Johansen.se

During a Taiwan National Day speech on October 10, Taiwanese president Lai Ching-te said that Taipei was determined to defend Taiwan’s sovereignty against “annexation and encroachment”, and emphasised that “China has no right to represent Taiwan”.

China’s response was swift. Less than a week after Lai’s provocative speech, a record 153 Chinese war planes swarmed and surrounded Taiwan during a Chinese military exercise over 24 hours. Beijing’s intention was simple: issue Taipei a “stern warning” for what China considers a “separatist act”.

Beijing sees the island as a “sacred and inseparable part of China’s territory” that must return to the fold. The Taiwanese president sees things differently. Currently, the self-governing island has a different political system, and few Taiwanese are in favour of reunification with China.

Though Washington doesn’t have diplomatic relations with Taipei officially, it does have regular communication through back channels and a strong economic relationship. The island is a key US trading partner and is a major supplier of semiconductors which are critical to the production of computers and other technologies. It also sells arms to Taiwan, although this has reduced significantly under Joe Biden.

China has not ruled out taking Taiwan by force, and if it does, the US might come to the self-ruling island’s defence as indicated by Washington in the past.

China holds extensive military exercises around the island of Taiwan in October 2024.

But Xi will be hoping the outcome of the 2024 US presidential election might bring a leader that would have a different attitude to Taiwan as well as helping China resolve its economic storm, which has resulted in a rising number of protests. So, between an outspoken Donald Trump and a seemingly even-tempered Kamala Harris, does Beijing have a favourite? And do either of them offer Xi anything new?

Taiwan and Xi’s legitimacy

Aside from Mao Zedong, the founder of the People’s Republic of China, Xi is the only sitting Chinese head of state without term limits and whose political ideology is enshrined in the Chinese constitution.

Xi could potentially prove his place in history by resolving China’s economic crisis. However, Beijing’s increasing isolation from the west due to its support of Russia’s Ukraine conquest makes this doubly hard.

Read more:
Biden on Taiwan: Did he really commit US forces to stopping any invasion by China? An expert explains why, on balance, probably not

Like it or not, Xi might have to ramp up whatever agenda Beijing has for Taiwan. If he could make sufficient progress towards unification, he may be hailed as one of the greats of the Chinese Communist Party, which would consolidate his status within the party, and distract from the nation’s economic woes.

Unlike Harris, who appears to take take alliances and partnerships seriously, Trump questions the benefits of many alliances forged by the US. In fact, the few times that he spoke about Taiwan centres on how the island state has taken America’s semiconductor business, and should pay more to the US for its defence.

So, would Trump come to Taiwan’s aid if China does invade Taiwan? Given the importance of semiconductors to electronics and AI, he just might. But Trump also has a reputation as a “dealmaker-in-chief”, so he might just cut a deal with Beijing, which erodes Taiwan’s independence. And that is likely to worry Taipei.

The Russia dilemma

As Russia’s “partner of no limits”, China has been supplying Russia with technology that fuels Russia’s war machinery against Ukraine. But this has strained Sino-western relations and earned Beijing trade and import restrictions, which hampers China’s economic recovery.

China could halt its aid to Russia to avoid western scrutiny, but that is not likely. Beijing needs a strong Russia to be a viable ally in its battle against a US-led world order, and to avoid being the focus of the west if Russia falters amid its conquest in Ukraine.

While Harris backs Kyiv and sees the war as a strategic and moral issue, Trump has criticised US aid to Ukraine. He also believes that Kyiv should provide concessions to Russia to end the war that Putin started in February 2022.

A future Trump administration might strengthen Russia by withdrawing support for Ukraine and lifting sanctions against Russia. And a more robust Russia is good news for Beijing.

US economic hostility

So, at first glance, Trump and Harris’s approaches towards China are different. Trump’s return to the White House could also intensify the trade war that he started in 2018, as tariffs on Chinese goods could go to as high as 60%. This might hasten the economic decoupling between the US and China.

Harris, on the other hand, wishes to “de-risk” China. This approach seeks to maintain US global interest while engaging with the east Asian economic behemoth. In such a scenario, Beijing might prefer a Harris presidency as it leaves room for negotiation.

However, Harris has relatively little foreign policy experience, and is expected to pick up where Joe Biden left off. This means the tariffs and technological restrictions that China faced under a Biden administration could stay under her presidency.

Another factor is Tesla founder Elon Musk, who is an ardent supporter of Trump, and may take a top job within a Trump administration.

How much influence the tech multi-billionaire actually has over Trump is uncertain. However, it’s worth noting that Musk has substantial business dealings in China, and might seek to lean on Trump if the former president’s policies harms Tesla’s interests.

With many of these factors unclear at the moment, Beijing will be hoping for a US leader who is more interested in economic wins than protecting Taiwan, and one that Xi can negotiate with to warm up relations between the two countries. Läs mer…

The spectre of the Reform party has been haunting the Tories since the general election. There is a general consensus that Reform split the vote on the right of the ideological spectrum, and this significantly contributed to the Tory defeat.

And now that the more centrist candidate James Cleverly has been eliminated from the leadership contest, the party is heading in a rightward direction. Both of the two finalists, Robert Jenrick and Kemi Badenock are on the right of the party and appear to think the next election will hinge on winning votes back from Reform.

But are they right to see Reform as their main threat? The results of the last election are still being analysed but it already looks like our perception of how the rightwing vote played out may be wrong. The perception is that in many constituencies, Reform ate into votes that would have otherwise gone to the Conservatives, costing them parliamentary seats. But that isn’t quite right.

