with ADHD may also “spend more time on digital media and have more severe symptoms of problematic internet use” compared to those without the diagnosis.

AI and addiction

The rise of AI may also be exacerbating digital addiction and potentially leading to worse mental health problems. Chatbots like ChatGPT have led many to psychosis by feeding delusions and offering unsound medical advice. A new subset of digital addiction, known as AI addiction, has become prevalent. Those who identify as AI addicts tend to use AI applications for extended periods “despite attempts to control or cut back,” said Internet and Technology Addicts Anonymous. They also reported finding that their “sense of validation and emotional regulation” was tied to their use of AI models.

Still, AI may eventually lead to a decrease in digital addiction. The internet is “already so woven into every part of our lives that going cold turkey is pretty much impossible,” said The Atlantic. But the “internet’s new era may push AI skeptics to spend less time online, while another group ramps up their AI-mediated screen time.” The prevalence of AI may make people turn to the real world again, viewing it as more trustworthy. “Where going online once evoked a wide-eyed sense that the world was at our fingertips, now it requires wading into the slop like weary, hardened detectives, attempting to parse the real from the fake.”

Preventing addiction

The key to keeping internet use healthy is to establish balance, boundaries and communication, according to Psychiatry.org. Families should “consider approaches ensuring children get adequate sleep, daily physical activity, time for play and reading and discovery, time with people they care about and time to focus on learning without multitasking.”

Adults could track their screen time and try to match it to time spent off-screen. “If you have an hour online, spend an hour outside or an hour reading a book,” Lisa Strohman, a clinical psychologist and the author and founder of the Digital Citizen Academy, said to NBC News. “You want to make it at least equal to the time you’re spending on your phone.”

If you find that your internet use is affecting your life or you are unable to stop, consider addiction therapy. Therapy can “help uncover the underlying issues that may be contributing to your addictive behaviors,” said the Addiction Center. This is important if digital addiction is occurring alongside another mental illness.

Each generation develops its own dating mores, lingo and modes of operation. When two Baby Boomers were in a long-term relationship, for example, they were “going steady,” a term that seems to have no meaningful analogue today. Today’s retirees might have a particularly hard time understanding what their grandchildren are talking about, given how much contemporary dating culture is both produced and reinforced by the apps that nearly everyone uses to meet their significant other these days.

Beige flag

Everyone knows what a red flag is — maybe it’s someone who has completely lost custody of a child from a past relationship, or doesn’t exist on the Internet at all. For Gen Z, a beige flag is more innocuous. It could be someone offering a cringe or basic answer to a dating app question, or someone who owns the entire DVD set of “The Big Bang Theory.” But we should be careful not to throw too many beige flags and in the process “overlook the beauty of embracing our partners’ quirks,” said The New York Times.

Benching

Benching should be familiar to older generations as a form of “taking a break,” as in the famous Ross-and-Rachel episode of the 90s-era sitcom “Friends.” But in this case it’s unilateral — one person pressing pause on a relationship because the other “may have done something you don’t like or that has upset you” but not ending it altogether, said Essence.

Breadcrumbing

To breadcrumb someone means to give them just enough attention and communication to keep them interested in pursuing a relationship but not enough to move things forward in a meaningful way. It’s not considered a very nice thing to do because “people who have been breadcrumbed tend to feel more lonely, more helpless and less satisfied with life,” said Psychology Today.

Cuffing season

Cuffing season is the “time when many people think more deeply about romantic connections as the year winds down,” said Hinge. The term is derived from “handcuffs,” which is perhaps not the healthiest metaphor about the consequences of getting into a long-term relationship. But the idea has nevertheless taken hold with younger dating cohorts. It refers loosely to the period between Halloween and Valentine’s Day, when much of the Northern Hemisphere is cold or at least chillier than usual and when people seem to crave companionship more than usual.

Cushioning

To employ cushioning means to be dating one main person with one or more people to fall back on so you don’t get hurt. The cushion is a metaphor for a soft landing. While the technique could be employed in bad faith, it also “​​can potentially be a good thing if you’re not sure where you stand in a relationship,” said Men’s Health.

