Donald Trump’s first term gave the world a taste of deliberately disruptive unwanted involvement in the domestic affairs of other countries, with examples ranging from Britain in the throes of Brexit to North Korea where the 45th US president attempted to forge a personal deal with Kim Jung-Un.

US tech billionaire Elon Musk, however, has taken this to a whole new level. Musk appears willing to intrude in other nations’ affairs by using his personal influence with specific decision-makers, governments and institutions, or by attacking them from the sidelines of social media in order to remake them in the way he wants them to be. In contrast, Trump is more pragmatic and could do a deal with any nation provided they fall in line with his “America first” mission, and give him what he demands.

In the past six months, many countries have been subjected to Musk’s “personal foreign policy” initiatives. Until fairly recently, there were two schools of thought on his interest in global politics. Initially, Musk was merely “a mischievous antagonist” who simply loved to shock and appeared largely driven by social media.

But that has given way to nervousness in the face of Musk’s increasingly deliberate attempts at destabilising governments, including his persistent stoking of populist support for far-right parties, and potentially funding populist allies. This comes as current president Joe Biden warns of the growing power of the ultra wealthy in his final address to the nation before he steps down.

Musk wields enormous global influence not merely because of his wealth, connections, and fleet of companies. But arguably because he is a self-proclaimed populist, with increasingly far-right political preferences. As of January 20, he will also be a significant member of the Trump administration.

His political toolbox includes supporting or (more usually) strafing individual politicians (for instance UK prime minister Keir Starmer, or German chancellor Olaf Scholz ). He also backs populist parties such as Reform UK and AfD in Germany. He criticises government officials in other countries, judges and broadcasting outlets in places where he doesn’t live.

Musk’s political involvement appears to be largely aimed at giving succour to populist individuals, parties and causes, as well as actively hollowing out centrist parties in other countries. Musk’s political intrusion, however, has expanded of late, with an apparent eye on election results.

Examples include countries with elections some way off (Canada by attacking prime minister Justin Trudeau), or much sooner (Germany), giving him scope to criticise the incumbents while backing his chosen opposition party.

Musk’s attention is extensive, from attacks on Starmer, to support for Italy’s Georgia Meloni and Argentina’s Javier Milei.

WHOSE FOREIGN POLICY?

The worry for those working in foreign policy is that Musk has proven effective in the role of Trump’s pre-inauguration disruptor of choice, and may well be deployed in the name of the US government to continue his interference and destabilisation. The challenge will then be discerning where Musk’s personalised foreign policy ends, and where precisely US foreign policy begins.

Musk positions himself as the global defender of free speech , in order to soften the ground for Trump’s preferred combination of far-right populism and protectionist, tariff-driven trade approaches.

Musk’s way of working is to encourage national communities and leaders to “rally against rules”, thereby empowering far-right parties, and industry leaders who have spotted an opportunity to deregulate key sectors.

Meta chief executive Mark Zuckerberg recently announced an enormous transformation of the social media giant’s content moderation policy in the US. The European Parliament’s far right grouping Patriots for Europe supported Musk’s call for greater media freedom.

Both of these conveniently aligned with Musk’s targeting of the EU and EU regulation as “institutionalised censorship”, paving the way for Trump himself to kickstart any number of quarrels.

The buffer zones of common sense, including former UK deputy PM Nick Clegg as (the now former) head of policy for Meta, have been dispensed with. Zuckerberg’s thinking now echoes that of companies, regulators and politicians who agree with Trump.

DISRUPTIVE AND DIVISIVE

Musk represents both indirect and direct state interference as a solo global disruptor and as Trump’s preferred front man. Sitting at Trump’s right hand and – as of January 20 – heading the new US Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) – means it is unclear who is acting, and in whose interests and crucially, who benefits.

Are countries less likely to tell Musk and Trump to back off, aware of the risk of a deluge of ire with very real consequences in terms of trade spats? This is certainly the approach of many, including Marietje Schaake, former European parliamentarian, arguing that: “Musk must be seen as representing the US president when he bets against the leadership of key European nations, allies until now.”

Or are countries just as likely to disregard Musk, betting that the ramped up performative bullying inherited from Trump can be largely ignored?