The chart below shows the relationship between the vote shares for the Conservatives and Reform in Britain in the general election, with each dot representing a constituency. The summary line shows that the correlation between the Reform vote and the Conservative vote is positive (+0.21). This means that the two parties were in effect electoral allies rather than rivals. Their vote shares increased in tandem. To be fair, the correlation is modest, so they were rather weak allies, but who can ask for more than that in this electoral climate?

It’s interesting to contrast this with the relationship between Labour and Conservative voting in the election. Their correlation was strong and negative (-0.54), indicating that they were clearly rivals. When Labour did well, the Conservatives did badly and vice versa. If Reform was a strong rival to the Conservatives, we would see the same pattern.

Rivals or allies? Constituency level votes

The Relationship between Conservative and Reform Vote Shares in 2024.
P Whiteley, CC BY-ND

Why does the positive correlation show that Reform was an ally of the Conservatives in the election rather than a rival taking votes that would have gone to the Conservatives? The answer lies in the detail. The two parties did well in the same constituencies but appealed to different demographic groups within those constituencies. If they were campaigning for support in the same group of voters they would be rivals, but for the most part they relied on support from different groups.

This is illustrated in the chart below which looks at the social characteristics of constituencies using data from the 2021 census. It shows how different groups supported the two parties in the election.

The chart shows the correlations between the size of a particular group and voting for Reform and the Conservatives in the election. It looks at the 575 parliamentary constituencies in England and Wales, since the Scottish data is not yet available.

The relationships between constituency characteristics and voting in 2024

Less in common than you might think.
P Whiteley, CC BY-NC-ND

We observe large differences between support for the two parties among the different groups. For example, looking at the percentage of people in constituencies over the age of 64, most of whom were retired, we see a big difference. There is a strong positive correlation between this measure and voting Conservative (0.45), indicating that the Tories did well among older people. The opposite is true for Reform, since the relationship is negative (although relatively weak at -0.17). Reform did not rely on older people’s support in the same way as the Conservatives.

Want more politics coverage from academic experts? Every week, we bring you informed analysis of developments in government and fact check the claims being made.Sign up for our weekly politics newsletter, delivered every Friday.

A similar point can be made about the percentages who worked in professional and higher management occupations. The Tories did well in this group, whereas Reform did badly. Among constituencies with high levels of unemployment, the reverse was true. A high proportion of unemployed people boosted the Reform vote and undermined the Conservative vote.

Two rightwing options – but the party doesn’t have to become Reform.
Alamy

If we look at ethnicity, a high proportion of ethnically white people in constituencies helped Reform, but it weakened support for the Conservatives. This seems surprising at first sight until one remembers that many of them voted for Labour, the Liberal Democrats and Greens. The Tories lost a good proportion of the white vote in the election.

The census provided information about the numbers of people who had moved into constituencies from abroad in the previous year. Not surprisingly, given their anti-immigration positioning, large numbers of newly arrived migrants helped both parties, with Reform doing better in these areas than the Conservatives. That said, the correlations were modest and so did not play a large part in explaining the overall results.

Read more:
When did class stop predicting who people vote for in Britain? Know Your Place podcast

Finally, the 2021 census asked people about their national identities and in this case there was an interesting difference between respondents who claimed they were exclusively “English” rather than ‘British’ or some other identity. Englishness helped both parties, but it helped the Conservatives more than Reform. It appears that the Tories are more of an English National Party than Reform.

The next general election is a long way off, but these results mean that if the Labour government fails to deliver growth and curb illegal immigration, it will face a pincer movement from the Conservative and Reform. The Tories will pick up votes in constituencies with a high proportion of prosperous, middle class, retired people and Reform will pick up votes from deprived areas with high levels of young unemployed people. Läs mer…

Tundu Lissu has become the face of opposition in Tanzania following his defiant and unrelenting criticism of the government. Since he came into the national limelight in 1995 when running for a parliamentary seat, Lissu has been a champion of democracy and human rights. He has taken on the ruling elite, exposing corruption and demanding accountability. This almost cost him his life in 2017.

In September 2024, new evidence presented at a London tribunal revealed that the telecommunications company Tigo had shared Lissu’s mobile phone data – including his location – with the Tanzanian government. The implication was that the company was assisting the government in its harassment of the politician. Tigo’s owners have distanced themselves from these reports.

The revelations coincided with a resurgence in government crackdowns on opposition figures.

In the most recent developments, leaders of the country’s main opposition party Chadema (Chama cha Demokrasia na Maendeleo) – including Lissu, who is the party’s vice-chairperson, and chairman Freeman Mbowe – were arrested in September 2024. This followed their attempt to organise mass protests, which were foiled by the police. The protests had been organised to demand government accountability after the killing of a senior Chadema official and the disappearance of other party members believed to have been abducted by state operatives.

I have studied Tanzania’s political party dynamics for a decade and interviewed Lissu as part of my PhD research on the country’s democracy. Lissu’s persistence in tackling democratic backsliding in Tanzania has made him a formidable force, challenging the ruling Chama Cha Mapinduzi party.

Lissu spent about three years in exile in Belgium after the 2017 shooting. He staged a comeback as a presidential candidate in the 2020 elections. He lost to John Magufuli in a poll marred by violence and allegations of rigging.

There have been changes in the country since Magufuli’s death in March 2021 and a string of political reforms under President Samia Suluhu. This has created the space for Lissu and his party Chadema to establish an opposition that now threatens the ruling party’s six-decade hold on power. Presidential elections are due to be held in 2025.

