As a hub for student activism in America, particularly regarding pro-Palestinian resistance on campus, Columbia University has been the first of many higher education institutions in the U.S. targeted by the Trump administration. For example, on March 20, Trump announced the suspension of 175 million USD in federal funding to the University of Pennsylvania for allowing transgender women to participate in women’s sports. The Trump administration has also called for an investigation into the University of California (UC) system in the wake of allegations of antisemitism. As a result of these threats, the UC system has also banned ‘diversity statements’ from their faculty hiring process amidst a federal crackdown on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, showcasing how the Trump administration’s goals will leave lasting impacts on both students and staff.

The cuts in Columbia’s federal funding mark the first of many initiatives that the U.S. government is taking in stripping private and public institutions of their autonomy, in curriculum, admissions, and hiring processes. Critically, it has also created a shift in the exercise of First Amendment rights in spaces where free thought has traditionally been welcomed. As the number of campus protests
has exploded in the past year – with over 3,000 protests logged by Harvard University Ash Center’s
Nonviolent Action Lab – the Trump administration is adamant to control many of the country’s
leading universities. Trump has carefully crafted a route to justify restrictions on free speech, such
as by equating pro-Palestinian activism with anti-semitism, setting a dangerous precedent for
future leaders.

Amid the protests at Columbia, Trump dispatched federal agents from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) into two university residences, as revealed in an email sent out to students from the Interim President Katrina Armstrong on March 13. These agents, alongside U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officers, had been assigned with arrest warrants, one for Columbia graduate Mahmoud Khalil, his detention being met with massive outcry across the country. Following his arrest, Trump vowed to deport pro-Palestinian activists, claiming that they support Hamas and are antisemitic. Despite the extreme circumstances that students across the country have been met with, protestors have refused to back down.

Universities across Canada and the U.S. have already been experiencing massive budget cuts, curtailing many PhD programs and even rescinding acceptances, as reported at the University of Pennsylvania. Now, with the threat of additional cuts looming over American universities, higher
education has become an instrument to Trump’s agenda to lead the country down a path of anti-intellectualism. As demonstrated earlier by the UC system’s banning of ‘diversity statements’ (despite California being a forerunner of readjusting to restore diversity in its admissions after the banning of affirmative action in the 90s), universities have preemptively changed their policies to align with the Trump administration’s values in order to protect themselves against retaliation. The many arguments that Trump has used to silence or control universities, such as punishing antisemitism due to anti-war protests, have been used as scapegoats for their broader mission of destroying “wokeness” in the U.S. In 2021, J.D. Vance declared that “the universities are the enemy.” This was not just an empty statement, as indicated by Trump’s recent executive order to shut down the Department of Education. Along the campaign trail, Trump and the Republican Party argued that the department should be under state control and that it has become dominated by liberal ideology. This anti-woke agenda is a symptom of the accelerating democratic backslide in the U.S., as well what many scholars deem to be an element of a developing fascist regime. In its self-declared war against “woke” culture, the Trump administration has actually been fighting against political opposition, resistant strains of thought, and values that do not directly align with its own.

On Friday, Columbia announced that it would concede to the requests from the federal government, which includes placing the Middle East, South Asian, and African Studies department under academic receivership, making protest rules on campus more strict, and increasing law enforcement authority. In the coming year, more and more universities will have to face a decision to either retain their institutional independence or to make concessions to the Trump administration and fundamentally restructure university policy.

Columbia University protests during its first encampment in April 2024.

The post Activism as a Scapegoat appeared first on The McGill Daily.

On March 18, they flooded the streets again, at the same starting point. But the general sentiment wasn’t joy: it was outrage.

Early Tuesday morning, the clock read 2:10 AM when the people of Gaza woke up to the deafening sound of air strikes — sounds they didn’t think they would have to endure any more.

Israeli raids targeted the northern, central, and southern governorates of Gaza. According to Al Jazeera Arabic, Israeli tanks also shelled the town of Abasan in Khan Younis. The world awoke to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s announcing that the war on Gaza had resumed.

By Tuesday afternoon, Gaza time, the Palestinian Health Ministry reported “404 martyrs and 562 injuries arrived at Gaza Strip hospitals so far,” adding that “a number of victims are still under the rubble.”

This continuation of brutal attacks comes two weeks after Netanyahu blocked aid from entering Gaza, just as Gazans were preparing to celebrate the holy month of Ramadan.

As of March 21, the rising toll of martyrs has reached nearly 600, with the majority of casualties being children.

The Islamic resistance group Hamas stated that “Netanyahu and his extremist government are making a decision to overturn the ceasefire agreement, exposing prisoners in Gaza to an unknown fate.” They called on people in Arab and Islamic nations, as well as the “free people of the world,” to take to the streets to protest the assault.

On Tuesday afternoon, at exactly 5:00 PM, Montreal4Palestine (M4P) rallied up Montreal residents in front of the U.S. consulate in response to this call. They expressed their frustration and anger concerning the escalation.

“Brothers and sisters, we are standing here today as a show of dignity, because we cannot just stay at home, and watch as these atrocities happen,” said one of M4P’s chanters. “I am fasting, and many of you are fasting right now, but that doesn’t stop us [from showing up]. Whether we’re fasting, whether it’s cold, whether it’s raining, we will continue to resist, we will continue to fight, because that’s what Gaza teaches us.”

“Today marks day 528 of the ongoing genocide in Gaza,” stated one of M4P’s organizers, noting that while the ceasefire technically went into effect on January 19, the aggression never stopped. “Only one truth stands clear: this is not a war on Gaza, this is an American-backed genocide. The Zionist enemy’s renewed aggression is not an isolated event. It is part of an ongoing war of extermination, targeting our people, targeting our cause, [and] targeting our resistance.”

Reports have suggested the Israeli government alerted the White House before launching the attacks, completely breaching the ceasefire agreement. U.S. President Donald Trump purportedly gave a green light to Israel’s moves.

“This is not ignorance, this is complicity!” continued the organizer. “The United States has once again proven that it is not a broker of peace, but a partner in war crimes, and genocide. Because with every
bomb that falls, every child under the rubble, every mother holding her dying baby, they all bear the fingerprints of American weapons.”

Montreal residents’, rejoicing only a few months back, now carried the weight of dozens of news headlines reporting rising death tolls. People screamed “shame!” in condemnation of the attacks, affirming the message of M4P’s organizer’s speech.

One speaker took the mic to say her piece in French, listing previous U.S. acts in complicity with Israeli aggression and violence towards Palestinians: “On December 6, 2017, Trump, then also President, recognized Jerusalem as the capital of the so-called State of Israel. And yesterday, he gave the green light to resume attacks on Gaza. So to try to separate the U.S.’s actions from what is happening in Gaza is to veil your face and deny that the so-called State of Israel is nothing more than an American colonial project.”

Many hecklers tried to disrupt the demonstration, yelling out obscenities at the chanters. They were met with M4P’s popular chant that goes, “All the Zionists are racist. All the Zionists are the terrorists,” to the beat of White Stripes’ “Seven Nation Army.” The chant has been a crowd favourite, used as rebuttal whenever Zionists attempt to cause chaos and invalidate the peaceful protest.

“They have tried and failed to crush our resistance, they have bombed our hospitals, they have wiped entire families,” said M4P’s organizer. “But they have not, and they will not, break our people and our resistance.”

Prior to the resumption of the war in Gaza, U.S. aggressions on Yemen have escalated, with the U.S. bombing Sanaa — the capital city controlled by the Houthis — and its surrounding areas, as well as the northern governorate of Saada and the port of Hodeidah. The U.S. government claimed to have been targeting Houthi leaders, their attacks resulting in the death of 53 people so far, including children, and nearly 100 injured.