Freak matching

Are you someone who is completely obsessed with the idea that the American Deep State might be hiding a secret cache of classified information about the 1937 disappearance and presumed death of aviation pioneer Amelia Earhart? If it’s important enough to you that you seek other Earhart Truthers in a romantic partner, you’re engaging in freak matching. A recent survey showed that almost 40% of respondents have “connected with someone based on this kind of offbeat compatibility,” said Vice. Bonding over shared dislikes, on the other hand, is known as “grim keeping.”

Ghosting

To ghost someone means to disappear from a relationship abruptly, with no explanation and no effort to help the other person understand why. It’s widely considered cruel and cowardly, especially because it “can lead people to question their self-worth and value as a human being,” said The New York Times.

Groundhogging

Named after the beloved 1993 Bill Murray time-loop comedy, groundhogging means to seek out the exact same type of person in a relationship over and over again — even after repeated failures or disasters. This common behavior means that you’re “stuck somewhere between a largely unsuccessful pattern and the fear of trying something new,” said The Independent.

Ick

To give someone “the ick” is to accidentally drive them away with behavior that they find gross, off-putting or cringe. This often happens for a “reason that seems pretty innocuous,” said Parents. In the 2024 Netflix comedy “Nobody Wants This,” for example, Joanne (Kristen Bell) gets “the ick” when Noah (Adam Brody) goes way over the top in an effort to impress her Mom (Stephanie Faracy). Joanne gets over it, but not everyone does.

Kittenfishing

If “catfishing” is creating an entirely fake profile to lure someone into a relationship or scam (or to get a job), “kittenfishing” is the milder version. It means to stretch the truth about certain elements of a dating profile to make yourself look better. It “involves minor stretches of truth or sugarcoating the reality of things,” said The Knot. One example: claiming to hold a job title that is higher-status than the one you have.

Love bombing

A love bomber is someone who is too much, too soon — blitzing a new love interest with texts and requests to hang out, and making florid declarations of love when most people are still trying to figure out if and how they fit together. This could describe someone who is well-intentioned but overbearing. It is more often “considered to be an abuse tactic, wherein one person showers the other with affection, compliments, gifts and attention in order to gain their trust and control or manipulate them,” said Cosmopolitan.

Orbiting

Orbiting refers to an ex who has stopped seeing you or communicating with you in the real world but who nevertheless follows and occasionally interacts with you on social media. It’s confusing behavior for the recipient because it raises the question of whether or not the person is still interested in you. For the orbiter, “checking an ex-love’s social media profiles can provide dopamine boosts, acting as a reward for curiosity,” said Forbes.

Roommate syndrome

A tale as old as romance is the charged magic shared between a new couple vanishing as soon as they move in together or marry. The term refers to relationships that begin with a “lot of passion and exciting intimacy” that often “fades over time as the rigors of life kick in,” said The Gottman Institute.

Slow fade

“The slow fade of love/its soft edge might cut you,” sang Jenny Lewis of the early-aughts alt-rock band Rilo Kiley. Today the idea of a “slow fade” has been seized by younger daters to describe the practice of diminishing communications and get-togethers rather than ghosting someone or explicitly breaking up with them. You’re “disappearing from a former romantic interest's life passively over a prolonged period of time” rather than suddenly, said Self.

Submarining

A delightfully evocative term, “submarining” means to resurface — like an underwater naval vessel coming up to refill its oxygen tanks — in a former romantic’s partner’s life after ghosting or breaking up with them. The person in question typically shows up “with no apology and acts as if no time had passed,” said NPR.

Speculation is rife about what could be in chancellor Rachel Reeves’ much anticipated Autumn Budget.

Reeves will deliver her latest fiscal update on 26 November and there are likely to be “significant changes to wealth and property taxes”, said BDO, with changes to pension tax reliefs and inheritance tax also a possibility.

The chancellor is facing pressures of a fragile global economy and “anaemic” UK growth, said Fidelity, so while everything is just speculation for now, she will be looking for “new ways to raise revenue this year”.