So who is Lissu? What’s his history and how did he became involved in politics?

Early years

Lissu’s political activism began during his university years in the early 1990s. This marked the start of a career that would later shape Tanzania’s political landscape. Lissu studied law at the University of Dar es Salaam before going to the UK for a master’s degree in law.

His first foray into national politics came in 1995, when he vied for a parliamentary seat. He was 27. The election was Tanzania’s first under a multiparty system. It introduced Lissu to the arena of opposition politics following his defeat.

A year later, Lissu was one of the lead investigative lawyers for a public interest environmental law organisation investigating abuses and irregularities at a World Bank-backed gold mine in northern Tanzania. His early work focused on environmental and human rights.

Lissu and his colleague Rugemeleza Nshala were investigating the killing of 62 small-scale miners and the evictions of thousands at the mine in 1996. They were charged with sedition over these investigations. The government eventually stopped following up on the case.

Lissu thereafter worked on community land rights at the World Resources Institute, a global organisation focusing on policy research.

Parliamentary years

In 2010, Lissu won the parliamentary seat for Singida East under the opposition party Chadema. As a first-term member of parliament, he gained prominence by exposing significant state corruption scandals, particularly in the energy sector.

Lissu and other Chadema opposition figures became a formidable force, openly naming corrupt government officials and exposing grand theft.

They also began making calls for constitutional reform. These were aimed at addressing excessive presidential powers and the power imbalances of the union between Tanganyika and Zanzibar. This push culminated in then president Jakaya Kikwete initiating a constitutional review process in 2010.

Lissu’s legal acumen played out in the constituent assembly, the body convened to deliberate on constitutional reforms. However, the assembly, dominated by members of the ruling party Chama Cha Mapinduzi, rejected many of the key provisions of the draft constitution. It had been widely regarded as the “people’s draft” because it included citizen participation. Its key provisions included reduced presidential powers and the establishment of independent state institutions.

The process was to culminate in a referendum in 2014. This prematurely aborted and Tanzania went into the 2015 election without a new constitution.

In these elections, Lissu successfully defended his parliamentary seat. As a second-term legislator, he focused on strengthening Chadema’s presence. This included door-to-door conversations with the public and grassroots mobilisation to build the party.

The party’s momentum, however, was halted by a repressive regime under Magufuli, who became president in 2015. He cracked down on critics and instituted a partial ban on political rallies.

Lissu became very critical of Magufuli’s economic policies. In a public address in 2017, Magufuli admitted to the government’s tapping of Lissu’s phone and described those who opposed his own economic reforms as traitors. Soon after this, Lissu was shot 16 times after leaving parliament buildings in the capital, Dodoma.

Exile

Lissu officially went into exile in Belgium after the shooting. In 2020, he published Remaining in the Shadows: Parliament and Accountability in East Africa, a critical examination of the presidentialist systems in Uganda, Kenya and Tanzania, which he argued had undermined democratic consolidation in the region.

Through this publication, Lissu continued his activism, challenging political structures.

His brief return to Tanzania to contest the presidency in 2020 was marked by repeated arrests and intimidation during the electoral campaign. After his loss to Magufuli, Lissu went back to Belgium.

He announced his return home in 2023.

Tanzania today

It’s important to understand why Lissu and Chadema are viewed as a current threat in Tanzania.

The country is entering an election period. Local government elections are scheduled for November 2024 ahead of general elections in 2025.

The ruling party, Chama Cha Mapinduzi, has in the recent past relied on state violence to secure electoral victories. The last general election in 2020 was marred by violence, as well as intimidation of the opposition and censorship.

It looks likely that Chadema will once again nominate Lissu to contest the presidency in the 2025 general election against president Samia. Lissu’s fearlessness and defiance make him the best candidate to take on the ruling party. Samia has already described Lissu as a troublesome character.

With the ongoing opposition clampdown, it looks clear that the ruling party is once again willing to do whatever it will take to hold on to power. Even if Tanzania’s democracy suffers. Läs mer…

Climate change is increasing the risk of extreme weather events for Australian households. Floods and bushfires are becoming more likely and severe. As a result, household insurance costs are soaring – tripling in some cases. High-risk areas might even become uninsurable.

The national housing crisis is pushing low-income households in particular to seek affordable housing in areas at risk of flooding. There they can become trapped in a vicious cycle. Unable to pay soaring insurance premiums in these areas, they also can’t afford housing elsewhere.

The regulation of housing in Australia traditionally relies on well-informed buyers being responsible for managing the risks. But our new study found home buyers are often not aware of the long-term risks.

Only after they’ve bought the home do they start thinking about these risks. When faced with unexpected high insurance costs, many opt to take the risk of being underinsured or even uninsured. This leaves them highly vulnerable.

The National Strategy for Disaster Resilience promotes a shared-responsibility concept. However, we found the main responsibility still lies with households. And they are not equipped to cope with the increasing complexity, impacts and costs of extreme weather events.

What’s wrong with the current approach?

The uncertain knowledge about future extreme weather events is challenging the traditional prioritising of individual responsibility. It’s becoming even harder for households to make informed decisions based on past experiences.

Government efforts to regulate increasing flooding events might not be effective when households do not want to relocate or cannot afford housing elsewhere.

Governments are also under pressure to jump in to compensate households for the costs of extreme weather damage.

Our research found a number of issues prevent efficient regulation:

stakeholders such as the insurance industry and home lenders face legal hurdles to sharing data and giving financial advice for housing in high-risk areas
well-intended measures such as buybacks and planned relocations can fail when they do not relate to people’s experiences and life situation, such as limited financial resources and deep connections to a place and community
households’ motivation to insure themselves might decrease if they can expect government to provide compensation as a de facto last insurer.

