Alex Chan /SOPA Images/Sipa USA/AP/File

Workers remove wet dirt at a former flooding area due to the breach of the Kakhovka Dam in Kherson, Ukraine, June 15, 2023.

When the Kakhovka Dam on Ukraine’s Dnieper River was destroyed a year ago, apparently by Russian troops, the flash evacuation of its massive reservoir was deemed an environmental calamity of global proportions.

In particular, scientists predicted that the 832 square miles of land once submerged beneath the reservoir would become a toxic desert of dried industrial sludge, agricultural runoff, and sewage.

But as Vadym Maniuk presses deep into the thick young forest of river willows and aspens now carpeting the reservoir floor, the professor of ecological studies at Dnipro National University highlights the evidence that he says debunks the apocalyptic predictions – and attests to what he calls nature’s indomitable regenerative power.

“Look at this willow; it sprouted and grew to this size in just one year,” he says with wonderment of a tree that reaches almost twice his height. “Look down,” he adds. “This place they declared dead is alive in so many ways,” as he points to the hundreds of tiny frogs that scatter with every step he takes.

“This is what they called the ‘Great Meadow’ before the dam was built, [what] my grandmother used to tell me was her childhood playground,” Dr. Maniuk recalls as he surveys the expanse of green from a nearby hill. “Now it seems we could be getting the Great Meadow back.”

Howard LaFranchi/The Christian Science Monitor

Poppies bloom a year after floodwaters inundated this storage building in the village of Zapovit, Ukraine, May 27, 2024.

Russian forces in control of the Kakhovka site are believed to have set off the explosion that caused the dam’s demise, as part of a continuing campaign to knock out electricity generation plants, destroy Ukraine’s economy, and thin out the population. Environmentalists and economists are now debating the disaster’s lasting ecological impact.

At the same time, residents of the cities and villages downriver are still struggling to recover – especially amid a war.

Some good results

Dr. Maniuk is aware that his enthusiasm might come off as indifference to the human suffering that the dam’s collapse unleashed. Entire neighborhoods of the downriver city of Kherson were flooded, dozens of villages were inundated, miles of irrigation channels were destroyed, and sensitive ecosystems were washed away to the Black Sea.

“Of course it was a catastrophe; the social impact was huge for the people who lived along the river and the farmers who lost their irrigation systems,” he says. “But we’re also seeing some good results that were not anticipated in all the dire predictions.”

Some of the centuries-old villages along the river and its tributaries were unable to withstand the double punch of the war and the flooding. They now sit vacant – smashed and silent.

In others, new windows, fresh paint, and neat vegetable gardens attest to life.

But nowhere is that life the way it was before the war and the floods, remaining residents say.

Howard LaFranchi/The Christian Science Monitor

Mykola and Valentyna Dudnichenko say only two houses on their street in Krasnoliubetsk, Ukraine are occupied, following two waves of departures from the village – one after the 2022 invasion, and the other after the dam's destruction last year.

“Only two houses on our street are occupied; the other families have left,” says Mykola Dudnichenko, as he gestures up and down the dirt road outside his house in Krasnoliubetsk, a village on the banks of a Dnieper tributary.

They left behind unexploded mines that floated into farmers’ fields and lodged there, the absence of potable water, worries about potentially toxic residues, and the lack of jobs, he adds. “You understand why so many have left.”

Mr. Dudnichenko’s wife, Valentyna, says people often ask how they can stay put, living so close to a war. The former music teacher at a nearby orphanage says she tells them the flood was much worse.

“When the shells come, you can seek proper shelter, but there is no escaping floodwaters,” she says, recalling how the nearby river reversed course and flooded from downstream as the engorged Dnieper blocked its tributaries’ normal flow.

“The water is really much scarier; there is nothing you can do,” she adds, choking up at the memory of it.

She weeps as she recalls the drowned chickens, the cows and other farm animals people let loose to fend for themselves – and the field mice that came running in droves, seeking shelter in her house.

“But then the water rose above the windows,” she says, wiping away tears. “So the house offered no protection.”

Howard LaFranchi/The Christian Science Monitor

Svitlana Zyma and her son started repairs her ruined home in Zapovit, Ukraine, by installing new subflooring, but it was soon retaken with toxic mold.