RESPONDING TO INTERFERENCE

While many may push back, only a few have the ability to make a difference in global politics, and the EU is one such example. The European Commission made clear that it closely watched Musk’s recent X livestream session with Alice Weidel, leader of German’s far right party AfD. This was in order to decide whether X itself provides (in this case) the AfD with an unfair public advantage – largely through the manipulation of algorithms designed to swamp competing non-AfD voices ahead of February’s German election.

The European Commission – in its role as enforcer of Europe’s Digital Services Act (DSA) – could impose high fines, or blocks. But it will need serious political will to do so, as well as incontrovertible evidence to prove that X is causing risk to the public by augmenting unlawful hate speech.

What are the consequences of Musk’s rollercoaster ride into global affairs? Deregulation is likely to be the order of the day. Maga has long pushed for a “small state/big companies” approach and this is likely to continue under Musk’s leadership of Doge.

There could also be problems ahead for those who don’t understand Musk’s role. Casualties here could include prospective secretary of state Marco Rubio along with US foreign policy officials in Washington (and their counterparts around the world), all of whom may be confused by whose agenda is being carried out.

But a slew of angry international allies is a poor start for any new government. Violating the “norms of responsible conduct” – however flippantly Musk regards them – will not ultimately assist in Trump himself being effective, but rather just more disruptive.

(Author: Amelia Hadfield, Head of Department of Politics, University of Surrey)

(Disclosure Statement: Amelia Hadfield has received Jean Monnet /Erasmus+ and Horizon Europe funding from the European Commission)

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
 

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

New Delhi:

Millions of Americans on Wednesday celebrated Donald Trump’s remarkable return to the White House – the 78-year-old defied pre-poll predictions to become the first Republican in 20 years to win the popular vote en route to the presidency. But not everyone was quite so happy.

Among his critics was Vanity Fair, a monthly magazine on popular culture and current affairs, which featured Mr Trump on the cover of its newest digital issue, with a sequence of numbers highlighting the legal disputes that still surround the President-elect.

At the top of the list is the 34 felony charges the incoming American President faced in a criminal case in the State of New York. The court ruled Mr Trump altered business records to hide over $400,000 in payments made to Stormy Daniels, an adult film actor, to try and conceal details of their sexual encounter. He was convicted – the next number, 1 conviction – on all counts in May.

Mr Trump – who slammed the entire case as a “witch hunt” and protested his innocence – is the first felon to be elected as President of the United States. He has said he will appeal the verdict.

Sentencing was delayed till after the result of this election; it will be held on November 26, while a separate hearing on immunity for the incoming President is expected on November 12.

If the latter hearing goes as Mr Trump will want – i.e., if the court rules he enjoys immunity as a former President – then the former will be dismissed, since the guilty verdict will be overturned.

Even if there is to be no immunity, Mr Trump can now surely postpone any sentencing, although he cannot, as President, pardon himself since this is a state and not federal case.

In the extremely unlikely case the sentencing goes through, Mr Trump could face a maximum of four years in prison, but sentencing a President-elect days before he takes oath (on January 20) would be unprecedented. Mr Trump has also asked for the case to move to a federal court.

The next number – 2 cases pending.

In the first pending case are four charges in a Washington, D.C. court accusing Donald Trump of spreading false claims of election fraud to try and block collection and certification of votes cast in the 2020 election. This is, perhaps, the big one, since it deals with the January 2021 attack on the Capital.

The attack – by a mob of Donald Trump’s supporters – was widely seen as being precipitated by incendiary speeches from the outgoing President, claiming, as he had for weeks earlier without any evidence, that his election win had been “stolen by emboldened radical-left Democrats”.

FROM THE ARCHIVE | Trump Summoned Supporters To “Wild” Protest. They Came

The US Supreme Court offered some relief for Mr Trump after ruling some of his actions had immunity, but prosecutors then revised charges to name him as a private citizen instead.

Trump pleaded not guilty to all charges and cast the prosecutions as politically motivated.

FROM THE ARCHIVE | “Appropriate”: Trump Defends Speech Before Capitol Violence

The trial date for this has not yet been set, and with Mr Trump’s election win now, it is unclear if and when this will move forward. As President, Mr Trump can pardon himself for these charges.

