One of the most amazing animals on the planet is the snow leopard. The smallest of the big cats is indigenous to the twelve countries sharing the High Himalayas including China, India, Russia, Pakistan, Afghanistan and Nepal. Those countries disagree on most things: borders, values, economics, religion---but amazingly agree that the survival of the snow leopard is in their national and collective interests.

The High Himalayas are a microcosm of the problems confronting the planet. Because it is cold, high, and glaciated, even small increases in temperature cascade into large ecological and societal impacts. Border conflicts are always bubbling---and often boiling over---while internal conflicts are rife in much of the region. And economic development, in many parts of the Himalayas is aspirational at best.

How can such a complicated group of countries, peoples, and leaders ignore their differences when it comes to protecting the snow leopard? Even more, how to agree that protecting the snow leopard should be done in ways that are in concert with, not at the expense of, the needs of the people who live in the High Himalayas?

Dr. Charu Mishra is Executive Director of the Snow Leopard Trust and one of the prime movers in an ongoing, but increasingly successful conservation campaign that defies geopolitical gravity. Listen as he describes how he and his colleagues have persuaded countries that are sometimes literally at war with each other to act together for a common purpose.

LEARN MORE

What do you get when you merge a failed War on Drugs with an archaic War on Terror? We may be about to find out as President Donald Trump unleashes a legal, political, and military campaign against drug cartels, whom he has re-labelled as terrorist organizations. The tactics include blowing up small "go-fast" boats in the Caribbean, labeling Venezuelan President Maduro a cartel leader and then placing a $50 million bounty on him, and pushing a massive air, naval, and land military force into the Caribbean.

Is U.S. national security really threatened by the Mexican and Venezuelan cartels, including the bête noire of the moment, Tren de Aragua? If this is a "war" can it be won---and, if so, how would we know (one of the many problems with both the War on Drugs and the War on Terror framing)? Is the man who campaigned against forever wars starting a new forever war?

In this episode, host Alan Stoga explores these and other questions with Chris Dalby, Director and Founder of World of Crime and author of Tren de Aragua: The Guide to America's Growing Criminal Threat, and Professor Clionadh Raleigh, President and CEO of ACLED and an expert on political violence and conflict data.

What do you think?  Is it war or performance art?```

Roughly six weeks ago, the two Middle East powers, whom everyone feared might someday go to war, actually went to war. After 12 days of fighting, mostly deadly exchanges of missiles, drones and air power, Iran and Israel agreed to a ceasefire on June 24th. But peace is an elusive concept in the Middle East, even more so these days. Will the ceasefire continue to hold? If it does, what are the likely consequences? If it doesn't, who would break it?

More importantly, was this the first Iranian-Israeli war or the last?

It is a hallmark of our info-bubble-infected world that we tend to listen to people with whom we agree rather than risk debating differences. Nowhere is that more true than in the Middle East. However, for this conversation, we invited three people who are not only deeply knowledgeable about the situation, but also approach issues from dramatically different perspectives. Francesca Borri is an Italian journalist who has spent much of the last decade living in Jenin and reporting from the West Bank, Israel, Syria, and other hot spots; Ambassador Hossein Mousavian is a former senior Iranian diplomat who now teaches at Princeton University; Abraham Silver is a lecturer at the Hebrew University on the Architecture of Jerusalem.

In this continuation of their dialogue with host Alan Stoga, the panel digs deeper into the lessons of the war, the risks of escalation, and the prospects—however slim—for a more peaceful future in the region.

👉 This conversation is published in two parts. You are listening to Part Two.

Roughly six weeks ago, the two Middle East powers, whom everyone feared might someday go to war, actually went to war. After 12 days of fighting, mostly deadly exchanges of missiles, drones and air power, Iran and Israel agreed to a ceasefire on June 24th. But peace is an elusive concept in the Middle East, even more so these days. Will the ceasefire continue to hold? If it does, what are the likely consequences? If it doesn't, who would break it?

