Global Dispatches -- World News That Matters

Cameroonians went to the polls earlier this month in national elections, and on October 27th, a constitutional commission packed with loyalists confirmed that 92-year-old incumbent Paul Biya had won an eighth consecutive term in office. If he serves out his term, Biya will be 99 years old. After 43 years in office, Cameroonians are used to the electoral shenanigans that have kept Biya in power. But this time, things feel different, according to my guest today, Tony Vinyoh. He's a Cameroonian writer who spoke to me from an undisclosed location in Cameroon. There are protests underway throughout the country, and people are being detained by security forces for questioning the official election results (hence the need for this security protocol.) We kick off discussing the volatile political situation in Cameroon right now, with two politicians claiming victory. Tony Vinyoh then explains why the prevailing mood in the country is profoundly different compared to the aftermath of previous (rigged) elections. He lays out where the unrest is headed and why Cameroonians are clamoring for outside mediation. Please support our global reporting with your paid subscription https://www.globaldispatches.org/

North Korea has been extremely repressive for a very long time. But over the last several years, the crackdowns have gotten worse. New reporting from The Economist shows how the regime is clamping down on South Korean cultural influences, strengthening its border to prevent escape, and sharply curtailing what were already limited free markets. My guest today, Patrick Foulis, calls this the "North Koreafication of North Korea," and it comes after a period of relative easing. Patrick Foulis is the foreign editor of The Economist. We kick off by discussing the various ways in which these crackdowns are happening before having a longer conversation about why Kim Jong Un's North Korea is tightening repression — much of which has to do with its changing relationships with Russia, China, and even the United States.

The Security Council is deep into negotiations around authorizing an international stabilization force for Gaza. But even if the Council approves such a mission, will it actually deploy? In this episode of To Save Us From Hell, Mark and Anjali share their doubts. Also up: the Trump administration blew up a global deal to put a price on carbon in international shipping — a move that would have pushed the industry toward zero emissions. Mark and Anjali break down this latest clash between Washington and the U.N. But first, Anjali and Mark sit down with Heba Aly, director of a new coalition called Article 109, which is taking on a bold mission: reforming the U.N. Charter itself. Article 109 is a little-known provision of the Charter that enables member states to review and revise it — but it's never been invoked. So, is now the right time to open up the U.N. Charter to review? What would that actually entail? And is it even a good idea? Listen and learn! The full episode is available for our paying subscribers. https://www.globaldispatches.org/40percentoff

Rhetoric and actions from the Trump administration suggest that the United States is seeking to forcibly oust Nicolás Maduro from power in Venezuela Is the U.S. really going to attempt regime change in Venezuela, and what would that even look like? Joining me from Caracas is Phil Gunson, Senior Analyst for the Andes Region at the International Crisis Group. We kick off discussing the mood in Caracas right now amid this increasingly threatening American posture before having a longer conversation about whether the U.S. is indeed seeking regime change, what that might entail, and the profound risks of American intervention in Venezuela.

A ceasefire is holding in Gaza. Aid is beginning to flow. The remaining Israeli hostages have been released, as have nearly 2,000 Palestinians from Israeli detention. This has been a truly remarkable day in the Middle East. But can this positive momentum be sustained? I recorded this conversation with Matt Duss of the Center for International Policy just moments after Donald Trump met with an impressive array of world leaders in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, in a ceremony designed to cement his personal investment in this peace plan. We kick off by discussing the significance of the spectacle and ceremony in Sharm el-Sheikh, then have a longer conversation about how the ceasefire came together and the many pitfalls that remain. This ceasefire is fragile. Hamas is reconstituting. And the Israeli government remains opposed to a viable Palestinian State. But this is nonetheless a significant inflection point after two years of brutal war.

UNGA is over. But its legacy lives on. We recorded this episode as news broke of a potential ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, and so we look back at UNGA80 to trace the ways in which the world's largest diplomatic gathering may have provided some key momentum for a breakthrough on Gaza. Mark and Anjali also go deep on a new Gang Suppression Force that the Security Council just authorized for Haiti. But can this international intervention in Haiti succeed when so many before it have failed? Finally, Mark and Anjali make their Nobel Peace Prize picks. Spoiler alert — it ain't Donald Trump. Unlock full access to this episode with a 40% discount. https://www.globaldispatches.org/40percentoff

