New Thinking for a New World

Politics in Mexico has long been a blood sport: not only “winner takes all,” but also incredibly violent. Last month’s national elections—when the country's first female president won with a record number of votes and by a record margin of victory—demonstrated both trends. President-elect Claudia Sheinbaum’s Morena party (founded and still controlled by outgoing President Andrés Manuel López Obrador) won huge national and state legislative victories. But the electoral campaign was punctuated by more than 100 political assassinations, as well as widespread kidnappings, forced disappearances, attempted murders, and attacks on family members and campaign staff—all by drug cartels competing for turf, control of markets, and quiescent politicians.

Even worse, this kind of political violence seems to be on the upswing in other parts of Latin America from Central America through the Andean countries and even into Chile. Why? The simple answer seems to be that controlling local, state, and national politicians is good for business—even if that sometimes requires killing those who have other ideas.

Can the cartels be stopped? Is Mexico becoming a narco-state? Is the infection spreading too fast in too many places to be contained?

Answers require a deep understanding of the cartels. That’s where Chris Dalby, an expert on cartel violence, comes in. He is a journalist and founder of World of Crime, which investigates and documents how the cartels operate. Listen as he explains what the Mexican cartels want and how they are getting it.

What do you think: Can Mexico beat the cartels or will the cartels beat Mexico?

Much to everyone’s surprise, France’s President Macron recently decided that—like much of the rest of the world—his country ought to have national elections this year. The outcome of the first of two rounds was devastating for his political project to govern from the center: Marine Le Pen’s right-wing National Rally party won a bit more than 33% of the vote. A coalition of leftist parties, the New Popular Front, won 28%. And Macron's Centers party again came in third, 22%.

Headlines around described a “landslide” for Le Pen and speculated that the RN might win an absolute majority of legislative seats in the July 7th second round of voting. While that is one of the possibilities, it's not clear, whether it's the most likely one. What does seem clear is that French politics has entered an incredibly volatile, unpredictable, perhaps dangerous period.

Fear of the populist far right is one of the themes coursing through, perhaps defining French politics. Alice Barbe is a French political and social activist who is firmly planted on the left of the political spectrum in her country. Listen as she shares her fears and discusses her expectations for the second round of voting—and the morning after.

What do you think: can right-wing populism be democratic?

That the Arctic is warming is not exactly breaking news on a planet where almost everywhere is warming. But it is critical news that the Arctic is warming almost four times faster than the rest of the globe since the polar regions are essentially the planet’s air conditioners. Last year's Arctic Report Card documented that 2023 was the Arctic's hottest summer in centuries, with all the attendant consequences: massive wildfires, late June Greenland ice sheet melt, sea surface temperatures 7ºC above normal, etc.

The list of firsts, or maybe better put, worst was a long one—and the early evidence is that those were trends, not anomalies, that continue in 2024.

Are we as a planet now locked into ever more warming? Are there potential tipping points that might produce even faster change? Are there actions that can be taken on a timescale that's relevant to people living today?

Even if the answers are "Yes, Yes, No" are there initiatives at scale that are worth pursuing if only to adapt to the massive changes clearly underway? If that question elicits even a tentative "Yes", then the places to start are at the epicenters: the Arctic and Antarctica.

Tero Mustonen— Finnish environmental leader, scientist, fisherman and past recipient of the Tällberg-SNF-Eliasson Global Leadership Prize—is spending his life working to make that last “Yes” more muscular. More immediately, he recently returned from traveling across the Arctic, which gives us a rare opportunity for a firsthand debrief.

Please tell us what you think.

In the podcast, Tero mentioned arcticseas.org where you can hear the authentic voices of hunters, women, and fishers from Arctic villages as they share their knowledge, often for the first time. These communities, living sustainably in one of the planet's toughest environments, offer vital messages about coexisting with nature.

Like everything else about India, its democracy is complicated. Recent parliamentary elections—more than 640 million people voted (roughly two-thirds of eligible voters)—produced a contradictory, confusing outcome. On the one hand, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's BJP party won a plurality, giving him a historic third term. On the other hand, the BJP lost its majority and required coalition partners to maintain control. The political opposition, including much-maligned Rahul Gandhi and Congress, won a new life as a serious political force.

So, which is it? Did Modi, denigrated by some as a Trump-like autocrat, win or lose? Did the majority of Indian voters reject the Hindu nationalism that has been his trademark? Was this election about Modi, about religious extremism, about economics, or about something totally different? Is India more or less stable, more or less predictable?

It’s India, so definitive answers are elusive. But our guest today on New Thinking for a New World, can surely point us in the right direction. Vishakha Desai is a widely respected Asian scholar focused on art, culture, policy, and women's rights. Born in India and living in the United States, Vishakha moves seamlessly between the two countries and the two cultures. Listen as she explains the elections and their consequences—and then tell us what you think.

It’s been an amazing, terrifying eight months in the Middle East. The horror of October 7th; the endless pounding of Gaza ever since; civilian deaths, casualties and lives disrupted, mostly in Gaza but also in Israel, the West Bank, and Lebanon; Red Sea shipping attacks; Iran and Israel’s exchange of massive missile and drone attacks; rising anti-Semitism and growing Israeli isolation around the world. What if it could all be ended by one audacious diplomatic masterstroke?