Abdul Malik al Houthi, the leader of the Houthi movement, stated that the U.S. and Israel were “seeking to impose the equation of permissibility on the region and its people.”

“We will respond to the American enemy with missile strikes and targeting its warships and naval vessels,” he said.

The Houthis have been launching attacks on shipping containers along the maritime corridor in the Red Sea since 2023, in solidarity with Gaza, and had stopped when the ceasefire was announced in January.

However, ever since the breach of truce, and the Israeli blockade of aid, they resumed attacks. They have declared they will not stop until aid deliveries in Gaza are allowed back in. They have also carried out a missile attack on Ben Gurion airport in Tel Aviv. Hamas also launched three rockets into the city, their first counterattack since Israel’s breach of ceasefire. No casualties were reported.

The post Montreal Stands in Solidarity with Gaza appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Upon the publishing of the strategy, François Miller, Executive Director of McGill Sustainability, told the McGill Reporter that “collectively, we are transforming McGill into a world leader in sustainability.” To do so, the new plan focuses on three core domains: climate change, biodiversity loss, and pollution. The university has adopted a bi-chronological approach, with long-term ambitious objectives and more pressing issues to be solved by 2030.

The report first outlines the long-term plan of achieving carbon neutrality by 2040, in balancing the university’s carbon emissions and absorption. In light of this goal, McGill aims to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 45 per cent from those reported in 2015. The university is also looking to increase climate resilience in facing increasing heatwaves, cold temperatures and extreme precipitation, both in frequency and intensity, and plans to address all critical climate risks on campus before 2030.

To remedy biodiversity loss, McGill pledged to become a Nature Positive University in 2022, joining over 500 higher education institutions worldwide in the effort to foster biodiversity on their campuses. Thus, by 2030, McGill plans to foster biodiversity in 30 per cent of our campus’s green spaces. This means managing our green spaces in a more responsible way: adapting mowing frequency, restricting chemical treatment, targeting only invasive species, and adding planting.

McGill is also currently pursuing goals of becoming a zero-waste institution by 2035. The university launched their first reduction and diversion of landfill initiative in 2018. In 2022, McGill created over 700 new sorting stations all over campus and compost stations in key academic buildings to further diminish landfill in 2022. Adopting a new meal plan approach in 2023 was another change made in hopes of lessening waste. The updated Climate Strategy outlines McGill’s goals to divert 70 per cent of landfill waste by 2030 to remain in line with its 2035 zero-waste objective.

Overall, these sustainability goals are consistent with McGill’s previous commitments, as the Climate and Sustainability Strategy for 2020-2025 contained the same core objectives. Indeed, achieving carbon neutrality by 2040, which has been a goal since 2017, and stayed consistently without any reassessment or delay discourse from McGill’s part. In other words, McGill is staying on track with its objectives. Proof of McGill’s continued engagement lies in their achievement of a Platinum STARS (Sustainability Tracking, Assessment and Ranking System) rating in March 2024: this achievement came six years before the deadline they had set, moving upwards from a silver rating only twelve years prior. The university’s efforts are confirmed when looking at the Association for the Advancement of Sustainability in Higher Education’s (AASHE) 2024 Sustainable Campus Index, where McGill ranked 8th out of 189 institutions.

However, an integral component of Climate and Sustainability initiatives at universities has to do with research and learning. McGill identifies not only research and learning as its “core mission,” but also the spreading of knowledge it should lead to. This is especially important knowing that Universities Canada warns that many higher education institutions do not communicate their actions or their research efficiently in sustainability. For example, in 2023, McGill established a sustainability module allowing students not only to further understand sustainability, but also showing them how to participate themselves and take action on campus. Learning about sustainability has been incorporated into university life through classes and modules, but also through workshops, clubs, and activities that give students the possibility to engage in a variety of ways.

The role of universities in sustainable development holds far more responsibility than simply making campuses ‘green.’ Evan Henry, Associate Director of the McGill Sustainability Systems Initiative (MSSI) states that, in setting its carbon neutrality goal ten years ahead of what Canada promised at the 2015 Paris Agreement, “not only are we playing our part, we are showing leadership, for not just Canada but for universities worldwide.” In other words, the new 2025-2030 Climate and Sustainability strategy not only reveals McGill’s ambition and commitment to sustainable development, but sets this same high standard for others. This seems to be a joint effort in Canadian universities: Sherbrooke University, the University of British Columbia, and Thompson River University all have a Platinum STARS rating alongside McGill.

Yet, despite the ambitious long-term goals and the emphasis placed on research and learning, Henry wishes McGill adapted to the “unexpected additional global emissions” and established more “aggressive” goals, as stated in an email to the Daily. Overall, if the new strategy ambitiously covers university action both on campus and beyond, it will become effective in the long-term and may be found lacking in more tangible shorter-term objectives.

The post Ambition and Long Term Emphasis In McGill’s Sustainability Strategy appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Major policy achievements during Trudeau’s run, which started in 2015, included legalizing cannabis, implementing a national carbon pricing policy, and negotiating key bi- and trilateral trade agreements like the Canada-United States-Mexico Agreement (CUSMA). His government also rolled out social programs such as the Canada Child Benefit and a national childcare program designed to lift children out of poverty and make early education more affordable. However, his leadership was not without controversy. Approval ratings at home plummeted as inflation surged, a housing crisis emerged, and divisions within the party broke out. Meanwhile, economic tensions inched higher after Trump slapped a 25 per cent tariff on Canadian imports that led to a tit-for-tat response by Trudeau’s government. These woes, in addition to increasing public dissatisfaction, ultimately forced Trudeau to step aside, providing an opportunity for the Liberal Party to relaunch under new management.

But for all the gravity of his leaving, Trudeau’s final moments in office were not without a trademark touch of levity. An image of him walking out of Parliament on March 10, 2025 — with the chair under one arm and his tongue stuck out in jest — caught the public eye in a candid moment. Some considered the moment a testament to Trudeau’s charm and relatability; others saw it as emblematic of his occasionally overly relaxed style of leadership. It was, in any case, an apt distillation of his tenure: a leader who mixed serious governance with personal and sometimes idiosyncratic style.

As Trudeau steps aside, Carney presents a very different leadership profile. As the only person to have served as the Governor of the central banks of two G7 countries, he is historically placed as an eminent economist. During the 2008 financial crisis, his strong actions as Bank of Canada governor — cutting interest rates and keeping liquidity flowing — helped Canada recover more quickly than most of its peers. He was appointed Governor of the Bank of England in 2013 and worked swiftly to calm financial markets during the turbulence around Brexit. Now, in his capacity as prime minister, Carney’s crisis management experience is widely seen as an invaluable asset for confronting domestic and international economic challenges alike.

His elevation to Liberal leader wasn’t only a matter of his own credentials but also a response to Canada’s political moment. The Liberal Party’s choice to favor a technocrat over a politician in the traditional sense signifies an embrace of the data-driven, expert-based form of governance. Public mood has also been critical — Canadians are searching for a leader who can offer financial stability and long-term economic growth amid continuing trade disputes and signs of economic turbulence. Carney’s non-partisan credentials and crisis-tested leadership provide some comfort, but with no prior experience in or proximity to politics, doubts about how he’ll approach coalition-building, public engagement and legislative negotiations have arisen.

Carney’s influence in shaping Canada’s global role, as well as its standing within the Liberal Party, is widely expected to be significant. His economic pragmatism and emphasis on fiscal responsibility have the potential to alter the party’s focus and, some fear, may redirect it toward more moderate policies. North of the border, his steadfast commitment to defending Canada’s sovereignty, from external pressures — particularly from the US — is a clear signal of where he intends to go on issues of economic independence and diversification. His dream of diversifying Canada’s trade relationships beyond the United States may lead the country to engage more with the European Union and other global markets as alternative partners to reduce dependence on a single market.