Here is how you can prepare.

1. Hurry up your home sale

There have been reports that property taxes could be reformed, replacing stamp duty, plus capital gains tax could be charged on the sale of certain homes.

It could be worth “pushing to complete before November” if you are currently selling, said The Times, so that you still get the capital gains tax exemption.

2. Top up your pension

Pension rules are often a source of speculation ahead of the Budget, said BBC News, with possible changes such as “tax relief available to savers and the level of the tax-free lump sum which can be withdrawn”.

It is “rarely a bad idea to top up your pension”, said Continuum, as pensions are an “incredibly tax-efficient way to save for the future”.

You could also withdraw more now before any reported restrictions but it’s “really important not to rush in”, said Rest Less, as anyone who takes money out of their pension is putting it into a taxable environment.

3. Boost ISA contributions

There is “widespread speculation”, said Fidelity, that the overall £20,000 ISA limit could be cut for cash ISAs amid a government review.

It “makes sense to make the most of the ISA system as it stands”, said Saga, by making full use of your allowance.

Stocks and shares ISAs “typically return higher growth over time” compared with cash ISAs, but may not be suitable if you may need money in a hurry “or if you’re not comfortable with a level of risk”.

4. Make use of tax allowances

Reeves may have “unfinished business” with capital gains tax, said AJ Bell, having “pushed rates up a bit” in the previous Budget.

It is worth planning how to use your £3,000 capital gains allowance, said Continuum, plus spouses and civil partners can transfer assets to each other tax-free, “letting you benefit from their allowance as well as your own”.

The “easiest way to protect your money” from tax rises is to make use of “all your allowances”, said The Times, including the £20,000 you can put in an ISA, £60,000 that can go into pensions and the £500 that can be earned in dividends outside an ISA tax-free.

5. Consider inheritance tax

Inheritance tax may be another target for the chancellor, having already used the previous Budget to apply the charge to pensions.

If she wants to “target inheritances again”, said AJ Bell, she could either reduce inheritance tax thresholds or extend the “seven-year rule” for lifetime gifts.

Making any “significant gifts” before the Budget could help “secure today’s more generous rules”, said Clarke & Wright, but “be strategic, not hasty” as acting too quickly could cause tax charges and “leave you short of funds you may need in the future”.

6. Don’t panic

Any changes may not be “implemented immediately”, said CheltenhamIFA, so it is important not to panic.

You will usually have time to digest the changes and “carefully consider how you’ll respond”. Plus, it may be worth speaking to a financial planner “rather than making a snap decision”.

Days after Polish and Nato forces scrambled to shoot down Russian drones that had flown into Poland’s airspace, Russian troops gathered in neighbouring Belarus for largescale war games; Indian and Iranian troops also participated. The Zapad 2025 exercises included a simulated nuclear strike. Although they were billed as defensive, analysts said they were designed to intimidate Europe.

In total, 19 drones crossed into Poland last Wednesday. Moscow’s allies claimed that they had strayed there accidentally, but days later, another Russian drone violated Romanian airspace. Warsaw said the incursion was a test of Nato’s defensive capabilities, and invoked Article 4, which brings a threat to the attention of its council. Nato then launched an operation to bolster its eastern flank. Donald Trump said he would impose tougher sanctions on Russia – but only if all Nato members stop buying Russian oil and gas and slap heavy tariffs on China.

‘Chinks in the alliance’s armour’

The sheer scale of the incursion into Poland makes it clear that this was a “calculated escalation” by Vladimir Putin”, said The Daily Telegraph. Emboldened by Trump’s indulgence, he wanted to see if Nato had the resolve to respond. Poland has painful recent experience of invasion and occupation, said The Independent. So its PM Donald Tusk’s warning that the prospect of conflict in Europe is “closer than at any time since the Second World War”, has to be taken seriously: this was the first time in Nato’s history that its member states have had to directly attack Russian forces, albeit unmanned ones.