The Georgia Case

In the second case, the President-elect and 18 others are accused of criminal conspiracy in trying to overturn his defeat in Georgia in 2020; he lost the state’s 16 electoral votes to Democrat Joe Biden, but popular vote loss was less than 0.5 per cent – 49.47 to Mr Biden and 49.24 to Mr Trump.

The investigation hinges on a call Mr Trump allegedly made, asking a senior George polling official to “find 11,780 votes” – which would have put him a single vote ahead of his rival.

Mr Trump pleaded not guilty, but the trial itself has been delayed by his team seeking to disqualify the public prosecutor for a romantic relationship with a man she hired to work on the case.

Oral arguments on that matter are scheduled for December 5, but Mr Trump’s lawyers are already looking ahead and have said they will ask the court for a suspension of proceedings based on the argument a President ought not to face a criminal prosecution while in office.

As with the New York case, Mr Trump cannot pardon himself as this is a state case, and he also cannot shut down these proceedings as he could the Washington, D.C. charges.

However, this case has also been paused with no certainty on when it will resume.

The other numbers on the Vanity Fair cover pertain to Mr Trump’s 2 impeachments – one in December 2019 on charges of abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, and the other in 2021, after the Capitol attack. In both cases Donald Trump was acquitted by the Senate.

The Vanity Fair cover also mentions Mr Trump’s 6 bankruptcy filings, and conclude on a sharply scathing note: “4 more years… the 47th American President.”

But these numbers are trumped by another – 280, the number of electoral college votes in Mr Trump’s pocket and which confirm that he will be the next President of the United States, despite a spirited (and hopeful) but ultimately futile challenge by Democrat Kamala Harris.

With input from agencies

NDTV is now available on WhatsApp channels. Click on the link to get all the latest updates from NDTV on your chat.

Pop megastar Taylor Swift drew more than 9 million “likes” to her Instagram post backing Vice President Kamala Harris for president from celebrities that included Jennifer Aniston, US basketball star Caitlin Clark and Selena Gomez. Soon after Harris, a Democrat, finished debating her Republican rival Donald Trump on Tuesday night, Swift, 34, told her 283 million followers that Harris and running mate Tim Walz would get her vote in the Nov. 5 election.

Her post encouraged first-time voters to be sure to register for the election, and a US General Services Administration spokesperson reported on Wednesday receiving 337,826 visitors at vote.gov from a custom URL that Taylor Swift had shared.

“I’m voting for @kamalaharris because she fights for the rights and causes I believe need a warrior to champion them,” Swift posted.

She called Harris a “steady-handed, gifted leader” who could lead the country with calm rather than chaos.

Swift was pictured with her cat in her post, which she signed as “Childless Cat Lady” in a dig at Trump’s running mate JD Vance, who in a 2021 interview called some Democrats “a bunch of childless cat ladies.” He has since said it was merely a sarcastic remark.

Supermodel Karlie Kloss, who is married to Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner’s brother, liked Swift’s post.

“Parks and Recreation” and “The White Lotus” actor Aubrey Plaza echoed Swift’s endorsement in her own Instagram post on Wednesday, where she held a cat alongside the caption “HARRIS WALZ” with an American flag emoji.

Trump supporter Elon Musk, who is chief executive of Tesla and owns social media platform X, wrote on his platform, “Fine Taylor … you win … I will give you a child and guard your cats with my life.”

His message was branded “disgusting,” “misogynistic” and “creepy.”

“I’ve done my research, and I’ve made my choice,” Swift wrote to her followers on Instagram. “Your research is all yours to do, and the choice is yours to make. I also want to say, especially to first time voters: Remember that in order to vote, you have to be registered!”

Swift wrote that she was impressed by Walz, the Minnesota governor, and described him as someone “who has been standing up for LGBTQ+ rights, IVF, and a woman’s right to her own body for decades.”

Walz, who was on MSNBC when the endorsement was announced, said he was “incredibly grateful” and urged the singer’s large fan base of “Swifties” to “Get things going.”

Shortly after Swift’s endorsement, the Harris-Walz campaign announced pre-orders for its latest campaign wear: Swift fan inspired friendship bracelets.

TRUMP DISMISSES ENDORSEMENT

Donald Trump on Wednesday dismissed Swift’s endorsement of Harris, saying he “was not a Taylor fan”.