Carney immediately inherits complex and urgent problems as he takes office. The paramount of these concerns is an increasingly aggressive trade conflict with the US that has weighed down Canada’s export-sensitive economy. Trump’s tariffs have spurred domestic economic uncertainty, raising calls for tougher negotiation tactics and trade diversification. In addition to outside pressures, Carney will have to confront internal economic issues, such as poor growth, inflation, and housing affordability. While Carney aligns ideologically with the Liberal Party, his reputation as a policy expert rather than a seasoned politician suggests he may need time to adapt to the dynamics of political life, build public support, and manage internal party challenges.

On the eve of his departure from politics, Trudeau addressed the nation, sharing his thoughts on his time in office and the strength of Canadians while calling on the people to stay true to democracy and unity. “I am so proud of Canadians. I’m proud to have served a country full of people who stand up for what’s right, rise to every occasion, and always have each other’s backs when it matters most,” he said in his farewell message. His comments highlighted the importance of solidarity and collaboration going forward under a new government.

The switch from Trudeau to Carney marks one of the most massive political turnovers in modern Canadian history. It represents a clear break from personality-driven leadership to an emphasis on economic expertise and crisis management. Although Carney is well-respected for the financial skills he developed in previous jobs, his capability to govern and engage with the public remains to be seen. With a new governing season upon us in Canada, observers are listening closely with good reason, eager to see if his tenure on the driver’s seat can usher in economic stability, reinvigorate national sovereignty, and guide us smoothly through the trials and tribulations of both domestic and international politics.

The post From Trudeau to Carney: Canada’s New Political Era appeared first on The McGill Daily.

TikTok has been at the center of debates about data privacy, national security, and digital sovereignty. US lawmakers have long expressed concerns that ByteDance’s ties to the Chinese government could enable unauthorized access to American user data. While ByteDance has repeatedly denied these allegations, the platform’s rapid growth and cultural influence have made it a target of bipartisan scrutiny. The extension granted by Trump provides a brief reprieve, but it also raises questions about what’s next for TikTok and the broader implications for social media platforms operating globally.

The uncertainty surrounding TikTok’s fate has already triggered shifts in the social media landscape. Competitors like Instagram, YouTube Shorts, and Snapchat Spotlight are scrambling to attract TikTok’s displaced user base. Instagram, for instance, has introduced features like “Edits,” a video-editing app inspired by TikTok’s CapCut, and has expanded its video grid format to support longer videos — a clear attempt to capture the short-form video market.

Meanwhile, platforms like RedNote (known as Xiaohongshu in China) have positioned themselves as key alternatives. By emphasizing creativity and international cultural exchanges, RedNote has seen a surge in downloads, bolstered by its recruitment of American influencers to promote the app’s versatility.

TikTok’s challenges extend beyond business; they’ve become a symbol of the growing tension between the US and China. President Trump’s proposal for the US to hold a significant stake in TikTok highlights the app’s role in digital diplomacy. The platform’s uncertain future has even sparked renewed dialogue between the two nations, as Chinese President Xi Jinping emphasized the importance of cultural and technological exchanges. This unprecedented intersection of social media and geopolitics underscores how deeply intertwined these platforms have become with global relations.

While TikTok’s 75-day extension offers temporary relief, its future remains unclear. Whether through a partial divestment, a merger, or a complete shutdown, the next steps will have lasting consequences for users, creators, and the social media landscape at large. The TikTok saga also highlights the need for clearer global regulations around data privacy, as well as the challenges of balancing innovation with security.

Social media, like its users, is at a crossroads. TikTok’s fate will not only shape the future of short-form content but also serve as a case study in how nations navigate the complexities of technology, culture, and power in an increasingly connected world. For now, all eyes remain on the clock — and on what happens when those 75 days are up.

The post Tiktok’s Uncertain Future: Social Media at a Crossroads appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The Quebec government is also feeling the repercussions of extreme weather events and the economic consequences they have provoked. The province witnessed an increase overall in extreme weather phenomena ranging from droughts, heat waves, and storms with heavy rains and violent winds, to drastic drops and rises in temperature leading to freeze-thaw – all of which affect the stability and durability of buildings, roads, and runways. Quebec is not an isolated case: Canada as a whole is experiencing this. The summer of 2024 alone led to $7.1 billion in insured losses, mostly due to floods in Southern Quebec and Southern Ontario, wildfires in Alberta, and a hailstorm in Calgary. This catastrophic summer led to 228,000 insurance claims, a 406 per cent increase compared to the average over the past 20 years, according to Celyeste Power, President of the IBC.

Due to climate change, both the frequency and intensity of weather-induced catastrophes increased, as can be observed through the augmentation of insured damage. If the increased cost of insured damage is a problem in itself, it also undeniably serves as an alert signal to remind us of the many risks these extreme weather phenomena pose. This increase in extreme weather phenomena also threatens energy production, transportation, and, most of all, agriculture, where productivity is directly altered by climate change and extreme weather. The question of our health and safety is also important: extreme weather affects everyone, as seen through the availability and quality of drinking water. However, it unequally threatens weaker or more exposed populations, such as the higher mortality of elderly populations seen during heatwaves.

The US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) has established a causal link between poverty and exposure to risk. Communities with less resources are feeling the burden of damages caused by extreme weather; they are shown to be more exposed and susceptible to suffering from mental and physical health issues, injury, and even death due to environmental disasters. Those that don’t have home insurance aren’t accounted for in these figures, implying that the situation is even worse than what the insurance sector is warning us about.

Climate change operates on such a broad scale that it is almost impossible to grasp the full extent of extreme weather-related damages and the damages that are slowly occurring as time progresses. To help us track estimates of costs, the Canadian Climate Institute developed a tool accessible to all at the website ClimateChangeCosts.ca.

This situation is not bound to get any better. Power ominously recalls that “what we have to remember is this isn’t an anomaly. It’s not bad luck. This is our new normal.” Philippe Gachon, hydroclimatology professor at the Université du Québec à Montréal (UQAM), predicted that the flood risk would only increase in Quebec due to high intensity downpours and storms. The increased frequency and intensity of natural disasters will make Canada, as Jason Clarke, national director of climate change at the IBC, says, a “riskier place to live, work, and insure” if no action is taken against climate change.

To limit the risks of both extreme weather phenomena and the damage they cause, the NIEHS explains a government may take action in three ways. First: preparation, or building infrastructure in advance, as well as informing and educating the population on the issue. Second: adaptation, which means changing the way we manage our forests and build our cities. Third: mitigation, where the objective is to limit climate change itself by reducing greenhouse gas emissions through sustainable development programs, engaging governments and states in the long-term.

Solutions have been proposed along these lines. Montreal, for example, took the effects of long-term climate change into account and planned to halve its greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. They have also proposed creating underwater reservoirs and greenspaces for draining excess rainwater to avoid overloading the sewer system – as what happened in 2023 and 2024 summer floods.

Even if the Canadian government has invested $6.6 billion in climate adaptation initiatives since 2015, it is not sufficient, and Power urgently calls for governments to “take action to reduce the risk,” as climate change effects will only worsen if nothing is done to prevent it further.

The post Extreme Weather in Canada: Financial Burden and Environmental Challenge appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Under the administration of Francois Legault and the Coalition Avenir Quebec (CAQ), the provincial parliament passed Bill 96 in June 2022. The bill is meant to solidify Francophone and French language rights province-wide. It has received heavy criticism following its release due to its treatment of business regulation in French, the freeze on English CEGEP students, and the six month window for immigrants to learn the French language.