Fortunately, for all Trump’s vacillations, Nato was still strong enough to answer the call. Yet there are “chinks in the alliance’s armour”, said The Times. Two of its members, Hungary and Slovakia, are “virtual allies of Russia”. And the leader of the US, its most powerful member, treats the Ukraine War as a “business opportunity”. Trump is making European nations buy US weapons to give to Kyiv; now he’s trying to stop them buying Russian gas, to boost sales of US liquefied natural gas.

Warning shots

Ever since Russian tanks rolled into Ukraine, Western strategists have been asking who the Kremlin would target next, said Mark Almond in the Daily Mail. The consensus was that “small, militarily weak nations on Russia’s border”, such as Latvia or Estonia, would be the target. Yet instead, Putin picked Poland, a country which spends nearly 5% of its GDP on defence – the highest share of any Nato member – and has the third-largest standing army in the alliance, after the US and Turkey.

Does this suggest we are “teetering on the edge of World War Three”? These warning shorts certainly expose our weaknesses, said Edward Lucas in The Times. “The US insists (rightly) that Europe must take the lead in standing up to Russia.” But without it, there is nothing like a unified European alliance. Political stances vary wildly, while even supportive nations, such as France, Spain and Belgium, flinch at the risk and the cost.

Trump’s ‘latest wheeze’

Europe’s Nato powers have more than enough air power to keep the Russians out, said Hamish de Bretton-Gordon in The Daily Telegraph. But they should go further, by establishing a no-fly zone in western Ukraine. This would save thousands of lives; and as a display of power, it could be the “catalyst to get Putin around the negotiating table”.

Nonsense, said Jennifer Kavanagh on UnHerd. Ukraine – in dire straits militarily – has an interest in exaggerating the Russian threat to Europe, to scare the continent into giving more aid. Instead of responding in a bellicose fashion, and risking a wider war, Western leaders should tamp down their rhetoric and “double down on diplomacy”.

Unfortunately, any diplomatic efforts are liable to be scuppered by Trump, said Jason Corcoran in The Moscow Times. His “latest wheeze” – promising to ramp up sanctions on Russia if Nato imposes tariffs of 50% to 100% on Chinese imports – is a “cynical stalling tactic”. He knows that this would be economic suicide for Europe. He is letting Moscow “off the hook, granting Putin much-needed breathing room as the war rages on”.

India’s participation in the Zapad war games, led by the highly respected Kumaon Regiment, has “raised eyebrows” amid signs that the US may be losing a “key ally” in Asia, says Lorraine Mallinder on Al Jazeera. But despite recent tensions over US tariffs, Trump confirmed last week that India and the US were continuing negotiations. Denmark announced on Wednesday that it would buy long-range precision missiles and drones, for the first time, to combat the threat from Russia. “Russia is testing us,” said Danish PM Mette Frederiksen.

We are delighted to present this issue of The Week Independent Schools Guide. There's no denying this has been an incredibly challenging period for the UK's independent schools. The imposition of VAT on school fees, rising NI costs and the loss of charitable business rates have left some schools, particularly the smaller ones that don't bag the headlines or student numbers, facing an existential threat.

There have been some heartbreaking closures in recent months, but the sector is also adapting; for a while this year, barely a week went by without news of a merger between schools or school groups. Elizabeth Ivens has written about the merger mania in this issue, why it is happening, what it could mean for the sector and what parents think about it.

Like many, I was stunned by the Netflix drama Adolescence, but also, like many, baulked at the idea that this was somehow the defining cultural touchstone on the subject of the 'manosphere'. I certainly didn't agree with the prime minister's belief that it should be mandatory viewing in all our schools. I have long felt queasy about the punitive term 'toxic masculinity', as it is a heavy yoke for young men to bear. So, I wasn't overly keen to investigate the issue of how schools are coping with the so-called 'crisis in masculinity' – but I am very pleased I did. Because there is so much enlightened, emotionally literate, life-affirming work in this sphere, being led by independent schools. And, as we go to press, the government has announced that all schools in England should teach children how to recognise and act against misogyny. The final draft of the new relationships, sex and health education (RSHE) guidance also states pupils must be taught "how to identify and learn from positive male role models", surely a positive step forwards.