On September 16th, Morocco became the 60th country to ratify the High Seas Treaty, triggering a countdown to January, when the treaty will officially enter into force. The High Seas Treaty establishes a kind of "rules of the road" for international waters that lie beyond the jurisdiction of any single country—particularly around conservation and the preservation of ocean biodiversity. At the core of the High Seas Treaty is the creation of Marine Protected Areas—think of them as national parks for the high seas. And even though the treaty has not yet entered into force, it is already influencing ocean conservation efforts, according to my guest today, Nichola Clark, a senior officer for ocean governance at the Pew Charitable Trusts. We begin by discussing why the international community felt the need for a High Seas Treaty in the first place, and then trace the story of how this agreement came to life. We wrap up with a conversation about what the treaty has already accomplished—and what it may achieve in the near future. This episode is produced in partnership with Lex International Fund, a philanthropic initiative dedicated to strengthening international law to solve global challenges. It's part of our ongoing series highlighting the real-world impact of treaties on state behavior, called "When Treaties Work."

A genocidal militia called the Rapid Support Forces has been laying siege to the city of El Fasher, in Darfur, for nearly 500 days. But in recent weeks, the situation has grown far worse. Some 250,000 people are now trapped in the city and are enduring relentless bombardment from drones and artillery. Food is scarce, and an untold number of people are starving to death. To make matters worse, recent moves by the Rapid Support Forces suggest they may be preparing for an all-out assault on the city. This is a pivotal moment in Sudan's civil war, which erupted in April 2023 when two generals—once allies in toppling a civilian-led government—turned their guns on each other, unleashing what is now the world's largest humanitarian crisis. After two and a half years of fighting, the Sudanese Armed Forces control most of the country's east, including Khartoum and a key port city. The Rapid Support Forces, meanwhile, hold much of the west, including resource-rich Darfur—with one critical exception: Darfur's historic capital, El Fasher. Joining me to discuss this precarious moment in Sudan's war and what might finally bring an end to the conflict is Noaman Elwaleed Mousa, a PhD student in political science at the University of California, Los Angeles, who studies civil wars in Africa. We begin with the situation on the ground in El Fasher and the broader significance of this battle for Sudan's future.

In 1995, there was a landmark meeting on gender equality in Beijing: the Fourth World Conference on Women. The conference produced the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action, a highly influential blueprint for advancing women's rights. It was at this conference that then–First Lady Hillary Clinton famously declared, "Human rights are women's rights and women's rights are human rights, once and for all." Last week, at the United Nations General Assembly, there was a 30-year commemoration of this landmark conference, which has become a touchstone for advocates around the world — particularly from civil society. Today, I'm joined by two of those advocates: Bani Dugal and Liliane Nkunzimana, representatives of the Baha'i International Community to the United Nations. They explain why the conference 30 years ago was so significant, how it continues to influence debates on gender equality today, and how to keep advancing gender equality in a profoundly different geopolitical context three decades on. This episode is produced in partnership with the Baha'i International Community, an NGO that represents the worldwide Baha'i community at the UN and other international forums, where it emphasizes that recognizing humanity's interconnectedness is key to a shared global future. The Baha'i International Community recently released the book "In Full Partnership: Thirty Years of Women's Advancement at the United Nations and Beyond, " which honors 30 years since the landmark Fourth World Conference on Women in Beijing and the creation of the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action. You can find the book at BIC.org.

Over the last two weeks, the United States has at least twice bombed boats in the Caribbean that the White House claims were smuggling drugs to the United States, killing an unknown number of people on board. This is extraordinary. Under normal circumstances, the United States Navy or Coast Guard would interdict alleged drug smugglers and turn them over to law enforcement for prosecution. But the Trump administration is apparently unleashing the full weight of the U.S. military against people it deems to be smuggling drugs. What's more concerning, according to legal experts across the spectrum, is that these targeted killings do not seem to be operating under any apparent legal framework. The administration is using the language of the War on Terror to justify these killings, but there has been no authorization for the use of military force against drug smugglers. Nor has the administration put forward a legal rationale for these strikes. And all this comes amidst an unprecedented American naval buildup in the Caribbean — a show of force against the regime of Nicolás Maduro. "It's truly extraordinary for the U.S. government to be conducting premeditated killing of individuals merely for suspected drug smuggling," says my interview guest Brian Finucane, senior advisor at the International Crisis Group. We begin by discussing what is known about these two strikes, before turning to a longer conversation about the implications of using the language and tools of counterterrorism to kill alleged drug smugglers absent any clear legal constraint. https://www.globaldispatches.org/40percentoff