Although this bill has been in effect for an extended period, this is one of the PLQ’s first clear proposals to combat it. They seek to implement a Quebec constitution that protects English language rights across the province and fights back against certain Bill 96 restrictions. This was seen as progress for the many families and lives affected by this change in the language laws. Following Bill 96’s enactment, anglophone citizens across Quebec have been concerned about how they might fit into a province that does not want them to speak their first language.

Many English-speaking immigrants find the transition between beginner’s French and French fluency difficult, especially within six months. Between 2022 and 2023, the province saw an increase of 52,800 immigrants, all of whom would be required to obtain an intermediate level of French, potentially coming with no experience in the language. Furthermore, the freeze on English CEGEP programs puts Anglophone middle and high schoolers in situations where they cannot begin their education with the CEGEP program due to their lack of fluency in French.

Many businesses have also been concerned about closure since they cannot keep up with the French advertising and sign laws. Places such as music stores across Quebec have struggled to find French branding for their instruments, which could result in heavy fines for businesses.

Many members of the PLQ were unhappy with the bill’s passing. Deepak Awasti, who is currently running to be the head of the PLQ in the upcoming election, criticized Bill 96, stating, “We seem to be going back to the old founding nations thesis. In this document, we are talking about the aspirations of the French nation vis-à-vis Canada. We are not talking about the aspirations of all Quebecers. […] I don’t want Quebec to be ethnicized. I don’t want Quebec to become the petit-Québec.”

People across the province are concerned about the passing of this bill, and the PLQ have had to hastily construct a response to it. Current PLQ members, including André Pratt and William Tetley, proposed and passed a motion to create a clearly outlined Quebec constitution. This proposed constitution would strengthen Anglophone rights by restoring certain restrictions put in place by Bill 96, such as access to healthcare in English or the previously mentioned English student CEGEP freeze across the province.

Amidst all this action, the PLQ is in the process of electing its new leader while discussing how to combat these laws and strengthen Francophone and Anglophone relations. The province is not due for another election until October 2026, and it is unlikely that the current CAQ will call for one. In light of the upcoming federal election in October 2025, we are seeing an increased effort by the PLQ to distance themselves from the currently unfavoured federal Liberal Party, which across Canada has not been viewed well due to their handling of the housing crisis and large country deficit – a price deficit that is also present in Quebec at currently around $11 billion. Pablo Rodriguez, a former Federal Liberal member of parliament who stepped down to run for the leader of the PLQ, gained strides in support during the debate in Lévis, with people chanting his name as he arrived outside. Rodriguez has also faced criticism from other party members, who say they do not want any Federal Liberals to have significant power in the PLQ due to Canada’s current national debt.

Many people across Quebec feel uncertain about how Anglophone rights will change with Bill 96. The Daily had the chance to interview an international student at McGill, who said that “the amount of French language laws and regulations was previously a deterrent on coming to Quebec for me. If, further down the line, even more language requirements came into effect, it would’ve affected my decision to even come here at all.” To many people, Quebec is their home and one they want to keep for the future. If this constitution is passed, it could make strides for Anglophone rights across the province, uniting people who both want to see the French language stay alive and those who want to come here not knowing but wanting to learn the language and make Quebec their home. The basis of this constitution is not to diminish Francophone rights across the province but instead to find harmony between the English and French languages and determine their use in everyday situations. A province does not have to exist in the context of one language or another, and this constitution would fight to make it so that both Anglophones and Francophones feel at home
in Quebec.

The post Unifying Quebec: The PLQ’s Proposed Constitution to Bring the Province Together appeared first on The McGill Daily.

The four countries accuse the Taliban authorities of “gross and systemic” violations of women’s rights under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW), adopted in 1979 and signed by Afghanistan in 2003.

Since its return to power in August 2021, the Taliban has shocked the world with the implementation of the law on “virtue and vice,” which aims at completely erasing women from the public sphere. Enforced by the “morality police,” this law includes restrictions such as:

• barring women from accessing secondary and university education;
• prohibiting women from travelling more than 72 kilometres without a male relative;
• prohibiting women from participating in sports and from entering public areas like parks;
• barring women from raising their voices in public and from looking at men other than their husbands or relatives.

Since the Taliban authorities seized power, it has been reported that nearly 60,000 women-owned businesses were negatively impacted by these restrictions. Amnesty International reports that, in a matter of two months (between June and July 2023), nearly 4,500 women were dismissed from jobs in education.Numerous UN agencies have also reported a sobering surge in forced marriages, child marriages, gender violence, and femicide.

As a result of these accusations, and the aforementioned restrictions, Afghanistan under the Taliban is considered to be the most restrictive regime in its treatment of women. If the hearing proceeds, this will be the first time in history that a country is taken to the ICJ for its violations of CEDAW and will therefore make a solid legal precedent in international law regarding gender prosecution.

The decision to take the Taliban authorities to court comes at a time when many Afghan women and activists feel that the world has forgotten about their struggle due to the international community’s silence on the issue. Living under such restrictive regulations, women do what they can to resist. Some women hold secret classes, while others participate in public campaigns where they share their singing on social media platforms as a protest against recent prohibitions from speaking in public. Some groups continue trying to attract the world’s attention through interviews and activism abroad.
According to the rules of the international court, once the plea is submitted against a party, there is a waiting period of six months in order for both parties to solve their issue without court interference. If this goes unanswered, the case proceeds before the ICJ. While the ICJ is a powerful international body, the rulings of which are legally binding for member-states, it lacks the means to actually enforce its decisions.

The decision to take the Taliban to court has been applauded around the world. In fact, 22 countries have issued a joint statement condemning the Taliban’s violations of the CEDAW: “We […] condemn the gross and systematic human rights violations and abuses in Afghanistan, particularly the gender-based discrimination against women and girls.” But what can this proceeding actually do to help Afghan women in their struggle against this “gender apartheid?”

The Taliban authorities can, in theory, simply ignore the proceeding. However, the Taliban has long been seeking international recognition, which has not been granted. Thus, being taken to court for human rights violations might put a higher price on the Taliban’s practices by inciting other countries to adopt unfavourable diplomatic attitudes towards the regime through sanctions such as maintaining travel bans for members of the Taliban regime, keeping the assets of the Afghanistan Central Bank frozen, limiting corporate cooperation with other countries thus disrupting the production chain of certain goods, and so on.

Some speculate that the recent increase in restrictions issued by the Taliban is actually a strategic play used by the authorities to bargain in negotiations with other states, possibly within the context of the international court proceedings.

The decision to take the Taliban to ICJ marks a significant shift in the way the international community reacts to such blatant human rights violations and gender-based discrimination. By taking risks that can cost them their freedom or even life, the brave Afghan women have brought the issue to the fore of international attention and have initiated tangible legal actions to challenge the wrongs they face.

The post Challenging Gender Discrimination appeared first on The McGill Daily.

This guide is the product of a two-year collaboration between the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and Equal Rights Trust, with their joint OHCHR Technical Anti-Discrimination Law Development Mission to address Costa Rica. Written by experts Claude Cahn (OHCHR), Jim Fitzgerald (Director, Equal Rights Trust), and UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Religion or Belief, Nazila Ghanea, the guide focuses on establishing international standards for legislation on equality. It offers clear, actionable steps for lawmakers and human rights defenders alike to draft and enforce more comprehensive anti-discrimination policies.

The origins of globally comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation can be traced back to post-World War II efforts, most notably the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) in 1948. While not legally binding, the UDHR was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly and represents a global commitment to human rights, influencing national and international law worldwide. Article 2 of the Declaration explicitly prohibits discrimination on several grounds, laying the foundation for national and regional efforts to codify protections; and though its principles are universal, countries are encouraged to incorporate these protections into their legal systems. For instance, the 2000 Equality Directive in the European Union and South Africa’s Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act of 2000 stand as key examples of national responses that have furthered the principles laid out in the UN’s new Anti-Discrimination legislation and guideline.