But let me leave you with an anecdote, passed on by Chloe Combi, author, speaker and futurist, during an electrifying presentation on the online world at a conference at Downe House School. While in Silicon Valley, she asked a senior figure at Meta what had been the company's most successful commodity to date. Their reply? "Teenage rage and pain." Consider that for a moment; a leader of the company that owns Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp and more said, off-the-record, that what this global behemoth has monetised most successfully is the pain of young people – our children. Perhaps worth thinking about on your next scroll through Insta?

There is also much to celebrate in this issue; we have focused on the amazing music that independent schools enjoy, plus the community work they pursue with music at its heart. And don't miss our much-anticipated guide to the best senior schools in the UK.

We hope you enjoy this issue.

Amanda Constance is the editor of The Week’s Independent Schools Guide. Read the full publication below or click here.

This article appeared in History of War magazine issue 151.

On 2 September 1945, Japanese forces officially surrendered to the Republic of China, ending the brutal occupation which began in 1937. Since the end of the subsequent Chinese Civil War, this victory has been marked separately by the People's Republic of China, and the Republic of China (Taiwan).

In mainland China, the communist government's role in the victory over Japan has been largely overemphasised over the decades, while the nationalist contribution has been downplayed or even extinguished from commemorations.

However, it was the nationalist government, the Kuo-min-tang (KMT), under Chiang Kai-shek, that led the main military campaigns of resistance against the Japanese and formally accepted their surrender in 1945.

Dissonance over who fought the Japanese harder, the KMT or the communists, or who is properly honoured in war memorials, now extends to the Taiwan question. Since the 1990s the island nation's politics has drifted away from the militaristic KMT and the Democratic Progressive Party now sees Japan as a diplomatic ally.

Meanwhile, China's state-owned media and its adjacent entertainment industry have fused the historical narrative of the war into a unified struggle that echoes the brief accommodation the communists and nationalists reached by 1938.

This has resulted in modern China marking the beginning of the war from 1931, when Japan seized Manchuria, until 1945 – labelling this a 'Chinese people's war of resistance' greater in scope than the previous 1937-1945 framing.

As far as the mainland is concerned, all of China was swept by the terrible ordeal and Japan's crimes are a timeless evil that sullied the course of Chinese history – never mind who was in charge of the government at this time.

The end of Japanese occupation

It took three weeks for the KMT to formalise the total surrender of all Japanese forces and civilians in 1945. Although Tokyo announced its decision to the allies on August 10 it was not until September 3 that Japanese soldiers in China were ordered to lay down their arms and a few more days passed until a formal agreement was smoothed out.

To mark the occasion a nationalist general with a sizeable retinue was sent to the former capital Nanking, still occupied by 70,000 Japanese soldiers. The venue itself was emblematic of modern China's statehood, being a war college for nationalist officers.

The once unrepentant General Yasutsugu Okamura and his staff were seated along a table and signed the act of surrender that was delivered to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek on the same day: September 9, 1945.

Japan's capitulation in China was far from straightforward. By Chiang Kai-shek's reckoning there were 1.3 million enemy soldiers left in the mainland. When the Soviet Union invaded Manchuria in early August it quashed and captured the million-strong Kwantung Army.

An estimated one million Japanese civilians were scattered among China's ravaged cities and 170,000 more soldiers were garrisoned in Formosa. Annexed by Japan in 1895 and subjected to a brutal ethnic cleansing, the fate of this island known today as Taiwan was decided at the Cairo Conference in 1943 when Chiang himself agreed on post-war territorial arrangements with Prime Minister Churchill and President Roosevelt.

The calamity of the war against Japanese aggression, which is how China recognises the conflict from 1937 until 1945, took such a severe toll on the country's population, that there was little to no relief once the Japanese left.

Impact of WWII on China

China began sliding toward a new crisis soon after the KMT finalised a treaty of friendship with the Soviet Union, while allowing 50,000 U.S. marines to land in the north and help repatriate Japanese POWs home.