Who is responsible for what?

In Australia, responsibility for managing extreme weather events is roughly divided among three main stakeholders: the three levels of government, businesses and households.

Within the three levels of government, states and territories bear the main responsibility for managing extreme weather events. They do so through disaster risk management plans and policies, hazard prevention and land-use planning.

Yet housing is still built in flood-prone regions. It happens where commercial interests conflict with regional planning, and governments are under pressure to deliver housing for growing populations.

After extreme weather hits, house and contents insurance cover is key for a household to recover. But insurance costs are based on the risk of events such as flooding. As these risks rise, premiums may also increase and become unaffordable. The Climate Council estimates one out of 25 properties will even become uninsurable by 2030.

When housing is built in at-risk areas, under the current system home buyers are largely responsible for informing themselves about the risks of floods, bushfires and other natural disasters. Our research suggests many are struggling to estimate what insurance is likely to cost them.

To prepare for these costs before they invest in a home, they must assess their own risk, know the value of their house and contents and calculate the costs of rebuilding after a disaster. They must also take into account increasing costs for builders and materials after an extreme weather event.

Climate change is making these already complex calculations even more difficult.

Our study is based on interviews with 26 insurance, legal, financial, policy and urban planning experts. Despite the National Strategy for Disaster Resilience’s concept of shared responsibility, we found most of the burden still falls on households.

Yet households often lack the knowledge to assess the risks. The data and information are either unavailable, or hard to access and understand.

These difficulties, coupled with the complex language of insurance contracts, contribute to high numbers of underinsured and uninsured households.

The Australian government responded in 2022 by setting up a cyclone reinsurance pool. Its aim is to keep premiums for households and businesses affordable.

There are also government buyback programs or relocation plans to move people out of high-risk regions. As noted above, though, these don’t always suit households when offered away from their communities or full costs aren’t adequately covered.

Governments must take on more responsibility

According to the experts we interviewed, households are no longer able to carry the main responsibilities for managing the risks of climate change. Government must take on more responsibility.

At the local level, councils need to better educate their staff on climate change risks. They should ban housing development in at-risk areas.

Better information and data sharing among stakeholders such as insurers and governments will also be crucial. Such data and information also need to be made more accessible and easier for households to understand.

In a climate change world, increasing extreme weather events result in new complexities. Households are not able to assess these new risks and complexities to make well-informed decisions.

Australia needs stronger sharing of responsibilities between different stakeholders such as insurers, governments and households. This includes changes to laws on information and data sharing between insurers, governments and households, bans on building in high-risk areas, and better advice about the costs of buying in high-risk regions. Läs mer…

Do you wash your hands every time you use the toilet? How about before you handle food? Be honest.

Australia’s Food Safety Information Council has released its latest report card on the country’s hand washing habits. It found 19% of Australians don’t wash their hands every time they use the toilet. Close to half (42%) admit they don’t always wash hands before handling food.

So who’s doing well when it comes to hand hygiene, who’s not – and why does it matter?

What did the report find?

The new report surveyed hand washing practices of 1,229 people. Results were consistent with what we’ve learned from similar surveys.

Once again, women do better than men at washing their hands after using the toilet, although only slightly (80% of men say they do every time, versus 83% of women). Just 55% of men wash their hands before touching food, compared to 62% of women.

Age also seemed to make a difference. Under 34 years old, 69% of people washed their hands every time they used the toilet. Over age 65, that jumped to 86%.

Although some of these differences aren’t completely unexpected – such as the gap between men’s and women’s hand washing habits – the reasons remain unclear.

People over 65 were much more likely than younger people to wash their hands after using the toilet.
Mélissa Jeanty/Unsplash

Why don’t people wash their hands?

Public health messaging often focuses on how to wash hands well. But there’s less research that follows up on how widely people actually adopt these practices. And to understand why – if they are skipping the soap and water – those messages might not be getting through effectively.

One study that looked at this question in India asked school children about barriers to hand washing. The vast majority (91%) had low “illness threat perception”. In other words, they simply didn’t perceive a risk of getting sick form not washing their hands after going to the toilet.

Interestingly, the inability to see germs with their own eyes was one of the biggest barriers, cited by 46% of the children. But 72% said they would wash their hands if their friends did.

It’s tempting to speculate these reasons may also apply to other age groups, but we simply haven’t done enough research to know. People’s reasons for hand washing, or not, likely vary across their lifetime and with their circumstances.

What are the risks?

Urine and faeces contain millions of germs, especially faeces, which has more than 100 billion germs per gram.

When you use the toilet and touch surfaces in the bathroom, you will pick up germs. People who skip the hand washing step on the way out take those germs with them when they leave, depositing them on each surface they touch afterwards.

You may not get sick yourself, but you’re increasing the spread of bacteria. This can increase the risk of infection and illness for other people, including those with compromised immune systems such as older people and those undergoing common forms of treatment for cancer.

Hand washing before cooking and eating is also important. The risk here goes both ways. If you have disease-causing germs on your hands (maybe because you didn’t wash them after the toilet) you may transfer them to the food where they can multiply and even produce toxins. People who eat the food may then get sick, often involving vomiting and diarrhoea.

Washing hands before eating and preparing food can stop germs spreading from the food to hands, and vice versa.
CDC/Unsplash

In the other direction, some foods naturally carry germs before cooking – such as salmonella and campylobacter bacteria in raw poultry. If you don’t wash your hands after handling these foods you may transfer them to other surfaces and risk spreading infection.