The release of the OHCHR’s Guide comes at a time when discrimination and inequality remain pervasive in many regions of the world. While several countries, such as Canada, known for its progressive LGBTQ+ rights; Argentina, which has advanced gender equality and same-sex marriage; and Portugal, recognized for its comprehensive anti-discrimination laws, have made strides in enacting equality laws, many others are still struggling to protect minorities and marginalized groups from both incidental and systemic discrimination. The guide provides detailed insights into these challenges, offering best practices from countries that have successfully implemented comprehensive legal frameworks.

The release of the guide also comes amid a wave of recent anti-discrimination initiatives across the globe. In early 2024, Germany passed its first comprehensive federal law addressing discrimination in the workplace, specifically aimed at preventing bias against women, LGBTQ+ individuals, and people with disabilities. Similarly, Chile’s parliament is currently debating new legislation to address racial and indigenous discrimination, while Canada has seen renewed discussions on tightening existing anti-discrimination laws as part of an ongoing review of its Human Rights Act.

However, despite these developments, many countries face significant obstacles in enforcing these laws. For instance, in the U.S., enforcement of anti-discrimination protections has come under scrutiny from those who see the issue as an extension of the political division throughout the country, leading to many states rolling back protection for transgender individuals in schools and workplaces. Similarly, South Africa, while having one of the most progressive sets of equality laws, continues to grapple with enforcement issues, especially in rural areas where access to justice can be limited.

According to its authors, the guide is “an essential tool for policymakers working to dismantle discriminatory systems that disproportionately impact vulnerable communities.” They highlight how the guide examines international legal standards to provide practical examples of legislation from around the world, helping governments adapt and tailor anti-discrimination laws to their specific populations.

The guide also outlines several key principles essential for creating effective anti-discrimination laws, including prohibitions against direct and indirect discrimination, harassment, and victimization. It emphasizes the need for reasonable accommodation for individuals with disabilities and other protected groups, aiming to ensure their equal participation in public life without undue burden. It further draws attention to the importance of enforcement mechanisms, encouraging the creation of independent bodies to investigate complaints and impose sanctions on discriminatory practices. The authors pointed out that “strong enforcement is critical to ensuring that anti-discrimination laws are not just symbolic but result in real-world change.”

Ultimately, this guide stresses the importance of international cooperation in combating discrimination. Collaboration between governments, civil society organizations, and international bodies is essential to sharing knowledge and addressing the cross-border pervasion of inequality. It also points out that despite the progress made, the journey toward global legislative equality is far from over, with many legal frameworks still lacking sufficient scope or mechanisms for enforcement. With the global rise of radically conservative movements and increasing polarization, the contribution to comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation is more urgent than perhaps ever before.

The post UN Guide Revolutionizes Anti-Discrimination Laws appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Numbers and events may have changed between the time of writing and the publishing of the article

It has been one year since Hamas launched Israel’s deadliest terrorist attack, killing over 1200 Israelis and taking more than 250 hostages. The immediate Israeli military response has since devastated the Gaza Strip, displacing around 90 per cent of its population, and killing 41,788 Palestinians, according to Gaza’s health authorities. Israel has also continuously been putting pressure on neighboring countries. In the past weeks, the Israeli army has pursued increasingly violent attacks on Lebanon, severely weakening Hezbollah’s leadership, prompting Iran to retaliate with a large-scale missile strike against Israel. Meanwhile international organizations have proved incapable of bringing an end to the violence.

Despite multiple international calls for de-escalation and investigations into Israeli war crimes, Israel has continued to navigate multiple military fronts. In the past weeks, it has continued its relentless bombing of the Gaza Strip while also targeting Yemen, Syria, Iran and Lebanon. For the past three weeks, Israel has bombarded Lebanon with airstrikes, killing over 2000 people while injuring nearly 7500 others. In addition to their aerial attacks, Israel announced its decision to begin “ground operations” in Southern Lebanon, reminiscent of their invasion four decades ago. While the Israeli government’s stated goal has been to take down Hezbollah’s structural organization, calling this a “limited, localized and targeted” operation. But the reality on the ground is far from this as shown by the growing number of civilian deaths.

The tensions between the Iranian-backed Hezbollah and Israel are decades old. The militant group Hezbollah was founded in 1982, after Israel seized Lebanon, creating a humanitarian crisis in the southern part of the country. Israel has been targeting Hezbollah leadership in hopes of dismantling the organization, launching one of the most intense aerial campaigns in the Middle East within the past two decades, as Airwars, a nonprofit that monitors military conflicts on Islamic states, reported. Following Iran’s missile strike against Israel, Iranian spokeswoman Fatemeh Mohajerani, said that they are not seeking a broader regional war. However, as tensions increase between Israel, Lebanon, and Iran, hopes for de-escalation are slim.

As Israel pursued its systematic attacks on Gaza, with disregard for civilian victims and the urgent calls for humanitarian aid, the government increasingly faced criticism from its citizens and grew more and more isolated from the international community. Over the course of the year, thousands protested across Israel calling for Prime Minister Netanyahu’s resignation, and for a cease-fire allowing hostages to return home safely. From the perspective of many of these protesters, Israel’s image as a regional superpower was damaged following the October 7 attacks and their failure to safely return all the hostages. However, since the pager attacks in Lebanon, the current seems to have changed. Recent polls show that Netanyahu’s far right coalition party, Likud, is steadily recovering. The series of successful targeted attacks on leaders of Hezbollah boosted a renewed support for the offensive warfare and created a rally round- the-flag effect in favour of Netanyahu’s government.

For the past year, international organizations and world leaders have been faced with the fact that stability will not be reached unless a solution responding to both Palestinian and Israeli national aspirations is reached. Today, a negotiated settlement seems more distant than ever.

There are several reasons why ceasefire deals and talks for consensual agreements have fallen through. Democratic countries such as the US and Israel “are essential for promoting the rule of law…and for ensuring public trust in democratic systems of governance,” the UN announced in a statement. However, Israel’s impunity from its crimes against Gaza, as well as the US and Israel’s threats of retaliation against ICC and ICJ have demonstrated their lack of intention to end the war and protect human rights. Furthermore, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu continues to launch military bombardment across Gaza, despite there being no real progress in achieving a ceasefire deal.

International structures designed to maintain international peace and security have consistently failed to effectively carry out resolutions. United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres released a statement with Al Jazeera on the failures of the Security Council to bring about political change in the region. He believes that the Security Council’s mechanisms at resolving conflict are outdated, referencing the permanent members’ veto powers and the severe obstacles it poses for action. Furthermore, if the Security Council cannot tackle the humanitarian crises that it was designed to, it hinders other UN agencies, such as the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA) from completing their tasks. With the recent developments regarding Israel’s shifted focus on Lebanon and Iran, UN experts admitted that “the ballooning violence adds immensely to the instability and the ongoing suffering of civilians in the wider region, including in Palestine.”

Previous peace frameworks, such as the Oslo Accords in 1993, have been unsuccessful at mitigating tensions between Palestinian self-determination and Israel’s desire for domination. For years after the failure of the Accords became evident, the United States and other major powers took a back-seat role in possible negotiations between Palestine and Israel, allowing these tensions to worsen.

What comes next? After one year, the conflict shows no signs of ending. It seems that with US continued support of Israel, refusing to restrict its weapons shipments, alongside Hezbollah’s commitment to continue attacks on Israel until a Gaza ceasefire is achieved; and the ongoing collapse of ceasefire negotiations in Gaza the situation won’t change.