The economic and humanitarian cost to China during WWII was immense, with 2 million soldiers perishing along with 14 million civilians. Contemporary historians now revise the death toll as high as 18 to 20 million (according to the Library of Congress Asian Reading Room), on par with the Soviet Union's losses during the war. Nonetheless, as soon as the mutual enemy was defeated, the civil war between the communists and nationalists simmered anew.

The communist leader and firebrand Mao Zedong shredded the KMT's tepid announcement of Japan's defeat in mid-August. Rather than the generous reassurance that China would not seek revenge on Japan, as uttered by Chiang himself, Mao blamed the KMT for their lack of co-operation and constant intrigues.

According to Mao, it was the communist forces who kept the Japanese divisions away from southern China's 'free' heartland where 200 million Chinese were spared the horrors of conquest.

This was a bizarre claim to make. In fact, the communists had fought short-lived campaigns against the Japanese in the early 1940s, which mostly took place in central China and the northeast.

Furthermore, the Imperial Japanese Army had reached the southern coast of China by late 1944 and even Hong Kong and Hainan island were seized as early as 1941 and 1939, respectively.

By 1947 the civil war was once again in full swing, despite heroic attempts by the U.S. envoy Gen. George C. Marshall to organise a coalition government.

In circumstances that echo current world politics, the United States was trying to solve the China question by bringing together two irreconcilable factions. Once the communists triumphed, and Mao Zedong and his circle were ensconced in Peking (Beijing) by October 1949, the entire fabric of China's national politics was in tatters.

The reeling nationalists of the KMT rebuilt their state on Formosa and organised a string of small garrisons on outer islands facing the Chinese coast as a primary line of defence for a coming invasion.

In supreme irony, by the early 1950s as the U.S. was extending support for the KMT in Taiwan, retired Japanese army generals were visiting Taipei incognito for briefings with their temporary secret allies.

The coming decades made the Peking-Taipei-Tokyo axis a complicated one. In his final years even Mao Zedong revised his views on Japan and welcomed a restoration of diplomacy. So did his successors, despite constant efforts in China to memorialise Japanese atrocities during the war of aggression, including the controversy surrounding 'comfort women' or the enslavement of women in Japanese-occupied areas.

Since the 1990s, immense monuments and exhibitions have emerged chronicling this painful and dark history, while at the same time Japan became the most reliable foreign investor in the mainland.

This article originally appeared in History of War magazine issue 151. Click here to subscribe to the magazine and save on the cover price!

Most of us could clear out a room by attempting to sing a karaoke rendition of "I Got You Babe" or give a dramatic reading of Jack Nicholson's courtroom speech from "A Few Good Men." But a handful of artists have excelled at both music and acting. For these singers turned actors, performing on-screen is not just something they dabbled in, but rather an entire second career. Some such musicians became arguably more renowned for their movie roles than for their exploits in music.

Cher

Cher rose to fame as one half of the musical duo Sonny & Cher alongside her first husband, Sonny Bono. But in the 1980s, she branched out into serious acting starting with the biographical drama "Silkwood" (1983). She later won the Academy Award for Best Actress for her performance as Loretta Castorini in the 1987 romantic comedy "Moonstruck," a movie that "celebrates the family over the romantic couple" and felt "completely true to people as they are: ridiculous and passionate, in search of answers and solutions, and taking what they can get," said B. D. McClay at The New Yorker. After starring in the 1990 comedy "Mermaids," Cher refocused her career on music and has only appeared in a handful of feature films since then, most recently 2018's "Mamma Mia! Here We Go Again."

Doris Day

Doris Day earned her first big hit in 1945 with "Sentimental Journey" and became a huge pop star before starring in film musicals like "Love Me or Leave Me" (1955). She headlined a number of romantic comedies in the 1950s and 1960s, including "Pillow Talk" (1959) and "Send Me No Flowers" (1964). She also starred in Alfred Hitchcock's "The Man Who Knew Too Much" (1956). Day was "surprisingly effective as the mother who is frantic about her child" in Hitchcock's thriller, said Bosley Crowther at The New York Times. Her final screen credit was the sitcom "The Doris Day Show," which ran from 1968 to 1973. After retiring from acting, she became an animal welfare activist.