Moscow accused of ecocide

Across the Inhulets River, in the village of Zapovit, Svitlana Zyma opens the door to her house, which floodwaters left uninhabitable.

“Everything was taken over by a toxic mold,” she explains. “Then the walls crumbled, so we knew it would be a long time before anyone could live here.”

Ms. Zyma, who has moved into another house nearby, says she has watched her once vibrant community decline “in waves,” first as a result of the war, and more recently since the flood.

“I could move to Mykolaiv,” she says, referring to a nearby city, “but how would I ever pay the rent?”

As Ms. Zyma resigns herself to live with the environmental consequences of the Kakhovka Dam’s destruction, the Ukrainian authorities have seized on them as evidence of a novel crime under international law – “ecocide.”

Last February, Ukraine became the first country to formally lodge allegations of ecocide at the International Criminal Court at The Hague. Kyiv is now pursuing more than a dozen such cases, several of which stem from the Kakhovka Dam’s destruction.

Howard LaFranchi/The Christian Science Monitor

For environmentalist Vladislav Balinskyy, shown on a beach in Odesa, Ukraine, the aftermath of the Kakhovka Dam's destruction still qualifies as an "environmental Chernobyl" even if the most dire predictions didn't come true.

Odesa environmentalist Vladislav Balinskyy says he has no doubt that the dam’s destruction resulted in ecocide. Whole ecosystems of the Dnieper River’s estuaries were destroyed, and dozens of species of fish, lizards, small amphibians, dolphins, and rare plants were lost, he says.

But he acknowledges some brighter environmental results amid the overall catastrophe.

“We have lost some unique biodiversity we will never restore, and the grave problem of toxic silt is going to be with us for a long time,” says Mr. Balinskyy, head of the Green Leaf environmental organization. But it’s true, he adds, that “some of the direst predictions did not come true.”

A storm over the Black Sea mixed cooler sea waters with warmer river runoff, he points out, nipping in the bud the toxic bloom many experts had predicted. And the dam broke just as river willows and other trees were releasing trillions of seeds, thus seeding the reservoir’s bed and restoring the Great Meadow.

SOURCE:

NASA, Institute for the Study of War

|

Jacob Turcotte/Staff

With a similar mix of trepidation and hope, the Dudnichenkos planted a vegetable garden this spring, even though they worry that toxic floodwaters may have poisoned their soil.

They rail against the lack of government assistance to help them recover from the flood, but they also plan to stay put. They bicycle up the hill every day to fetch safe water from a plastic tank that regional authorities installed. They care for their chickens, ducks, and pigs, and for Refugee, the cat that showed up on their doorstep after the flood.

“The villages here are dying; it’s true,” Mr. Dudnichenko says. “But we will do what we can to keep ours alive.”

Israelis erupted in a spontaneous outpouring of joy Saturday as news broke over the dramatic rescue of four hostages held by Hamas. But the euphoria was short-lived, as it quickly became clear that none of Israel’s remaining challenges from the war in Gaza – military, diplomatic, or political – had been materially altered.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu came under immediate fire from hostages’ advocates and others for politicizing the release. Former military chief Benny Gantz pulled his centrist party from the government over its failure to adopt a day-after plan for Gaza. And Monday it was reported the Biden administration was trying to negotiate a side deal with Hamas to secure the release of American citizens still held hostage.

Israelis were whipsawed from grief to joy and then back to grim reality in mere hours.

Just days before the rescue, Israelis had learned that four other hostages, who had been seen alive in Hamas propaganda videos, had died in captivity.

On Saturday, the nation breathed a huge sigh of relief at the news that commandos had liberated four living hostages. A veteran TV journalist burst into tears in a live broadcast, lifeguards announced the news by megaphone to cheering beachgoers, and people grabbed flags to pour dancing into the streets.

But by nightfall Saturday, a grim reality once again cloaked the nation: Israelis fretted over the remaining 120 hostages and over widening social and political cracks, the high human and economic toll of Israel’s longest war, and the nation’s increasing global isolation, made worse as the reported Palestinian death toll from the rescue operation surged past 200 people.

Marko Djurica/Reuters

People react during a rally in support of Israeli hostages being held by Hamas in Gaza, asking the Israeli government to obtain their release, in Tel Aviv, Israel, June 8, 2024.