This has also been a year of student uprisings, protests and counter protests. Students in Montreal have been relentlessly organizing marches and protest in solidarity with Gaza and now Lebanon, continuing to call upon the government and university administrations to divest from Israel and recognize the ongoing genocide. Additionally, the Palestinian Youth Movement, alongside other student led organizations held marches commemorating “One Year of Genocide, One Year of Resistance” from October 5 to 7.

On October 5 the Palestinian Youth Movement called for an International Day of Action. Thousands of people marched in over 50 cities across the US and Canada to mark one year of mobilization and solidarity with the people of Palestine and Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and all those victims of Israel’s violent attacks. Here in Montreal thousands met on Place des Arts. Students and Professors from McGill, Concordia and other institutions joined the rally to the rhythm of drums and slogans. Amongst the speakers was activist Katsi’tsakwas Ellen Gabriel. She spoke out to the crowd, denouncing the genocide, celebrating the strength of students and others to stand together, and reaffirming the shared struggle of Indigenous peoples and Palestinians against colonial oppression and occupation. “We see, as Indigenous people, commonalities between our struggles. We know what genocide is like. Our people united, our people are strong in standing with Palestine” she said. For hours, the steps and slogans resonated through the streets of downtown until Atwater, reminding the world that “the people united will never be defeated”

As a response to the different calls to mobilize McGill and Concordia have decided to restrict access to their campuses. At the time of writing, it has been communicated with students that access to the downtown campus until October 7 will require a McGill ID or a permission letter for visitors to enter. They justified these measures to “prioritize the stable continuation of critical academic activities at a time when there is an elevated potential for disruption” even if there have been no threats to physical safety.

Students at McGill and in the Montreal community at large have displayed their solidarity with the Lebanese people. On October 1, Students for Palestine’s Honour and Resistance (SPHR) McGill and Concordia alongside other student-led groups held a vigil for Lebanon on the campus lower field. Speakers were students from McGill and Concordia, and professor Michelle Hartman reading out a poem written by professor Rula Abisaab. Around 100 students gathered, with candles and Palestinian flags being held next to Lebanese ones. Speakers later condemned the systematic violence carried out against Lebanese people and the genocide in Gaza, while praising the power of resistance and the sustained need for solidarity and collective actions.

A member of Montreal’s Lebanese community has shared their perspective on issues ensuing back home. “As a Lebanese student living in Canada, I can share that many of us are deeply concerned about the ongoing threat in southern Lebanon, even though we’re miles away,” said Sarah Tehini, a U1 Computer Engineering student at McGill. “The situation with Israel is something we’ve grown up hearing about, but now it feelslike things could escalate at any moment.” She expressed concerns about the future state of Lebanon if Israel proceeds with its current military tactics. “We worry about being able to visit home, or if there will even be a ‘home’ to return to. There’s this overwhelming sense of uncertainty about whether Lebanon will ever find stability again, and it’s heartbreaking,” she said on behalf of herself and other Lebanese students in her community.

In light of Tehini’s worries, she still believes there is room for hope. “Despite everything, the resilience of the Lebanese people keeps us hopeful. No matter how much we’ve been through, our love for our country keeps us holding on to hope for a better future,” she concluded.

The post An Analysis of Israel’s Actions Since October 7 appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Study permit caps will be distributed on a provincial level, weighted by population size. This means that provinces with a higher proportion of international students, such as Quebec, will experience a greater decline in international student enrollment. Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship, Marc Miller, justified this move by citing the exponential growth of students applying for study permits. In 2024, international students comprised 2.5 per cent of all residents in Canada, double the figure recorded 5 years ago, causing what Miller describes as “pressure on housing, health care and other services.” Miller justified these measures in order “to protect a system that has become so lucrative that it has opened a path for its abuse.”

Abuses and “unsavoury actors” have been prevailing reasons for introducing study permit caps. These include private colleges, which supposedly provide students with an unsatisfactory standard of living, including poor access to housing and other services. This leaves students unable to afford the cost of living in Canada. Additionally, fraud is mentioned as a major issue: in 2023, over 1,550 study permits were allegedly connected to the issuance of fraudulent acceptance letters.

This said, Miller’s definitions of these supposed ‘bad actors’ has led organizations such as the Migrant Workers Alliance to underline how “tens of thousands of students will be punished for failures of government policy.” The press release also cited a lack of “predictability and transparency” of government policy, largely tracing back to the Trudeau government’s ever-changing international student policies.

In an October 2023 interview with Global News, Miller mentioned proposed international student caps as akin to “doing surgery with a hammer,” whilst in January 2024 he endorsed the study caps for “ensuring the integrity of our immigration system.” These sudden changes in policy have caused concern for Master’s and PhD students, who are exempt from the caps but fearful of another sudden change. In an interview with the Daily, Annabel Ling, a Master’s student at the University of British Columbia, stated “how can I trust a government which is in a constant tug of war with their own policies,” adding that “it is an unsettling time for any academic in Canada.”

The Daily recently reached out to the IRCC to discuss these measures. Regarding how the federal government intends to regulate the caps applied by provinces on international students, the IRCC Media Relations Office stated how “Matching allocations with a provinces per capital share of the population is the prime consideration.” referring to the ratio of permanent residence to International students in a province.

The email further explained: “To ensure international students who arrive in Canada are set up for success, we must tackle issues that have made some students vulnerable,” when asked about the nature of the federal government sudden turnaround on international student regulation.

The IRCC’s new legislation presents an additional challenge for anglophone universities in Quebec such as McGill and Concordia. These universities are reeling from tuition amendments targeting out-of-province students, with 33 per cent increases in tuition being planned. Combined with the rise of $8,000 in the minimum tuition fees for international students in Quebec, this measure is predicted to cause a decrease in enrolment at the two anglophone universities. With applications for admission in Fall 2024 well underway, this announcement came at a shock for many applicants, including Ravi Rahman, a student from Hyderabad, India hoping to study at either the University of Toronto or McGill. He commented to the Daily: “I am just a bit confused as to why this announcement came so late” adding “Both my older brother and sister went to Canadian universities. I feel like I am being robbed of my education and to be honest I feel pretty upset.”

Other universities have had mixed responses. The University of Waterloo in Ontario outlined its support of the IRCC’s attempts to curb ‘bad actors,’ especially in the housing market, whilst the President Vivek Goel worried “we expect [the impact] will be a significant decline this fall in our international student population.” Meanwhile, the University of Saskatchewan could benefit from the caps if allocated three percent of study permits, which could increase their international student population by 11,000 a year if students decide to attend this institution. Concerns have since been raised about whether provinces which clearly attract greater populations of international students like Ontario and British Columbia should have the majority of the 360,000 study caps available in 2024.

International students have expressed feelings of remorse regarding the caps. Fred Azeredo, a Theology major from Brazil, mentioned “while the concerns about obscure private universities’ abuse of international visas are valid, extending the cap to all international students across Canada hammers in just how precarious our status is here.” Another international student, Ollie Saunders, stated how he is “very concerned about the future of international students at McGill, especially as I came here from the Philippines expecting to feel welcome, which is not the case.” Ollie added that he “worr[ies] about his younger siblings and their experience being damaged through this bill.” For many, this cap feels like an attack on international students as opposed to those “unsavoury actors” mentioned by Miller.

Students aren’t the only ones expressing concern about legislation impeding international students’ entry to Canada. Universities Canada, representing the voices of over 234 post-secondary institutions in Canada, including McGill, addressed a joint letter to Minister Miller expressing concern over the federal government’s motives. It mentions the collateral effects of the caps, “given that international students play a pivotal role in bolstering the economy by contributing $22 billion a year to our country.” This is particularly relevant to Quebec as Canada’s third most sought-after destination by international students, with 12 per cent of all international students ending up in Quebec and playing a major role in Quebec’s economy. However, the McGill Media Relations Office commented to the Daily that “Preliminary indications are that the cap on international student permit applications is not likely to affect McGill’s ability to welcome international students,” ensuring McGill will find ways through these stricter measures.