“It was just a question of time,” Trump told Fox News in an interview. “She’s a very liberal person. She seems to always endorse a Democrat. And she’ll probably pay a price for it … in the marketplace.”

In August, Trump posted a fake social media image of Swift asking people to vote for him in the November election.

Swift referred to that in her Tuesday post, saying Trump had “really conjured up my fears around AI, and the dangers of spreading misinformation.”

She added: “It brought me to the conclusion that I need to be very transparent about my actual plans for this election as a voter.”

Opinion polls show the race essentially tied between the two candidates.

Harris, who supports abortion rights, has criticized Trump for appointing three of the Supreme Court justices who in 2022 helped overturn the 1973 Roe v Wade ruling ensuring a constitutional right to abortion.

Trump has defended the court’s abortion ruling but said a federal abortion ban is unnecessary and that the issue should be resolved at the state level.

Swift backed President Joe Biden in 2020. Many Hollywood actors, producers and filmmakers have said they view Harris, a former U.S. senator from California, as their hometown candidate.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

Washington:

Donald Trump has faced a jolt from within the Republican party. More than 200 Republicans who previously worked for former US President George W Bush have written an open letter endorsing Kamala Harris for the top post instead of their own party candidate Donald Trump.

This comes weeks ahead of the US Presidential election scheduled in early November.

According to Fox News, a group of Republican officials, including several former aides to George HW Bush, has endorsed Kamala Harris, a Democrat and current Vice President, urging “moderate Republicans and conservative independents” to support her.

However, this is not the first time this has happened. In the previous US election, held in 2020, the same group had opposed Donald Trump.

“Four years ago, President George W Bush, the late Sen John McCain, and then-Gov Mitt Romney alumni came together to warn fellow Republicans that re-electing President Trump would be a disaster for our nation. In those declarations we stated the plain truth, each predicting that another four years of a Trump presidency would irreparably damage our beloved democracy,” the letter said, which was published on Monday by US-based news organisation USA Today.

“We reunite today, joined by new George HW Bush alumni, to reinforce our 2020 statements and, for the first time, jointly declare that we’re voting for Vice President Kamala Harris and Gov Tim Walz this November,” the letter added.

While acknowledging significant policy disagreements with Kamala Harris, the Republican officials emphasised that the alternative is untenable. “Of course, we have plenty of honest, ideological disagreements with Vice President Harris and Gov. Walz. That’s to be expected. The alternative, however, is simply untenable,” the letter said.
 

Washington:

US President Joe Biden on Wednesday praised his Vice President Kamala Harris — presumptive nominee for the Democratic presidential ticket — as “tough” and “capable” as he addressed the nation from the Oval Office.

“She’s experienced, she’s tough, she’s capable. She’s been an incredible partner to me and a leader for our country. Now, the choice is up to you, the American people,” he said days after bowing out of the election race and endorsing her.

Join me as I deliver an address from the Oval Office. https://t.co/MPTTLv6nyn

— President Biden (@POTUS) July 24, 2024

Biden also told Americans that he had dropped out of the 2024 election to unite his party and his country, saying in a historic Oval Office speech that it was time to pass the torch to “younger voices.”

“The defense of democracy, which is at stake, is more important than any title,” the 81-year-old said in his first televised address since his stunning decision.

“I have decided the best way forward is to pass the torch to a new generation. That is the best way to unite our nation.”

Biden bowed out of the race later than any other president in US history on Sunday, giving in to weeks of pressure from Democrats after a disastrous debate performance against Donald Trump raised concerns about his age and mental acuity.

Using the powerfully symbolic setting of the Resolute Desk, Biden’s speech called for an end to the divisions in US politics and said the country was more powerful than “any dictator or tyrant.”

The veteran Democrat said there was a “time and a place for new voices, fresh voices. Yes, younger voices. And that time and place is now.”

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)

President Joe Biden, right, and Republican presidential candidate former President Donald Trump, left, during a presidential debate hosted by CNN, Thursday, June 27, 2024, in Atlanta.
| Photo Credit: AP

U.S. President Joe Biden and his Republican rival, Donald Trump, took the stage Thursday evening for a debate that offered an unparalleled opportunity to define their unpopular presidential rematch.