The successful rescue of four living hostages was a “sweet drop of water in a sea that is salty,” says Eyal, an Israeli demonstrator giving only his first name and sitting on the pavement at an antigovernment protest in Tel Aviv Saturday night.

There are “security, economic, social, and international relations” issues that need to be urgently addressed to get the nation back on its feet, he says gloomily. “We need a lot of work and a lot of hope.”

Pressure on Netanyahu

Mr. Netanyahu has come under intensified criticism at home and abroad for his conduct of the war. And Mr. Gantz, in his resignation announcement, and U.S. President Joe Biden, in an interview last week, both gave support to the contention that the prime minister has prolonged the war for political gain. After eight months, the war aims of rescuing the hostages and breaking down Hamas’ military and governing abilities still seem distant.

On Monday, NBC News reported that Biden administration officials have discussed negotiating a deal with Hamas to release five American hostages held since Oct. 7 if current efforts to secure an Israeli-Hamas cease-fire fail. Secretary of State Antony Blinken arrived in the region Monday to promote a cease-fire deal previously outlined by President Biden that holds the promise of a longer and broader settlement. At the United Nations, the Security Council passed a resolution Monday afternoon endorsing the U.S.-backed cease-fire plan.

If the NBC report is accurate, “it would be dramatic news,” says Professor Gideon Rahat, chair of the political science department at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. “Israel sees itself as the safe haven for Jews globally. But now it is President Biden, and not the Israeli government, that is saving the Jews.”

“It is clear that this is a leak that is meant to pressure Mr. Netanyahu to agree to a cease-fire deal,” Professor Rahat says.

Abed Khaled/Reuters

A woman and child walk among debris in the area of the Nuseirat refugee camp in the central Gaza Strip where the rescued Israeli hostages had been held, June 9, 2024.

In his resignation announcement Sunday night, Mr. Gantz accused Mr. Netanyahu of preventing Israel from “advancing to real victory” and called for early elections.

The departure of Mr. Gantz’s National Unity Party from the emergency government is not expected to pose an immediate risk to the right-wing coalition, which still has 64 seats in the 120-seat Knesset, says Professor Rahat.

“What it will do is increase even further Israel’s international isolation, as Mr. Gantz and his party were seen as the responsible adults, the voice of reason, within the government,” he says. But Mr. Netanyahu “likes this global isolation,” he says. “He likes to show Israelis how strong he is vis-à-vis a hostile world. It works for him.”

Professor Rahat says it is likely that Mr. Netanyahu will try to add opposition members to his government. “This will allow him to juggle opposing views within his government and in this way buy time, which is what he wants. He tries to buy time.”

Yohanan Plesner, president of the Israel Democracy Institute, said in a statement that the departure of Mr. Gantz’s party from the coalition “is incredibly consequential to Israeli politics.” The participation of Mr. Gantz and his team at critical junctures of war decisions gave a “broad swath [of] Israelis a higher level of confidence that critical wartime decisions were being made with moderate voices in the room and broad national representation, rather than narrow political interests.”

Nir Elias/Reuters

Benny Gantz, a former army chief, addresses the media after his ultimatum to withdraw his centrist party from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s emergency government expired, in Ramat Gan, Israel, June 9, 2024.

Photo ops

Meanwhile, Mr. Netanyahu came under much public criticism for rushing Saturday to meet the just-freed hostages and publishing those images for political gain, while he has not yet met the bereaved family members of hostages who have died.

Avi Marciano, the father of hostage Noa Marciano, whose body was retrieved by soldiers, said in a Facebook post that he is “happy with all his heart for all the families who got to embrace their loved ones. I’m also jealous. This highlights how our ending was bad. When it ends badly, the prime minister doesn’t come. He also doesn’t call.”

Among the hostages freed Saturday was Noa Argamani, who was seen Oct. 7 being rushed away from the site of an outdoor concert on a motorcycle sandwiched between militants as she cried out, arms outstretched, for help. Israeli commandos rescued her and the others from civilian homes in the midst of the Nuseirat refugee camp in central Gaza.

The rescue mission has underlined the complexity of freeing prisoners held either underground or among civilians, highlighting for many the urgent necessity of a deal to get back the remaining 120 hostages, many of whom are deemed to be already dead. Since Oct. 7, 2023, when more than 250 people were taken hostage by Hamas, just seven have been rescued alive. More than 100 others were released under a temporary cease-fire deal, which eventually broke down. Three others were mistakenly killed in December by Israeli troops.

Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Daniel Hagari said Saturday that the “heroic” and “high-risk” mission was based on precise intelligence for which commando teams prepared for weeks.

The commander of one rescue squad was fatally wounded in the operation by heavy Hamas fire. The Hamas-run health ministry in Gaza said the raid killed more than 270 people, including children and other civilians, from heavy artillery barrages and airstrikes.

Marko Djurica/Reuters

Rescued hostage Almog Meir Jan, held by Hamas in Gaza for eight months, is escorted by Israeli fighters in Ramat Gan, Israel, June 8, 2024. The young man's father died hours before the dramatic military operation.

The rescue sends a “very strong signal” to Israel’s enemies about its military capabilities, says Avi Kalo, a lieutenant colonel in the reserves and a former head of the military intelligence department dealing with soldiers missing in action. But “it does not significantly improve” Israel’s strategic situation regarding the war, and certainly not with regard to the hostages held by Hamas, he said Sunday at a briefing with journalists.

Rescue options limited

An operation such as the one executed Saturday “cannot be the platform to return all the hostages, whose time in the tunnels is running out,” Mr. Kalo said. Hamas is now likely “tightening its guard” over the remaining hostages and will draw lessons from the “loopholes” that led to their rescue, he said.

A Hamas spokesperson said in a statement Saturday that the Israeli operation will pose a “great danger” to remaining hostages and negatively impact their conditions and lives.

Rear Admiral Hagari, the Israeli military spokesperson, voiced doubt that more such operations would follow, given their complexity and requirements.

“We know that we can’t do operations in order to rescue all of them because there aren’t always the conditions that allow that,” he said at a briefing Saturday. “We saw in the past that what brought us the biggest number of hostages was a deal.”

At the Tel Aviv demonstration Saturday night, protester Miri Pinchuk concurred. The rescue was “a very good and emotional intermezzo” in the saga of Israel’s woes, she says, but it will not have any “long-term impact” on Israel’s future. “We need an overall political solution that will build a new reality here instead of hate and war.”

Matt Slocum/AP

Hunter Biden arrives at federal court in Wilmington, Delaware, with his wife, Melissa Cohen Biden, June 10, 2024.

The criminal trial of Hunter Biden, the president’s only surviving son, has shined a light on the human, legal, and political dramas swirling within and beyond the first family.

Reduced to essentials, the case is not complicated: The younger Mr. Biden faces three federal felony counts in Wilmington, Delaware, related to his 2018 purchase of a firearm during a period when he struggled with drug addiction. His defense centers on whether he knowingly lied on the gun-purchase form, where he said he was not using illegal drugs, a required condition for buying firearms. If convicted, he could be sentenced to prison.  

Mr. Biden has also been indicted on federal charges of tax evasion, a case scheduled for trial in California in September. The two cases stem from the implosion of a plea deal last summer that would have immunized the first son from future potential charges. 

The Hunter Biden case pales in significance to the legal woes of former President Donald Trump, who was found guilty last month of falsifying business records in a hush-money deal with a porn star. Mr. Trump, the GOP’s presumptive presidential nominee in November, has also been indicted in three other criminal cases.

Hunter Biden, of course, isn’t running for office – let alone reelection as president, as his father is. And certainly the specter of a presidential relative facing personal and legal problems is nothing new. Throughout history, many presidents have had family members who have attracted embarrassing (or worse) public attention. 

But for President Joe Biden, whose life has been marked by tragedy, his son’s saga represents an unprecedented dimension in the heat of a presidential election campaign already unlike any other. 

As a political matter, the Hunter Biden gun case is unlikely to have an impact, analysts say. Even if voters across the political spectrum themselves have experience with relatives struggling with addiction, “I suspect reactions will be heavily dependent on party ID,” says Michael Traugott, a presidential scholar emeritus at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. 

“Republicans, especially, are not likely to be swayed by this in any positive way or accept a very sympathetic view,” Professor Traugott says. 

President Biden has sought to avoid an appearance of conflict of interest. When asked last week in an ABC News interview if he would accept the outcome of his son’s trial, he said “yes.” The president also ruled out a pardon in the event of a conviction.