How should I wash my hands?

Follow these three simple tips for hand washing correctly:

wet your hands and rub them together well to build up a good lather with soap for at least 20 seconds and don’t forget to wash between your fingers and under your nails. You might have to use a nail brush
rinse well under running water to remove the bugs from your hands
dry your hands thoroughly on a clean towel for at least 20 seconds. Touching surfaces with moist hands encourages bugs to spread from the surface to your hands.

What about hand sanitiser?

If no running water is available, use an alcohol-based hand sanitiser. These rapidly inactivate a wide range of germs, rendering them non-infectious. Hand sanitisers are effective against a wide range of bacteria and viruses that can cause many common gastrointesintal and respiratory infections.

However if your hands are soiled with organic matter – such as blood, faeces, meat, sand or soil – they won’t be effective. In that case you should clean your hands with soap and water.

The bottom line

Hand washing is a bit like wearing a seat belt — you do that every time you get in a car, not just on the days you “plan” to be involved in an accident. The bottom line is hand washing is a simple, quick intervention that benefits you and those around you — but only if you do it. Läs mer…

“And it was Leila Whittaker, Ken Black’s widow, not Leila Whittaker the novelist who bent down to pick up a flower arrangement.”

Leila the novelist has spent a lifetime playing second fiddle to her celebrity artist husband, the evocatively named Ken Black. She strives for recognition on her own count, but her energies have clearly been sucked up in the nurturing of her husband’s art, and the raising of their two sons, the blessed Sebastian and the troubled Otis.

Review: Diving, Falling – Kylie Mirmohamadi (Scribe)

Ken’s untimely death from cancer is the starting point for Kylie Mirmohamadi’s exquisitely crafted psychological portrait of Leila: betrayed wife and numbed widow. She is also a doting mother, loyal friend and sister. But most intriguingly, she assumes a new role as lover.

Much of the novel’s narrative propulsion comes from the unfolding of Leila’s multi-faceted character. She is a complex woman on many levels.

Less happy than she ‘should be’

As a wife, Leila seems to have hardly remonstrated against Ken’s serial philandering: there are surprisingly few embittered references, even when she recognises what she assumes are the “genitals” of Ken’s muse and her former friend, Anita, wife of Ken’s agent, Giorgio. After the post-wake family dinner, Giorgio phones Leila and drunkenly proposes “we should fuck”, as revenge.

As her two adult sons become executors of their father’s artistic estate, Leila becomes a somewhat passive bystander. Decision-making about Ken’s legacy is usurped by Sebastian’s glamorous, assured partner.

Leila proves an ambiguous, slightly flaky character in other domains. Now her sons are grown, she nostalgically embraces her role as mother, but discloses that when they were young “I couldn’t be as happy as a mother, and a loved woman should be”. (To be fair, what mother wouldn’t admit to this, during those seemingly endless years of child-raising?)

Shockingly, she doesn’t challenge Ken’s physical abuse of Otis, on more than one occasion, starting in childhood when he accidentally crashes Ken’s 1971 Citroën Maserati against the garage door. From her recollections, it seems Leila regularly acquiesces in order to keep the peace. Or perhaps, more significantly, for the freedom her marriage allows to pursue her own writing and to stay in their gorgeous house, with its big glass windows looking onto the river.

Kylie Mirmohamadi exquisitely crafts the story of Leila, a novelist used to playing second fiddle to her artist husband.
Scribe

I thought Leila’s somewhat ill-advised choices revealed a certain ambiguity of motive. I was never quite sure whether she really did love Ken, despite his obvious failings as husband and father. Later in the novel, she admits to loving “rich” men, in contrast to her sensible sister, Marian. Rumours of a “new Ken Black on the market” and the unearthing of new material seem to reignite Leila’s admiration for Ken, all the while minimising the significance of his more repugnant behaviours.

What did Leila value about Ken? Was it nostalgia for the heady bohemian days of their early courtship, their family life? Or was it more her love of art, and Ken’s art in particular? Or the artistic lifestyle and the accompanying wealth and prestige?

An ambivalent relationship with a long-term partner who dies in traumatic circumstances certainly complicates the grieving process, as we witness. It is fruitful subject matter for a novel, not commonly explored – lending Diving, Falling its originality and momentum. As a psychological drama, it forensically dissects complex relationships, in a fresh style devoid of clichés.

‘Waking to my own bodily rhythms’

A cover line reads: “you’ve lived his life, now it’s time to live yours.” This prompted me to expect a stronger Leila persona to emerge. At a critical point, surrounded by her poetry, her notebooks and “non internet connected laptop”, Leila does withdraw to write (yay!). We finally see some of her own naked artistic drive:

No man, no children, no dog, falling asleep when and where I wanted, and waking to my own bodily rhythms. No one’s genius to nurture, and no one’s arse to wipe.

Yet there are few insights into the metamorphosis of “Leila Whittaker the novelist”. Soon after Ken’s death, she falls for the nearest Nordic charmer, Magnus. She is also vulnerable to the seductions of the more exotic, much wealthier purchaser of one of Ken’s paintings, who happens to be married.

At one point, Leila asks herself who she is “betraying”: is it “the whole of womankind”?

At times, I was alarmed by Leila’s choices. For instance, when she invites a perfect stranger her son’s age to live with her in their Melbourne house, wanting to nurture him and his art: tiny miniature sculptures. She connects him with her favourite son, is overly attentive to his needs, announces he “should feel free to have guests in the house. Overnight ones. I was young myself once”. There is a lot of slightly cringy familiarity and boundary crossing.