The post IRCC Announces Cap on International Student Permits appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Birzeit University, located in the West Bank, has publicly replied to the bombing, saying the institution “reaffirms the fact that this crime is part of the Israeli occupation’s onslaught against the Palestinians. It’s all a part of the Israeli occupation’s goal to make Gaza uninhabitable; a continuation of the genocide being carried out in Gaza Strip.”

The toll of educational institutes in Gaza either destroyed or severely damaged by Israeli attacks has reached over 350 schools and numerous public libraries. This latest attack on the educational and cultural institutes of Gaza has reinvigorated discussions surrounding the term “scholasticide.”

The concept of scholasticide first appeared in 2009, in response to attacks by the Israeli military against the Ministry of Education and multiple schools in Gaza. The Guardian has defined scholasticide as “the systematic destruction by Israeli forces of centres of education dear to Palestinian society.” For decades, schools in Gaza have been targeted by Israeli attacks, in addition to cultural institutions elsewhere such as the 1982 looting of the Palestinian Research Centre in Beirut and the accompanying destruction of historical archives. Furthermore, centres of education replacing previously destroyed institutions have also been targeted, such as attacks in 2009 on the UN-established school in the Jabaliya refugee camp.

In light of Israel’s recent assault on Gaza, the idea of scholasticide has been supported by academics by three of Israel’s actions: the devastation of educational infrastructure, the continuous military assault on universities and schools, and the persecution of Palestinian scholars and dissenting scholars at Israeli universities. The first and second actions have spoken for themselves over the course of the war since October, with the sheer amount of destruction across Gaza and the future of education remaining bleak for Palestinian children. Furthermore, many prominent Palestinian scholars were recently killed by Israeli strikes or offensives. The scientist, researcher and president of the Islamic University of Gaza, Sufyan Tayeh, specializing in theoretical physics and applied mathematics, was murdered along with his family in December. Similarly, the renowned professor, writer, and poet Refaat Alareer was killed in air strikes in Gaza in the same month. Alareer was well known for writing about his Gazan experience, leaving behind the emotional poem “If I Die,” shortly before the airstrike that killed him and six members of his family. Their deaths, alongside the combined efforts to reduce educational infrastructure in Gaza to rubble, have outraged academics across the world and prompted the petition Scholars Against the War on Palestine (SAWP). Scholars from institutes across Israel, such as Anat Matar, an Israeli philosopher and activist, have joined the petition, along with a wide range of signatories from Stanford to the University of Amsterdam.

One such signatory of both the SAWP petition and the open letter “Support SSMU and the Palestine Solidarity Policy” published by the Daily in April 2022 is Michelle Hartman. A professor of Arabic literature at the McGill Institute of Islamic Studies, Professor Hartman, has been deeply involved in the Palestinian cause for over a decade.

“If the concept of scholasticide works to stop what is happening in Palestine, then I am all for it. We at universities around the world must respond to the systematic destruction of Palestinian education as loudly and forcefully as possible,” she stated in an email to the Daily. “This is a comprehensive project to completely decimate physical infrastructure — bombarding schools and universities in Gaza — while deliberately targeting Palestinian professors and students for harassment, detention, and murder.”

The final element supporting the idea of scholasticide is the importance of academia in Palestinian culture and society. In 2009, The Guardian wrote that “Palestinians are among the most thoroughly educated people in the world…[and have] put a singular emphasis on learning.” In the same article, Dr. Karma Nabulsi, a Professor of Politics and International Relations at Oxford University, stated that for many Palestinians, “education is the most important thing – it is part of the family life, part of your identity, and part of the rebellion.” The resilience of Palestinian culture and education is showcased by the country’s extremely high literacy rates. With a literacy rate of 97.7 per cent, Palestine ranks above countries such as Singapore, Hong Kong, and Turkey. This achievement is a testament to the Palestinian commitment to education regardless of ongoing conflict and humanitarian crises. Prof. Hartman continues along this vein.

“As scholars and as students, we must remind the world that the lives, thoughts, and work of our Palestinian peers are as worthy as our own. This is not because academia is more important than other spheres or academics are more important than other people. But education is a central value in Palestinian society and the attack on education is meant to destroy not only buildings but the aspirations, hope, and spirit of a people,” she wrote. “In an iconic poem, Mahmoud Darwish asks the colonizer, “Why not memorize a little poetry to stop the slaughter?” We must listen to him, and other Palestinians, and defend their right to exist and thrive—the future poets, alongside everyone else.”

The post Scholasticide in Gaza appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Concerning the economic objective, Yousif states that the “country’s cannabis industry is struggling for survival.” Even though the cannabis recreational market in Canada is valued in the billions as Deloitte Canada states in 2022 it added $43.5 billion since 2018, the cannabis industry makes little to no profit. George Smitherman, former Ontario Deputy Premier and head of the Cannabis Council of Canada, explains to Yousif the absence of a “global road map,” or the fact so few other countries have legalized cannabis,  makes it impossible for the industry to expand past a certain point, over which production exceeds demand. For Armstrong, it resumes to a classic “boom and bust” situation: the initial lack of production and high demand led to a surplus and so a downsizing. So much that today, only 20 per cent of cannabis related businesses have a “positive cashflow” according to Smitherman. In 2023, the cannabis industry is effectively struggling to survive. For example, Aurora Cannabis, thriving in 2018, had to sell their headquarters back to Hershey Canada. Le Journal de Montréal describes that most cannabis manufacturers, such as Hexo, Cronos Group or Canopy Growth are struggling for benefits. Furthermore, many Canadian citizens who invested in the industry lost an estimated $131 billion. 

But the struggle also resides elsewhere. In late 2022, the Department of Public Safety stated that 33 per cent of the market remained illegal. Although the police observed 47,000 incidents in 2017 against only 16,000 in 2019, traffic has not stopped. Léa, who  used a pseudonym, a 16-year-old interviewed by Félix Morrissette-Beaulieu for Radio-Canada, said that it is “relatively easy” to get ahold of the drug. She started smoking at the age of 13.  Marie-José Michaud, coordinator of the prevention service Le Grand Chemin, explains that the illegal market adapted to the legalization. There are new ways of smoking that are gaining in popularity, for example, the wax pen, for example, is gaining in popularity: a vape-style way of smoking the drug with over three times the authorized amount of THC in it.

With the combined effect of the legalization and the evolution of the illicit market to stronger and more nocive products, a widespread consumption of cannabis could be expected. Statistics Canada explains that the use of cannabis increased from 22 per cent to 27 per cent between 2017 and 2022 for Canadians over 16, but the percentage of people consuming the drug did not change. In other words, the drug did not spread to a broader or younger audience, but its use became heavier. Pediatrician Richard Bélanger claims that smoking “did not diminish either” and Léa condemns a lack of education and information about drugs. Whereas Enquête Canadienne announced in 2021 that 93 per cent of consumers know of the addictive effects of cannabis against 64 per cent in 2017, this inquiry was only submitted to people already buying cannabis. Government issued packages with warnings and no advertisement may not be sufficient as a third of the market is illegal, and an additional 10 per cent cultivate their own plants. 

Overall, the reform’s success is debatable. For some, Canada has done something exceptional world wide; for others, the industry struggles, and public health concerns are still present. The Medical Association Journal describes the reform as “not a public health disaster” but has yet to show any positive aspects in the area. However, a reform often takes effect in the long term. Five years is, for many experts, way too short to correctly evaluate the efficiency of the bill in meeting the three main goals of 2018.

The post Cannabis in Canada appeared first on The McGill Daily.