More importantly, was this the first Iranian-Israeli war or the last?

It is a hallmark of our info-bubble-infected world that we tend to listen to people with whom we agree rather than risk debating differences. Nowhere is that more true than in the Middle East. However, for this conversation, we invited three people who are not only deeply knowledgeable about the situation, but also approach issues from dramatically different perspectives. Francesca Borri is an Italian journalist who has spent much of the last decade living in Jenin and reporting from the West Bank, Israel, Syria, and other hot spots; Ambassador Hossein Mousavian is a former senior Iranian diplomat who now teaches at Princeton University; Abraham Silver is a lecturer at the Hebrew University on the Architecture of Jerusalem.

Listen as they engage with host Alan Stoga in an exploration of both the underpinnings of the recent war, but also begin a conversation about the possibility of a peaceful future.

👉 This conversation is published in two parts. You are listening to Part One.

The Congo River Basin includes six countries and covers approximately 3.7 million square kilometers, making it the world's second-largest rainforest basin behind the Amazon. Like the Amazon, in practical terms, it is vital to the health of the planet. Also like the Amazon, scientists and conservationists worry that the Basin's ecology could tip if its rainforests are seriously degraded.

Global meetings on climate change almost always turn on two factors: political will and money. Even when the will is present, the money is not---and the result for decades has been the seemingly endless, accelerating slide toward a hotter, more volatile, climate.

Each year the big international climate meetings like the 2025 COP to be held in Belém, Brazil in November produce ever larger estimates of the financing needed to move away from fossil fuels, to compensate developing countries for loss and damage, to sustain biodiversity, etc. Each year governments are more and more stretched to meet growing social, defense, and endless other needs and less and less willing to even to pretend they can find the vast sums needed to slow, stop, or reverse the climate change spiral.

That only leaves the private sector as source of finance. However, many climate activists distrust private capital or seek to create conditions that deny businesses the opportunity to earn competitive returns on their investments. But without private money OR enough public money…there simply isn't enough money.

So, whether or not it's possible for a profit making enterprise to do the right things for the environment while making a decent return on their investment is critical to the future of the planet.

For insight, we went to the front lines of climate change, the Congo River Basin, one of the two "lungs" of the planet. SODEFOR is a forestry company in the Democratic Republic of Congo, that manages a million hectares of forest. They have a well documented record of operating legally and responsibly in the rainforest. Tânia Trindade plays a key role in managing the company's commitment to its shareholders as well as to the planet; she deeply believes that SODEFOR can do both.

Listen as she describes the challenges of operating in a complex environment as SODEFOR tries to do good and to do well at the same time.

What do you think: if the public sector won't find the resources to mitigate climate change, is there a viable role for the private sector? Or should we just give up?

We live at a moment when everything we thought we could rely on to understand our world seems to be becoming unglued. Whether it's “uncharted waters” or the “break up of global order” or “the end of the American century,” at the least we are entering a period of change and chaos unlike anything that most of us have experienced in our lifetimes.

President Trump has launched an unprecedented trade war, a radical overhaul of regulation, and a significant reshaping of U.S. fiscal policy. His purpose? To rewire global trade patterns and supply chains, recreate American manufacturing capacity, and change the essential structure of the U.S. and world economies. Can he succeed? How would success be measured? What are the risks it will fail --- and what would failure look like? How might all of this affect your job, your savings, your kids’ future prospects?

Great art is timeless because it provides insights into our souls, into how we think and why we do what we do. That's as true of Shakespeare's sonnets as it is of Michelangelo's frescoes, as it is of the Greek tragedies. 

In 2019, Carlos Nobre, a leading Brazilian scientist, published an open letter entitled "Amazon tipping point: Last chance for action.” If that article were published today, it might have to be titled, “No more chances” because the past five years have seen record-breaking drought throughout the region as well as record-breaking forest fires.