Hannah Beier/Reuters

First lady Jill Biden walks outside the federal court on the day of Hunter Biden's trial on criminal gun charges, in Wilmington, Delaware, June 10, 2024.

At the same time, Mr. Biden accused Mr. Trump of trying to undermine the rule of law in the former president’s claim that his conviction last month in a New York state case was politically motivated. Two of Mr. Trump’s remaining cases are federal, sparking accusations by the former president and his allies that the Biden administration has weaponized the Justice Department against him.  

That the Hunter Biden case is also federal cuts a bit into that argument, as have federal indictments of two Democratic lawmakers – Sen. Robert Menendez of New Jersey and Rep. Henry Cuellar of Texas. 

Biden critics counter that the earlier Hunter Biden plea deal was a “sweetheart” arrangement by his father’s Justice Department that collapsed at the last minute only because the judge blew the whistle. 

House Republicans also intend to keep pursuing their investigation into Hunter Biden’s business dealings, which they say also implicates the president. Last week, the Republican chairs of three House committees urged the Justice Department to charge Hunter Biden and the president’s brother James Biden with making false statements to Congress. The allegations come within an ongoing impeachment inquiry into President Biden. 

“Now, we’re going to do everything we can to hold Hunter Biden and all the different shady associates accountable. This is just the beginning,” House Oversight Committee chair James Comer said Sunday on Fox Business. “But the next step will be accountability for Joe Biden.”

The impeachment inquiry into President Biden has so far failed to surface firm evidence of wrongdoing, despite claims that he had abused his office for financial gain. But if Mr. Trump wins in November, he has suggested he will seek legal retribution against his political enemies, including Mr. Biden. 

For the president, the trial of his son represents nothing less than the latest chapter in a life marked by tragedy. Early in his political career, President Biden lost his first wife – Hunter’s mother – in a car crash, along with the Bidens’ baby daughter when Hunter and his brother, Beau, were young boys. Beau Biden, seen as the family’s rising political star, died of cancer in 2015. 

After that loss, Hunter Biden went into a spiral of drug abuse and infidelity, destroying his marriage. After Beau’s death, Hunter and Beau’s widow, Hallie Biden, became romantically involved, ensnaring her as well in drug use for a time. Both Hallie Biden and Hunter Biden’s ex-wife, Kathleen Buhle, testified at the trial for the prosecution, in an extraordinary airing of family dysfunction unprecedented in modern American presidential politics. 

Hunter Biden’s oldest daughter, Naomi Biden Neal, testified Friday for the defense, saying that her father had gained control of his drug abuse at the time he purchased a gun – an effort to show that Mr. Biden hadn’t lied on his firearms application. But on cross-examination, the prosecution seemed to undermine Ms. Biden Neal’s testimony by presenting contemporaneous text messages between her and her father portraying anguish over his behavior. 

Biden family members have shown up daily to support Hunter – including first lady Jill Biden, who shuttled back and forth between France (where her husband was traveling) and Wilmington. A remaining question, as the trial was expected to head soon to the jury, was whether Hunter Biden himself would testify. Monday morning, the defense announced he would not.

The jury deliberated for one hour Monday and is scheduled to resume Tuesday morning at 9:00 a.m.

When President Joe Biden slapped a 100% tariff on certain Chinese imports last month, he triggered a new wave of international speculation. Is globalization – the force that has made the modern world, a trend as reviled by some as it is revered by others – in retreat?

Trade as a share of global economic output has shrunk. And “industrial policy,” meant to promote certain domestic industries at the expense of global competitors, is on the rise, especially in wealthy countries. For nearly a decade now, people have been talking about “slowbalization,” as globalization appears to be slowing down.

But that trend may point less to deglobalization, and more to an economic recalibration favoring domestic resilience, prompted largely by supply chain vulnerabilities exposed by the pandemic and the war in Ukraine. Policymakers are worrying more, too, about climate change and social inequality.

“Fragmentation is a major danger to the health of the global economy,” says Kevin Gallagher, director of the Global Development Policy Center at Boston University. But “there is now a consensus that the ‘hyperglobalization,’ whereby free and unregulated markets were the norm, was detrimental to the cause of building low-carbon, socially equal, and resilient economies.”

What is “industrial policy,” and does it run counter to globalization?