The debate provided Mr. Biden, the 81-year-old Democratic incumbent, the chance to reassure voters that he’s capable of guiding the U.S. through a host of challenges as he moved to sharpen the choice voters will face in November. Mr. Trump, 78, had the opening to try to move past his felony conviction in New York and convince an audience of tens of millions that he is suited to return to the Oval Office.

ALSO READ | Politics of memes: How Biden and Trump are fighting each other on the internet

Mr. Trump and Mr. Biden entered the night facing stiff headwinds, including a public weary of the tumult of partisan politics and broadly dissatisfied with both, according to polling. But the debate was highlighting how they have sharply different visions on virtually every core issue — abortion, the economy and foreign policy — and deep hostility toward each other.

The two candidates strode on stage and walked directly to their lecterns, avoiding a handshake.

The first question went to Mr. Biden, pressed to defend rising inflation since he took office, which he pinned on the situation he inherited from Trump amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Biden needed to clear his throat twice during his first answer, sounding hoarse, and Trump smirked as Biden started speaking.

The current president and his predecessor hadn’t spoken since their last debate weeks before the 2020 presidential election. Mr. Trump skipped Mr. Biden’s inauguration after leading an unprecedented and unsuccessful effort to overturn his loss that culminated in the January 6 Capitol insurrection by his supporters.

Mr. Trump has promised sweeping plans to remake the U.S. government if he returns to the White House and Mr. Biden argues that his opponent would pose an existential threat to the nation’s democracy.

ALSO READ |The Hindu editorial on the 2024 U.S. Presidential election as a Biden-Trump rematch

Thursday’s broadcast on CNN, moderated by anchors Jake Tapper and Dana Bash, marked the earliest general election debate in history. It’s the first-ever televised general election presidential debate hosted by a single news outlet after both campaigns ditched the bipartisan Commission on Presidential Debates, which had organised every matchup since 1988.

Aiming to avoid a repeat of their chaotic 2020 matchups, Mr. Biden insisted — and Mr. Trump agreed — to hold the debate without an audience and to allow the network to mute the candidates’ microphones when it is not their turn to speak. The debate’s two commercial breaks offered another departure from modern practice, while the candidates have agreed not to consult staff or others while the cameras are off.

Mr. Trump and his aides have spent months chronicling what they argue are signs of Mr. Biden’s diminished stamina. In recent days, they’ve started to predict Mr. Biden will be stronger on Thursday, aiming to raise expectations for the incumbent.

Mr. Biden’s team too predicted that he would rise to the occasion, and expressed hope that Mr. Trump would be forced to address his positions they believe are anathema to voters.

“Joe’s ready to go. He’s prepared. He’s confident,” his wife, Jill Biden, told donors ahead of the debate. “You know what a great debater he is.”

Heading out of the debate, both Mr. Biden and Mr. Trump will travel to states they hope to swing their way this fall. Mr. Trump is heading to Virginia, a onetime battleground that has shifted toward Democrats in recent years.

Mr. Biden is set to jet off to North Carolina, where he is expected to hold the largest-yet rally of his campaign in a state Mr. Trump narrowly carried in 2020.

Being second in line for leadership of the most powerful country in the world is not an easy job. But for Mike Pence, vice president under Donald Trump, things were even harder than usual.

As insurrectionists descended on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, they had a specific target in mind – the outgoing vice president. They built a wooden gallows, and called out for him by name: “Hang Mike Pence! Hang Mike Pence!”

As the extensive congressional hearings into the insurrection later documented, the threats were not hollow. One informant told FBI investigators that “if given the chance”, certain far-right insurrectionists would have tried to kill him. Pence escaped with his life, but only just.

The insurrectionists, as a federal investigation alleges, were drawn to the Capitol by Trump, who had just lost the 2020 election to Joe Biden. They were after Trump’s VP because, as one later claimed, he had “betrayed” Trump by not refusing to certify the election results.

The job of vice president of the United States is not a normal one at the best of times. The person chosen to run alongside Trump in this year’s election will no doubt be keeping Pence’s experience in mind. It will likely be someone who can convincingly pledge undying loyalty to Trump. The former president – and his supporters – will expect nothing less.

Speculation over who that person might be is heating up, and Trump, as usual, is relishing drawing out the process in order to gain as much attention as possible. So, who – and how – will he choose?