Lady Gaga

One of the biggest established music superstars to ever make the pivot into acting, Lady Gaga's feature film debut was in director Robert Rodriguez's 2013 "Machete Kills." She later appeared in two seasons of the anthology series "American Horror Story" — but her big screen breakout came in 2018 when she played Ally in the most recent remake of the Hollywood classic "A Star Is Born" opposite Bradley Cooper. In a "transcendent Hollywood movie," Gaga delivered a "fetching and accomplished debut" playing a waitress thrust into the limelight following a chance meeting with Cooper's jaded country musician, said Owen Gleiberman at Variety. She has also scored leading roles in "House of Gucci" (2021) and "Joker: Folie à Deux" (2024) while continuing to churn out chart-topping albums.

Whitney Houston

Houston was a pop megastar with multiple #1 Billboard hits to her name, including "The Greatest Love of All," when she starred in the smash 1992 romance "The Bodyguard" as Rachel Marron, a pop star who falls in love with her bodyguard (Kevin Costner). A movie "mocked by the critics and loved by the public," said Peter Bradshaw at The Guardian, it was buttressed by the "powerhouse punch of Whitney Houston's showcase musical numbers." While her performance drew some criticism — she was nominated for a Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Actress — it also helped make her one of the highest-paid actresses in Hollywood. After starring in the hit "Waiting to Exhale," Houston won an NAACP Image Award for her performance in "The Preacher's Wife" (1996). She died tragically in 2012 at the age of 48.

Jennifer Hudson

Hudson is one of the few stars who launched a career by getting eliminated from a season of "American Idol." Her shocking 2004 exit from the show had fans outraged, and she parlayed that fame into a multi-dimensional career as an actor and recording artist. While her Oscar-winning turn in "Dreamgirls" (2006) predated the release of her first album, she was known at the time for her singing. Her "pure delight to watch" of a performance in a film about a Supremes-esque Motown group called The Dreams meant that viewers could "finally experience the completion of the collective star-making fantasy" of "American Idol," said Dana Stevens at Slate. Hudson has subsequently "received the coveted EGOT for all four major entertainment awards, Emmy, Grammy, Oscar and Tony," said People.

Janelle Monáe

A highly regarded musical artist, Janelle Monáe won a Grammy in 2008 for her song "Many Moons" and later released several acclaimed studio albums. After doing voice work for the animated film "Rio 2," she broke out with roles in the 2016 films "Moonlight" and "Hidden Figures." In the latter, Monáe gave one of several "superb, luminous performances" as Mary Jackson, a member of a "trio of math whizzes" tasked with assisting early NASA space missions in the 1960s, said Stephanie Zacharek at Time. Her performance earned her a Critics Choice Awards nomination, and she scored another for her supporting role in "Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery" (2022). She continues to do prolific work in both film and music.

Dolly Parton

Few performers are so successful that they spawn their own theme park with millions of visitors per year. But Dollywood is part of what makes Dolly Parton one of a kind. Beginning with her 1968 duet with Porter Wagoner, "The Last Thing on My Mind," Parton became a country music sensation and one of the best-selling musical artists of all time. She made her feature film debut in the 1980 workplace comedy "9 to 5" and received a Golden Globe nomination for her role as Mona Stangley in the 1982 musical comedy "The Best Little Whorehouse in Texas." She also turned in a memorable performance in the 1989 melodrama "Steel Magnolias," a movie that "belongs to its actresses, who have tapped into some fundamental truths about the strength women derive from one another," said Peter Travers at Rolling Stone.

Diana Ross

Motown megastar Diana Ross rose to fame as a member of The Supremes, known for chart-topping hits like "You Can't Hurry Love" and "Baby Love." In 1972, she made her film debut as Billie Holiday in the biopic "Lady Sings the Blues." Ross delivered "one of the great performances of 1972," said Roger Ebert, in part because "she never tries to imitate Holiday, but she sings somehow in the manner of Holiday." She was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actress for the role. While other films she appeared in, like "Mahogany" (1975) and "The Wiz" (1978), were less lauded at the time, they now have devoted followings. Ross also starred in two made-for-TV films in the 1990s, but has otherwise focused on music.