At times, it seems Leila doesn’t have full insight into the choices she is making. This might be the point – grief does this. But her baffling behaviour raises the stakes, and seems intentional on Miromahadi’s part.

One possibility, though, is that Leila is finally and justifiably reclaiming autonomy in a sexual life long dominated by her husband’s needs – and the possibility of genuine love, of the kind she was denied in her marriage with Ken. I was convinced by her description of the profound experience of being loved “in a way that did not damage” her.

‘Pure art’

Throughout the novel there are plentiful references to art, mostly mediated by Leila, that will resonate with art lovers. Leila’s admiration for Ken’s art is palpable, as if the truth of it has finally become clearer in his legacy.

It was strange to see Ken’s hand in charcoal and pencil. The finer lines made his vision more sensitive somehow. It reminded me that he saw the world as we all saw it, before he took it apart and re-presented it in a way that illuminated the essence rather than reproduced the details.

Mirmohamadi’s writing was a high point for me. She is especially masterful at crafting nuance in interpersonal encounters:

I thanked Michaela as I left, and I kissed her on the cheek, and I felt her lean away. We both felt it, though I think she hadn’t meant to do it. Her body had registered threat. Her mother body and her sexual body.

Mirmohamadi touchingly renders Leila’s flaws as a mother, too. Following a poignant observation made by her less favoured son, Otis, about his recognition of this position, she says: “And that is how I can say, with confidence, that there are women walking around this earth with hearts that are broken, though they beat on.”

The prose is immersive and insightful, with layers of deep universal understandings that perhaps only art – including literature – can deliver. “Think about it, Leila. Layers of leaves, layers of truth, around the hidden heart.”

Diving, Falling is a novel about complicated grief and the unravelling of relationships following a major loss. It’s about transitions and adaptations, and new awakenings. It is also, perhaps, a manifesto about the sublimation of women’s art, in deference to the (much less hard-won) notoriety of their artist husbands. Or as about one woman’s sacrifice and eventual epiphany.

In the end, though, it is in itself like a work of art:

Like a secret language. Yes, pure art. Just to exist, not for viewing. To declare the artist’s existence. Evidence of their existence. Testimony. Läs mer…

Disturbing details emerged this week about AFL men’s football team GWS’ end-of-year event, themed “controversial couples”.

The AFL handed down a range of sanctions to the players involved, including fines and suspensions.

While those defending the players have suggested their actions were lighthearted and in the spirit of the season-end celebration, research has established a connection between rape jokes and sexual assault.

The AFL has a tarnished history when it comes to players perpetrating violence against women.

Despite pledging support for ending gender-based violence in Australia, this incident proves problematic cultural problems persist within AFL clubs.

What happened?

Following an anonymous tip-off to GWS management, it was revealed a number of players engaged in sexist, racist and degrading acts during an end-of-season event.

Player Josh Fahey dressed up as former NRL player Jarryd Hayne and “simulated inappropriate acts on a sex doll.”

Hayne was sentenced to four years and nine months prison for raping a woman on the night of the 2018 NRL grand final but was released earlier this year after his convictions were overturned.

Players Connor Idun and Lachie Whitfield performed a skit involving slavery, while another pair simulated the September 11 terrorist attack on the Twin Towers.

It has also been reported a sketch involving Sean “Diddy” Combs — an American rapper currently jailed on charges of racketeering, sex trafficking and transportation — was performed.

Scholars and activists are working tirelessly to change public perceptions around violence against women. Jokes and skits themed around violence and sexual assault are harmful because they trivialise the immense harm gendered violence causes women and children.

The AFL’s woman problem

There are many historic examples of AFL players and athletes of other codes acting violently and disrespectfully towards women.

Numerous current and former players, who have faced criminal charges for assaults and sexual violence towards women, have been allowed to continue playing or retain their status as celebrated players.

Current AFL player Jordan De Goey has faced sexual assault allegations, and was briefly stood down by his club in 2021 after being charged with assault in the United States.

He pleaded guilty to harassment and in 2022, Collingwood extended De Goey’s contract for five years.

Recently, one of the AFL’s greatest former players, Wayne Carey, was set to be inducted as a legend in the New South Wales Football Hall of Fame, despite having a number of charges for assaulting women. However, the AFL did eventually block the move after public outcry.

The AFL, and parts of the media, often distinguish players’ violence against women from their achievements on the field. This allows men to continue playing or repair their public image.

It also sends a message that misogyny and violence against women are tolerated as long as the perpetrator’s talent provides value to the sport.

The impact of athletes

In the case of the GWS players, the AFL’s sanctions indicate the code’s willingness to take a stance on breaches of conduct.

However, that the players believed their costumes and skits were acceptable in the first place indicates deep-seated issues in attitudes towards women.

In each of the costume examples, sexual and racial violence formed key elements of the “joke”, indicating the AFL’s education and training on equity and diversity is not working.

The general public tends to have high expectations of athletes’ behaviour due to their position as role models.

It is often suggested that boys and young men require positive role models and that AFL players fit the bill, although research is not clear on whether the gender of supportive adults is relevant.

At the moment, there is significant concern within the community about the influence of dangerous misogynist influencers on boys’ attitudes and behaviour towards women.

Research suggests that while some young men have the skills to be critical about the messages they receive about violence and sexism, they still experience pressure to live up to restrictive rules on what it means to be a “real man.”

Many Australians highly value AFL players’ skills and abilities on the field. This admiration and respect can also extend to their off-field lives.

