The US President frequently claims that illegal immigrants cause the loss of innocent lives and often cites the gang MS-13 as justification for harsh treatment of immigrants. Although the resulting fear and pain inflicted are most acute among those hard-working immigrants who have built their lives in the US, it also creates anxiety among Latino diaspora communities in Europe. The US has a long history of criminalizing and stigmatizing immigrants even though it also takes pride in being a nation of immigrants. Irish and Italians who migrated in vast numbers in the 19th and 20th centuries suffered discrimination and prejudice and were characterized in the US press and in political speeches as criminals, drunkards, brawlers, Mafiosi, undesirables. The danger in the 21st century is that these aspersions have not only broad repercussions, but are deeply socially divisive with potentially deadly consequences.

In the early twenty-first century, as inter-state war appeared to decline in frequency, new forms and discourses of ‘war’ took prominence, epitomised by the ‘War on Terror’ and the ‘War on Drugs.’ For some critics, the use of the term ‘war’ in these contexts was deeply problematic. Ensuing debate underlined that precisely what constitutes war, and what divides it from peace and other situations of violence, would now be questioned in unprecedented and fundamental ways.

Since the late 1970s, when a wave of contemporary immigration to the United Kingdom was supplemented by an influx of Islamists from Arab and South Asian countries, the United Kingdom has had to figure out how to best incorporate different ideologies within its liberal-democratic socio-political structure. In the mid-1990s, with the arrival in the UK of Arab jihadists with ties to al-Qaeda, the effectiveness of state multiculturalism and its relaxed attitudes towards beliefs that go against democratic values were once again put to the test. Being both a close ally of the United States – even in controversial foreign policy decisions – and a country that hosts a large population of Pakistanis who can easily access terrorist camps and militant groups in Afghanistan, the United Kingdom has seen an estimated 850 jihadists travel to Syria and Iraq in the name of jihad.

Over the past decade, the literature on diaspora politics has been growing. The concept of diaspora is a much-debated one, with definitions generally focusing on core features, such as its being: a voluntary or involuntary dispersion; a collective memory and myth about the country of origin; a troubled relationship with the country of settlement; a commitment to the homeland’s safety and prosperity. Other core features include the presence of the issue of return, though not necessarily a commitment to do so, or a diasporic consciousness, which can be expressed through the creation of diaspora organisations. From that perspective, groups of migrants may constitute a diaspora if, with time, they develop these organisational and imaginative elements upon which they develop a shared identity.

Institutions of security – the military, police and judiciary – are critical for peaceful governance in states throughout the world. It is for this reason that so much funding and manpower is committed to Security Sector Reform (SSR) in post-conflict peacebuilding: the rewriting of constitutions and laws, the establishment of courts and prison systems, the restructuring of militaries and the retraining and redeployment of police. Such processes function to re-establish the institutions of security. However, do such processes result in experiences of security? Should it be taken as given that a restructured military and a retrained police force make people feel more secure?

Among the violent events that have affected – and unfortunately still affect – Uganda, a prominent place is undoubtedly occupied by the insurgency in the northern regions, the key figure of which is the infamous Joseph Kony. Less well known, also due to lower levels of violence, are the vicissitudes affecting the western portion of the country, in particular the region called Rwenzori: an area on the border with Congo, which has a long tradition of rebellion against the Ugandan government. It has also become infamous for a series of episodes that have caused several hundred deaths altogether.

The Arctic can be presented as a prime example of a region where international legislation appears to be effectively working. The coastal states of the Arctic Ocean – Canada, Iceland, Norway, Russia, the United States and Denmark/Greenland – have jointly declared that they will follow the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, and have been mapping their seabed to provide scientific evidence of their territorial claims to the United Nations. The UN Commission on the Limits on the Continental Shelf (CLCS) will then give recommendations regarding the maritime boundaries of each state. Questions of ownership of underwater minerals, oil, and gas will also be solved on international law.

Agonistes, the name John Milton gave to the biblical Samson, could apply to Africa as that continent confronts radically altered climate conditions. Africa survives on agriculture, the source of 64 percent of its employment. On top of neocolonialism, recurring epidemics, resource plunder, deep ethnic divisions, global land grabs, civil wars and weak-state circumstances, African farmers confront mounting weather woes and related sea level incursions.

Understanding the nature of violent conflicts is a long-standing quest that has always attracted scholars and practitioners. However, conflict analysis as a form of applied qualitative research for the study of the profile, causes, stakeholders, and dynamics of conflicts only emerged in the mid-1990s. It evolved thereafter, driven by advancements made in academic research on conflicts, the collection of field experiences, and the observation of tangible changes occurring internationally.

The lack of leader turnover, even when justified with claims of stability and prosperity, comes at the expenses of democratic quality.

Empirical proof of growing tensions in the Far East can also be traced in the data on global military expendituree, as presented in the latest edition of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) Yearbook.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is already transforming our lives, for good or ill. And in the case of war, killing machines are not just the weapons of the future; they are already here. Israel already uses the Harpy, a drone that seeks out and destroys radar systems on its own without human permission, loitering in the sky until a target appears.