Frank Sinatra

Ol' Blue Eyes was a well-established music star when he moved into acting, and the singer eventually "became admired for a screen persona distinctly tougher than his smooth singing style," said All About Jazz. Starting with lighthearted musicals like "Anchors Aweigh," Sinatra gradually took on meatier roles, including in 1953's "From Here to Eternity." Perhaps his most memorable turn was in 1962's "The Manchurian Candidate," a thriller in which Sinatra plays Captain Bennett Marco, who thwarts an assassination attempt by an unwitting communist sleeper agent. Sinatra here gave a "reasoned and in many ways more mature performance than he has ever done before," said The Hollywood Reporter.

Will Smith

As one-half of the legendary hip-hop duo DJ Jazzy Jeff and the Fresh Prince, Will Smith had won a Grammy award for the song "Summertime" before launching his acting career on the 1990 sitcom "The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air." A ratings success, the show led Smith to big roles in studio films like "Six Degrees of Separation," (1993) in which he plays a young conman pretending to be Sidney Poitier's son to insinuate himself into a wealthy, white family.

Smith has been an action star in movies like "Bad Boys" (1995), but has also turned in a number of critically praised dramatic performances, most recently in "King Richard" (2021), as tennis stars Venus and Serena Williams' father. This was a movie about a "fraught but loving family relationship at a pivotal time in all their lives," highlighted by Smith's "poetic physicality" in a "touching turn," said Bilge Ebiri at Variety. Smith won the Academy Award for Best Actor in 2022 for his role.

Barbra Streisand

Broadway star Barbra Streisand made her film debut in 1968's "Funny Girl," an adaptation of the stage musical she also starred in, and won the Academy Award for Best Actress. Streisand later played the idealistic young leftist Katie Morosky in the bittersweet 1973 romance "The Way We Were," acting opposite Robert Redford as her more conservative love interest Hubbell Gardiner. In that film, Streisand proved herself to be the "brightest, quickest female actress in movies today," said Roger Ebert at the time. She was able to inhabit her "characters with a fierce energy" yet also be "touchingly vulnerable." Streisand has been choosy about her cinematic roles since then, last appearing in 2012's "Guilt Trip."

Special mention for musical stars

In the heyday of the Hollywood musical, a number of stars emerged as staples of the genre, seamlessly blending the roles of musician and actor on and off screen. One of the most successful was Judy Garland, who toured as part of a musical vaudeville act with her sisters before signing with MGM at the age of 13 in 1935. She went on to star in more than two dozen film musicals, including the 1939 cultural touchstone "The Wizard of Oz." Garland was nominated for an Academy Award for one of her only roles in a non-musical; she played Irene Hoffmann, who was convicted by a Nazi kangaroo court, in "Judgment at Nuremberg"(1961). The film offered a "dramatic statement of moral probity," said Bosley Crowther at The New York Times.

A similar trajectory was enjoyed by Bing Crosby. While he was a more established musician than Garland had been before launching his acting career, Crosby is primarily known and remembered for his roles in musical films like "The Bells of St. Mary's" (1945), for which he earned an Academy Award nomination. He was again nominated for his portrayal of an alcoholic, down-on-his-luck actor in 1954's "The Country Girl."

Julie Andrews, who rose to musical stardom on Broadway as a child in the 1940s, struck gold in Hollywood with "Mary Poppins," her 1964 film debut in which she played the titular character, a nanny with magic powers. Her performance was a "signal triumph and she performs as easily as she sings," said Variety. She then starred in the beloved 1965 musical "The Sound of Music" and has since worked in a variety of settings, including television, film and voice work (she was Gru's Mom in the "Despicable Me" and "Minions" children's movie franchises). Incredibly, Andrews is still working at the age of 89.