“Industrial policy” is an umbrella term for policies that aim to develop certain sectors of the economy so as to meet government goals. That can be done in many ways, for example using subsidies, tax benefits, and trade protections. 

Most major economies, including the U.S. and Germany in the 19th century, and Japan and China in the 20th century, matured with the help of industrial policy.

In the 1980s, as globalization began to take off, many governments came to see industrial policy as an obstacle to free trade and free markets, and they took a hands-off, laissez-faire tack.

Jacquelyn Martin/AP

Joe Biden arrives at an Intel chip facility in Chandler, Arizona, where he announced nearly $20 billion in government grants and loans to support the U.S. company in the face of foreign competition.

In recent years, the pendulum has swung back.

“Now in the United States, both major parties are protection parties, they just sing slightly different melodies,” says Gary C. Hufbauer, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics in Washington. “That has an effect around the world.”

Why are rich countries adopting more industrial policies now?

In the past, industrial policy focused on traditional manufacturing and boosting economic growth. Today, it has more to do with encouraging green manufacturing, securing supply chains, and staying technologically competitive – not least in defense and national security-related industries.

Border closures during the pandemic forced policymakers to reassess their dependence on fragile international supply chains, especially for semiconductors, electric batteries, and critical minerals. Europe sought independence from Russian energy supplies when Moscow invaded Ukraine. Meanwhile, governments are pushing to be at the forefront of the technological revolution, ensuring good domestic jobs at the same time.

Mr. Biden’s latest tariffs are an illustration of what economists have called a “great reallocation” of trade away from China, as the U.S. seeks to decouple its economy from China while building up its own green manufacturing sector.

The investments needed for the green transition are “rife with market failures,” says Adam Hersh, senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute in Washington. “So if we want to see that change, then we have to have some kind of public intervention.”

From the Inflation Reduction Act and the CHIPS Act in the U.S. to Europe’s Green Deal, Beijing’s “Made in China” drive, and Canberra’s vision of a “Future Made in Australia,” politicians are working to safeguard their own economies in the face of global instability and pressures at home.

“The tone of the conversation has shifted radically,” says Fredrik Erixon, a director of the European Centre for International Political Economy in Brussels. “There’s a premium on every type of policy proposal you can brand as being part of economic sovereignty [and] reducing dependencies.”

Anusak Laowilas/NurPhoto/Reuters

A visitor checks out a Chinese electric car at a Bangkok motor show. The U.S. government has imposed 100% import tariffs on such vehicles.

Who wins and who loses when countries protect certain industries?

In wealthy countries, the “winners” are the favored industries, concentrated now in the low-carbon and high-tech sectors, and their workers. The “losers” are consumers and firms paying higher prices for goods produced locally, but more expensively.

In the case of electric vehicles, the BYD Seagull costs $10,000 in China. Consumers in the U.S. can expect to pay three times that for an EV. (President Biden’s policies offer a tax credit of up to $7,500 to anyone who buys an American-made EV.)

In the absence of negotiated global agreements, developing countries lose, too. Industrial policy is expensive, and poorer countries “don’t have the financial firepower to match … the West,” says Professor Gallagher, making it harder for them to become producers of the technologies that will power the future economy.

Is this the end of globalization?

In short, no. Globalization may be taking a new shape as governments reshuffle their domestic priorities, but the world is still becoming more interconnected, not less.

“Globalization today works in different ways,” says Mr. Erixon. “It’s a lot more concentrated on services, on digital connectivity, on technology ideas and applications that are flowing across borders, and on human capital.”

Still, economic fragmentation is cause for some concern. Tariffs may be low by historical standards. But trade restrictions increased by 500% worldwide between 2015 and 2023.

If that trend continues, the costs to the global economy could reach $7 trillion over time, or about 7% of world GDP, according to one estimate by International Monetary Fund staff last year.

So far, though, the impact of a shift toward industrial policy is relatively minor. The heaviest adopters, excluding China, spend an estimated 0.3% to 0.7% of gross domestic product on the initiatives.

“There are protectionist trends,” adds Mr. Erixon. “But they’re not really going to take away the oomph from globalization.”