But it doesn’t mean AFL players are beyond reproach.

More needs to be done

The impacts of men’s violence on their victims are horrific and myriad.

This year, the AFL partnered with Our Watch – a national leader in the primary prevention of violence against women and their children – to provide training to players and clubs and help them understand:

the link between gender inequality and violence against women
the role of sport in promoting gender equality
and what players can do to be active allies including taking action when they see or hear disrespect.

While this is promising, this education must result in changed behaviour, attitudes and accountability.

The Australian government has recently labelled violence against women a “national emergency”. Major sporting codes need to take a leading role in addressing it.

It’s time for the AFL to honestly confront their problems with misogyny and violence against women. Läs mer…

The death of Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar, one of the masterminds behind the group’s horrific October 7 2023 attack on southern Israel, is no doubt a consequential moment in Israel’s year-long war against Hamas.

But is it a turning point?

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Sinwar’s killing – long a major objective of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) – would signal the “beginning of the end” of the war. But he made clear the war is not over.

In fact, Benny Gantz, a former defence minister and member of the war cabinet, said the IDF would continue to operate in Gaza “for years to come”.

So, what exactly will be the impact of Sinwar’s death?

Does this change anything?

Sinwar’s death does change at least one aspect of the war. He was an iconic figure, for better or worse, for Palestinians. He was seen as someone who was taking the fight to Israel.

With Sinwar still alive and Hamas hitting back at Israel’s war in Gaza, the group was actually increasing in popularity.

Top Hamas leaders Ismail Haniyeh (left) and leader of Hamas movement in Gaza Strip Yahya Al Sinwar (R) attend a Hamas rally to mark the group’s 30th anniversary, in Gaza City, Gaza Strip, 14 December 2017.

Opinion polling in late May showed support for Hamas among Palestinians in the Occupied Territories had reached 40%, a six-point increase from three months earlier. Support for the Palestinian Authority, which controls the West Bank, was about half that.

Sinwar’s demise changes the face of Hamas. It could be a major turning point if Hamas is unable to replace him with a leader as strong as he was.

One of the names being discussed is Khaled Mashal, the former head of Hamas’ political office who still remains influential in the organisation.

This moment offers an opportunity for a new Hamas leader to seek a ceasefire with Israel and an end to the horrific conditions in which Gazans are living. But there’s still the question of whether Sinwar’s death achieves Israel’s war objectives.

What would constitute a victory for Netanyahu?

The main issue is that Netanyahu’s war aims have not yet been achieved:

the elimination of Hamas as a fighting force and a danger to Israel
the freeing of the roughly 100 Israeli hostages still believed to be held in Gaza, as many as half of whom may now be dead
the re-establishment of deterrence with Hezbollah in Lebanon to allow the 60,000 Israelis who have been evacuated from northern Israel to return home.

Although the killing of Sinwar is a major step towards restricting Hamas’ ability to maintain its war against the IDF in Gaza, Israeli soldiers still face some very significant problems there.

Over the past year, Hamas has morphed from an organised fighting force into guerrilla mode, which makes its fighters much more difficult to eliminate completely.

The classic methodology for dealing with a guerrilla force is “clear, hold and build”. This means you clear an area of the enemy, put troops in to hold the area, and then build an environment in which the enemy can’t re-establish itself.

Israel can certainly do the “clearing” and “holding”, but has not been able to build an environment in which Hamas can no longer operate.

Israeli journalists who have been embedded with Israeli forces have made the point that Hamas operatives are returning to areas that were previously cleared by the IDF, in part due to the group’s extensive tunnel network.

Other complications for Netanyahu

Another issue for Netanyahu is that right-wing members of his cabinet have threatened to resign from his governing coalition if he agrees to a ceasefire before Hamas is destroyed as a fighting force. They believe Hamas could use a ceasefire to regroup and re-establish itself as a serious threat to Israel.

At the same time, Netanyahu is also facing increasing pressure over the fate of the hostages. If there isn’t a ceasefire and negotiations to release them, their families and supporters will continue the large demonstrations they have been staging in Israel in recent months. They are desperate to get back any hostages who may still be alive and the remains of those who have died.

An Israeli demonstrator in Tel Aviv holds a sign calling for a ceasefire deal and the immediate release of hostages held by Hamas.
Ariel Schalit/AP

Netanyahu is also still weighing Israel’s promised retaliation against Iran for its missile attack against the Jewish state in early October.

If Israel does launch a major strike, what does Iran do in response? Iran’s problem is that it had always relied on a strong Hezbollah in Lebanon to be able to respond to Israel militarily on its behalf. And now it seems to have lost that as Hezbollah has been significantly weakened in recent weeks.

The US sees a potential off-ramp

Another aspect, of course, is where the United States stands on this. The US has made clear it sees Sinwar’s death as being an off-ramp for Israel in Gaza – it can claim a major strategic victory and essentially agree to a ceasefire.

In recent weeks, the US has also given Israel an ultimatum, saying if there isn’t an improvement in the amount of humanitarian aid going into Gaza by the end of November, it will cut off some military aid to Israel.

The Democrats want the war to end as soon as possible, because while it’s on the front pages of US newspapers, it divides the party and could encourage some voters not to come out and vote in the presidential election.

So it’s very important for the Democratic candidate, Vice President Kamala Harris, that there be a ceasefire as soon as possible. She said as much in her remarks today:

Hamas is decimated and its leadership is eliminated. This moment gives us an opportunity to finally end the war in Gaza.

The problem, however, is that Netanyahu has shown in the past he is prepared to go against US wishes whenever it suits him. And a ceasefire does not suit his purposes at this point.