Back in 2018, over 40,000 women marched through Santiago. The protest ended tragically, with three women being stabbed. In 2019, an anti-rape song recorded by a group of Chileans went viral and was utilized by protestors worldwide. Moreover, reports of underage school children experiencing sexual assault rose by 55 per cent in 2022. The response was a number of strikes and the closure of a school in the centre of the city. After a slight lull, a second wave of protests is being seen across Chile.

This growing tension can be pinned down to the impending release of the new Constitution. The new set of laws will be the third attempt to rewrite the Constitution that has been in place since 1980, under the dictatorship of Augustus Pinochet. However, in 2022, President Gabriel Boric’s attempt to introduce one of the world’s most left-leaning bills of rights was voted down, leading to the election of a new Constitutional Council. There, the conservative Republican Party won 23 out of the available 51 seats. This has granted their leader, far-right Catholic Jose Kast, the opportunity to lead in the drafting of the new bill. Kast had previously expressed deep opposition to abortions, such as trying to outlaw the contraception pill back in 2007. He also previously proposed removing the Ministry for Women, a position he has since abandoned. His Constitution will be voted on by the public in December of this year.

Currently, abortion is legal in three situations: when the life of the mother is at risk, when the fetus is not viable, and in cases of rape during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy (or 14 weeks if the woman is under 14 years old). However, since 2018, clinics can refuse abortion based solely on their ideological perspective. Kast claims that if he were to introduce a total ban, he would be simply representing the views of his country. Indeed, a 2021 poll stated that 54 per cent of Chileans disagreed with the legalization of the medical procedure up until 12 weeks of pregnancy, regardless of the reason.

In 2015, a campaign group called InformAborto launched a public pro-life campaign. Their social media shows them driving through the streets of Santiago with a large and explicit image of a fetus, with the words “torture and disappearance”. This reflects their attempt to liken it to the crimes of Augustus Pinochet, who was responsible for over 3000 human rights violations.

Despite this, there has been great outrage coming from the left in response to these proposed measures. Paloma Zúñiga Cerda, a member of the Democratic Revolution party and part of the Constitutional Council, argued that the views of the Republican Party were deeply hypocritical. For one, she notes that Kast has failed to condemn the murders that took place during Augusto Pinochet’s dictatorship. This, she claims, shows a stronger disregard for life than that of pro-lifers.
Moreover, earlier this year, 15 members of the house voted against condemning the sexual violence that took place during this time. One member of the Republican Party referred to the hundreds of reports of rape and sexual assault as ‘urban legend.’ Similarly, others have drawn comparisons to the perceived lack of state action against the rise in domestic violence against women. For example, only 73 per cent of the cases of femicide recorded between 2010 and 2019 ended in sentencing.

The UN have also called on Chile to improve gender equality in the country, citing that in 2018, 5.8 per cent of women aged 15 to 49 years reported that they had been subject to physical and/or sexual violence by a current or former intimate partner in the previous 12 months. Cerda wonders how the right can claim to be protecting the life of the unborn child while showing disregard for the lives of countless women. She has since voiced her attempts to ensure gender equality is provided by the next constitution.

A huge consequence of Chile’s strict abortion laws is the rise in at-home abortions. Around the city, one can find numerous fliers on how to obtain misoprostol, a prohibited medicine commonly used to terminate an early pregnancy. This pill is increasingly used illegally by Chilean women, an act that can be dangerous and extremely isolating. Indeed, in 2017, up to 70,000 abortions took place in this way. In 2014, this was responsible for up to 900 deaths in Latin America, and Human Rights Watch claims this has disproportionality affected poorer and Indigenous women. This act is punishable by five years imprisonment, yet this hasn’t stopped a number of clandestine groups supplying the drug. Alongside the medication, these “abortion doulas” provide emotional support to those in the process. Organisations such as Advocates for Youth even offer training to those as young as 14 to help those who want to guide others with the procedure.

Chile continues to be divided on this policy. The conservative members of the constitutional council affirm that they “are not making any changes that could affect the three-cause abortion law,” yet the Green Tide continues to spread the hashtag, “#SeraLey,” or “It will be Legal.”

The post Abortion Rights Debate Continues to Cause Tension Throughout Chile appeared first on The McGill Daily.

 Indeed, the Canadian government believes that agents of Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government are behind the murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canadian and Indian citizen. This murder took place on June 18 in Surrey, British Columbia. Nijjar was known to be involved with the Khalistan movement as a Canadian Sikh separatist leader. This movement calls for an independent Sikh state, as Indian Sikhs constitute the fourth largest religious group in the country. Nijjar’s involvement with the Khalistan movement is in fact a significant aspect to the tensions that have risen between Canada and India. In fact, since Trudeau’s accusations, Indian media sources have presented Canada as a country that offers refuge to Khalistani terrorists

Trudeau’s accusations, and the Indian government’s reaction to them, has caused negative repercussions for Canada, whether it is diplomatically, economically, or socially. A key result of these tensions, for instance, has been the Indian demands of the repatriation of 41 Canadian diplomats, which was recently enacted on October 19. Along with that, India has warned its citizens to be cautious when traveling to Canada, and has stopped processing visitor visas for Canada. This can indicate a diplomatic setback for Canada, for whom India constitutes a “country that we want to have a good relationship with” according to Daniel Béland, Director of the McGill Institute for the Study of Canada and Professor in the Department of Political Science. When talking to the Daily, Béland emphasized the importance of salvaging “our relationship with India; in part because we have so many Canadians of Indian descent, along with foreign students and temporary workers from India.” “Four per cent of Canadians are of Indian background” and “half of that are from Sikh background” says Béland. As discussed with Professor Béland, this issue exceeds the realm of international relations as it “has ramifications that are important domestically” for instance within the Indian diaspora, “including tensions between Indians and Sikh people.” 

Daniel Béland explains that Canada has not received a lot of public support from its allies (such as the UK)- except for the US which has asserted support for Canada during these tensions- which might display a shift in Canada’s positioning in the world as a “middle-sized power.” However, he claims it is important to remember that “Canadian voters aren’t as interested in foreign diplomacy.” Béland discusses Canada’s tendency to focus on local issues rather than focusing on the country’s foreign correspondences. He says that foreign policy is “not necessarily a priority” in Canada, but that these tensions show that Canadian foreign policy is already shifting. There is “more push back on alleged foreign interference,” displayed through Trudeau’s decision to “publicly take a strong stance” on this issue, describes Béland.

Although these tensions might come off as pivotal for Canada and Canadian foreign policy, the Trudeau government has claimed that they are not looking to escalate tensions with India. “You need two partners to dance,” says Béland. Indeed, the future outcomes of these tensions will not only depend on the Canadian government, but also the Modi government’s response.

From India’s perspective, the Indian government has denied any involvement in the murder of Nijjar and has labeled these accusations as “absurd and politically motivated.” The Indian government views Canada as accepting of the Khalistan movement, which they consider to be a terrorist movement and a national security threat. The Indian government further reiterated their belief that Canada is “not doing enough to stem anti-India activism.” The Indian Minister of External Affairs, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, has explaimed that Indian diplomats positioned in Canada feel unsafe when going to embassies or consulates due to the “climate of fear” that has arisen. However, Jaishankar emphasized that India remains open to exploring any relevant or specific information that Canada might advance. Nonetheless, India expresses concerns of “continuous interference” in their internal affairs by Canadian agents, which threatens their “sovereignty and territorial integrity.”

The future of the Canadian-Indian diplomatic and political relationship is hard to predict. It will depend on the upcoming actions of both countries and how these tensions evolve; whether the countries are willing to cooperate, or, contrastingly, if they continue to exacerbate the friction.  

The post Rising Tensions Between India and Canada appeared first on The McGill Daily.