Making race a priority

A vice presidential candidate is usually chosen based on a political calculation. For instance, the running mate can be seen to offset a presidential nominee’s weaknesses (be they real or perceived).

The relatively young northerner John F. Kennedy, for example, chose the much more politically experienced southerner, Lyndon B. Johnson. Barack Obama, running to be the first Black president, similarly chose the older and more experienced – and reassuringly white – Biden.

In his first run, Trump settled on Pence to offset his perceived weakness with evangelical voters – a critical mobilising base to any Republican candidate.

Viewed through this lens, the commonly accepted wisdom is that Trump has both a race and a woman problem, and that he should choose a VP candidate who can address at least one of those concerns.

In the first category, the leading candidates appear to be two men who ran against Trump for this year’s nomination – Tim Scott and Vivek Ramaswamy.

Scott – a South Carolinian that Bloomberg has dubbed “Trump’s New Black Best Friend” – is the only Black Republican in the Senate. He has certainly indicated he is keen for the job, professing his love for Trump and recently announcing his engagement (being single is generally regarded as a political liability).

During the Republican campaign for the presidential nomination, Ramaswamy had presented himself as the newer, shinier Trump. In one memorable moment in the debates, he was first to raise his hand when the candidates were asked who would still support Trump if he is convicted of a crime. Ramaswamy also quickly endorsed Trump when he dropped out.

Trump would no doubt be pleased with such public professions of loyalty. But there is no indication Trump considers race to be a problem for his candidacy – in fact, quite the opposite.

Trump has been leaning in to increasingly extreme racist rhetoric. If he thought race mattered to his chances, he would likely be behaving differently. Trump’s political rise began with his racist “birther” conspiracies about Obama. It is not a stretch to suggest many of his supporters would baulk at a ticket that wasn’t entirely white.

Why a conservative woman might make sense

In the second category, the accepted wisdom is that Trump’s “woman problem” is a direct result of the signature achievement of his administration: the appointment of three conservative justices to the Supreme Court, which subsequently led to the overturning of Roe v Wade.

As Biden put it recently, candidates underestimate the political and electoral power of women at their peril.

Among the leading women Republican VP candidates are Elise Stefanik, a congresswoman from New York, and Kristi Noem, the governor of South Dakota.

The fact both are considered leading candidates reveals the political calculations behind Trump’s possible selection. While Trump has flip-flopped on abortion restrictions himself, both Stefanik and Noem have extremely conservative positions on reproductive rights.

And given what we know about Trump’s views on women, it seems likely his judgement would be almost entirely aesthetic. There is a very specific political reason why Noem has grown out her hair and gotten new teeth.

Congresswomen Marjorie Taylor Green is often added to this list, but may have slimmer chances. While she literally wears her Trump loyalty on her head, she attracts a lot of attention. And Trump does not much like to share the spotlight.

It’s also entirely possible Trump will go with a wildcard candidate. He is increasingly resentful of what we could loosely characterise as “establishment” political advice designed to curb his worst instincts. His campaign is now almost entirely based on a desire for revenge and retribution against the people he believes held him back.

There has never been a reason to believe Trump will follow conventional political wisdom.

The stakes are higher than usual

Given the cult of personality that has developed around Trump, some argue his choice of running mate is unlikely to shift many votes. As a result, it doesn’t actually matter all that much.

Other keen watchers of American politics, though, argue the opposite. Given the advanced ages of both Trump and Biden, the VP pick is more important than usual, not least because of the higher-than-normal chance this person could be elevated to the Oval Office at some point.

In Trump’s case, some argue that if he wins, he will be a “lame duck” president from day one since it would be his second term in office. So, all eyes will be on his VP as the presumptive nominee for 2028.

This glosses over the very real questions about the continuity of constitutional law under a second Trump presidency, and ignores the noises Trump supporters are already making about trying to remove presidential term limits. It also assumes that, like Pence, Trump’s next VP would choose to put their own political future or American democracy above being an enthusiastic supporter of Trump’s authoritarianism. This is unlikely.

Like everything this time around, the stakes are higher than usual.

(Author: Emma Shortis, Adjunct Senior Fellow, School of Global, Urban and Social Studies, RMIT University)

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)