Given Republican nominee Donald Trump’s steadfast support for Netanyahu, the Israeli leader would also be more than happy to see him return to the White House.

What’s most likely to happen

Taking all of these factors into account, Netanyahu is likely to prioritise keeping his government together.

As such, he will be more guided by its very right-wing members – Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich and National Security Minister Itamar Ben Gvir – than by the US or the families of the hostages.

AFter Sinwar’s death, Smotrich said the IDF “must increase intense military pressure in the Strip”, while Ben Gvir called on Israel to “continue with all our strength until absolute victory”.

So at this stage, it seems likely the war will continue until Netanyahu can say Hamas has been destroyed as a fighting force. That is what his cabinet is demanding to achieve the government’s war aims. Läs mer…

In Australia, it’s scam victims who foot the bill for the overwhelming majority of the money lost to scams each year.

A 2023 review by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) found banks detected and stopped only a small proportion of scams. The total amount banks paid in compensation paled in comparison to total losses.

So, it was a strong statement this week when it was revealed the Australian Financial Conduct Authority (AFCA) had ordered a bank – HSBC – to compensate a customer who lost more than $47,000 through a sophisticated bank impersonation or “spoofing” scam.

This decision was significant. An AFCA determination is binding on the relevant bank or other financial institution, which has no direct right of appeal. It could have implications for the way similar cases are treated in future.

The ruling comes amid a broader push for sector-wide reforms to give banks more responsibility for detecting, deterring and responding to scams, as opposed to simply telling customers to be “more careful”.

Here’s what you should know about this landmark ruling, and what it might mean for consumers.

Read more:
Australia’s new scam prevention draft is welcome – but it needs to be broader in scope

A highly sophisticated ‘spoofing’ scam

You might be familiar with “push payment” scams that trick the victim into paying money to a dummy account. These include the “mum I’ve lost my phone” scam and some romance scams.

The recent case concerned an equally noxious “bank impersonation” or “spoofing” scam. The complainant – referred to as “Mr T” – was tricked into giving the scammer access to his HSBC account, from which an unauthorised payment was made.

The victim was duped into providing passcodes to access his online banking account.
tsingha25/Shutterstock

The scammer sent Mr T a text message, purportedly asking him to investigate an attempted Amazon transaction.

In an effort to respond to the (fake) unauthorised Amazon purchase, Mr T revealed security passcodes to the scammer, enabling them to transfer $47,178.54 from his account and disappear with it.

The fact Mr T was dealing with scammers was far from obvious – scammers had information about him one might reasonably expect only a bank would know, such as his bank username.

On top of this, the scam text message appeared in a thread of other legitimate text messages that had previously been sent by the real HSBC.

AFCA’s ruling

HSBC argued to AFCA that having to pay compensation should be ruled out under the ePayments Code, a voluntary code of practice administered by ASIC.

Under this code, a bank is not required to compensate a customer for an unauthorised payment if that customer has disclosed their passcode. The bank argued the complainant had voluntarily disclosed these codes to the scammer, meaning the bank didn’t need to pay.

AFCA disagreed. It noted the very way the scam had worked was by creating a sense of urgency and crisis. AFCA considered that the complainant had been manipulated into disclosing the passcodes and had not acted voluntarily.

AFCA awarded compensation covering the vast majority of the disputed transaction amount, lost interest charged to a home loan account, and $5,000 towards Mr T’s legal costs.

It also ordered the bank to pay compensation of $1,000 for poor customer service in dealing with the matter, including communication delays.

HSBC argued the complainant had given over his passcodes voluntarily, but AFCA disagreed.
Mick Tsikas/AAP

Other cases may be more complex

In this case, the determination was relatively straightforward. It found Mr T had not voluntarily disclosed his account information, so was not excluded from being compensated under the ePayments Code.

However, many payment scams fall outside the ePayments Code because they involve the customer directly sending money to the scammer (as opposed to the scammer accessing the customer’s account). That means there is no code to direct compensation.

Still, AFCA’s jurisdiction is broader than merely applying a code. In considering compensation for scam losses, AFCA must consider what is “fair in all the circumstances”. This means taking into account:

legal principles
applicable industry codes
good industry practice
previous AFCA decisions.

Relevant factors might well include whether the bank was proactive in responding to known scams, as well as the challenges for individual customers in identifying scams.

Broader reforms are on the way

At the heart of this determination by AFCA is a recognition that, increasingly, detecting sophisticated scams can be next to impossible for customers, which can mean they don’t act voluntarily in making payments to scammers.

Similar reasoning has informed a range of recent reform initiatives that put more responsibility for detecting and responding to scams on the banks, rather than their customers.

In 2023, Australia’s banking sector committed to a new “Scam-Safe Accord”. This is a commitment to implement new measures to protect customers, including a confirmation of payee service, delays for new payments, and biometric identity checks for new accounts.

Tech platforms – including social media giants – would have to take more proactive steps against scams under proposed new legislation.
Primakov/Shutterstock

Changes on the horizon could be more ambitious and significant.

The proposed Scams Prevention Framework legislation would require Australian banks, telcos and digital platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent, detect, report, disrupt and respond to scams.

It would also include a compulsory external dispute resolution process, like AFCA’s, for consumers seeking compensation for when any of these institutions fail to comply.

Addressing scams is not just an Australian issue. In the United Kingdom, newly introduced rules make paying and receiving banks responsible for compensating customers, for scam losses up to £85,000 (A$165,136), unless the customer is grossly negligent. Läs mer…