That sounds too good to be true, but it is exactly what American diplomats are trying to make happen. Their idea is a three-way agreement with a formal U.S. defense guarantee for Saudi Arabia who would sign a peace treaty with Israel (while also rolling back their recently strengthened economic and tech relations with China) who would end the Gaza war and firmly commit to the two-state solution with the Palestinians. In other words, a complete reset of the dynamics of the Middle East.

Fantasy or real possibility? This episode of New Thinking for a New World explores the contours of a possible deal with Neil Quilliam, a British expert on Saudi Arabia and more generally the Arab Gulf, who is a fellow at Chatham House.

Can diplomacy trump hate? Please tell us what you think and leave a comment.

We live in a world where facts are everywhere, recorded and shared ubiquitously. That ought to make this an era where arguments, journalism, and politics are routinely rooted in fact; unfortunately, it is more a world where too many people insist not only their own opinions, but on their own “facts.”

The problem is technology running amok, a bit like the broom in Goethe’s Sorcerer’s Apprentice (or the perhaps more familiar versions starring Mickey Mouse or Nicolas Cage). Wouldn’t it be a better world if endless open-source information and smart, widely distributed technology shed light instead of heat?

The good news is that there are people trying to do exactly that, starting with Eliot Higgins, founder of Bellingcat, an investigative collective focused on online open-source investigation. Listen to this episode of New Thinking for a New World, as he discusses how he and Bellingcat separate fact from fiction.

Almost seven months ago, Hamas terrorists stormed into Israel murdering, raping, and kidnapping. In response, Israel launched its attack on Gaza that has reportedly killed at least 34,000 people (mostly civilians), leveled much of the Gaza Strip, significantly degraded Hamas's military capacity, and killed many senior Hamas political and military commanders.

Yet the war continues and, no surprise, has spread to include Houthis, Hezbollah, Iran and a coalition of US, European and Arab forces. And the conflict has roiled politics in America and in Europe, with consequences yet to be seen.

Even though the fighting has not ended, it’s possible to think about how the conflict may be changing political dynamics in the Middle East. Are the Israelis more secure? Do the Palestinians have more possibility of achieving a state for themselves? Are Iran and Israel more or less likely to engage in a wider, deadlier war? And, what are the limits to U.S. support for Israel; indeed, is a break possible?

Armin Rosen, a US-based journalist for Tablet Magazine, has already published some of his answers to those questions and joins host Alan Stoga to **share his insights about Israel, Hamas, Iran, Hezbollah, America, the region and, of course, the war. **

What do you think? Is peace possible?

We live in an era of mass migration. Millions of people and families are on the move, driven by conflict, natural disasters, insecurity, and lack of opportunity. The human cost of migration is high, especially for children who often lose access to regular schooling, health care, nutrition, and other factors that will shape their futures for better or for worse.

On this episode of New Thinking for a New World, we push beyond the problems to explore solutions. Three experts share their experiences in designing and executing educational and other programs for children in distress. Listen as Pashtana Durrani (LEARN Afghanistan), Lala Lovera (Fundacion Comparte Por Una Vida Colombia), and Caroline Kronley (Tinker Foundation) discuss how it’s possible to deliver quality education even under the most complicated circumstances.

What do you think?

What do Shakespeare, neuroscientist Rafa Yuste, and human rights lawyer Jared Genser have in common? They all believe that our brains make us human. Yuste and Genser add their own coda to that belief: therefore, it is essential to define and protect mankind’s neuro rights. And through the NeuroRights Foundation which they co-founded they are working to do exactly that around the world.

The good news is that they are starting to have successes: in Colorado, California and Minnesota in the United States, as well as in Chile and Brazil.

Yuste and Genser are both past winners of the Tällberg-SNF-Eliasson Global Leadership Prize. Indeed, that’s how they met and began their collaboration.

Listen to this special Spotlight episode, as Yuste and Genser discuss the urgency of the issue and their advocacy campaign. Then tell us what you think —and nominate impactful leaders like them for this year’s Prize.

Andrew Bastawrous solves problems. As a well-trained, highly skilled ophthalmologist he was devoted to treating as many patients as possible, in Kenya and elsewhere in Africa. But even gifted surgeons can only do so much, and Andrew came to realize that there were innumerable patients who never even made it to the queues outside his treatment centers.

So, Andrew stepped back and rethought how to do ophthalmology in practice. He found an answer by reimagining how eye care is delivered—literally a whole new supply chain—and leveraging technology. The result is that his Peek Vision software and data intelligence platform now help millions overcome vision impairment.

Listen to (and watch) this special episode of New Thinking for a New World, as Dr. Bastawrous, a winner of the Tällberg-SNF-Eliasson Global Leadership Prize for 2023, explains what it really means to think differently.

You can see the interview here: https://youtu.be/1OZQRQX81_g

The podcast was published on 2024-02-22.