A studious silence descends on the large tent that, minutes earlier, was filled with a whirlwind of activity as two dozen teenagers danced and bantered to loud South African amapiano beats. Now the boys are crouched over tables scattered with glitter and crayons, occasionally glancing up at the question scrawled on a whiteboard: “Who are you?”

Ziyaad, 13 years old, draws a red cross on a sheet of paper. “It’s my mom’s grave,” he explains to junior counselor Lutho Gcelu, who peers over his shoulder. On one side of the paper, the teen has written his deepest concern: “I do not have a mother or a father. I’m afraid I won’t make it in life without them.” In another corner, he has sketched his dream: “I would like to be a President because I want a better South Africa.”

On a recent weekend, Ziyaad was one of 39 boys ages 13 to 15 who gathered at this lush campsite an hour outside Cape Town with an unusual purpose. (Like other boys in this story, Ziyaad is using only his first name.) They were there as part of a mentoring program called iNtsika yeThemba – or Pillars of Hope – that aims to turn South African boys into “everyday activists” and defenders of women and girls.

Julie Bourdin

A camper creatively explores questions about his identity, what "holds him back," and his dreams, at the Justice Desk weekend camp.

With almost 11 women killed every day, South Africa has among the highest recorded rates of female homicide in the world. Meanwhile, according to police statistics, over 12,000 rapes were recorded in the last 3 months of 2023 alone. Earlier this year, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa urged all men to sign a pledge committing to end violence against women and girls. But despite decades of campaigning, femicide is still on the rise. 

The way boys are raised is one of the underlying causes of this gender-based violence epidemic, says Lerato Kossie, program coordinator at the Justice Desk, the human rights nonprofit that organizes iNtsika yeThemba. 

“A boy is told, ‘You must never cry; you must be the protector, the provider,’” he says. “We were taught to become robots and disconnect from our emotions.”

But iNtsika yeThemba wants to break that cycle. The boys in the program go for counseling, take regular field trips, and attend yearly overnight camps like this one, where they compete in mock Olympics, play soccer, and have candid conversations about identity, masculinity, and the pressures of teenage life in some of the country’s most disadvantaged communities.

“Here, by removing them from the daily norms and duties at home, we see boys who can express themselves fully,” Mr. Kossie says.

Julie Bourdin

Lerato Kossie, program coordinator for iNtsika yeThemba, poses for a portrait at the Justice Desk camp outside Cape Town, South Africa.

Thirty years after the end of apartheid, which segregated and oppressed South Africa’s nonwhite majority, “the country is still very much healing,” Mr. Kossie says. The aftershocks are most visible in townships, the mostly Black, working-class neighborhoods at the fringes of South African cities. Here, violence and unemployment still hit communities hard. “I see generations and generations going through the same cycle of drinking and drug use,” he says. “We need a new generation of positive male role models.”  

Fixing the wheel

On the first evening of camp, the campers sit in a circle, bundled in warm pajamas. Shuffling on their chairs to stay awake, they lean in to hear Mr. Kossie’s voice over the roar of the wind outside. “Why is there crime in Nyanga?” he prods, asking about the Cape Town township that many of the boys come from. 

The answers tumble out. 

“No jobs!” 

“No education!” 

“Poverty!” 

“Drugs!” 

Mr. Kossie scribbles them on the whiteboard. 

“And how does that come back to you? How are you stopping that cycle?” he asks. “Even me, today, I’m still trying to fix that wheel,” he continues, launching into his own story. 

Julie Bourdin

Boys play soccer in the early morning at the Justice Desk weekend camp, outside Cape Town. In between sports and various activities, the boys follow sessions analyzing the sources of anger, power, and violence.

In 1997, at the age of 18, Mr. Kossie was arrested after getting involved with a gang. Incarcerated in Pollsmoor, Cape Town’s notorious maximum security prison, “I battled with the question ‘Who am I?’” he remembers. “I knew my identity as a gang member, but when I was removed from that society, the question came striking back. The answer I came to is that I’m a human being that is allowed to make mistakes.”

When the charges were dropped eight months later, Mr. Kossie pledged he would make sure other youths would never know “the smell of Pollsmoor.” 

In a corner of the room, a 15 year-old – whose name has been omitted to protect his privacy – listens with glistening eyes as the program coordinator shares his story. The teen struggles at school and has battled suicidal thoughts. In his “Who are you?” drawing, he sketches small clouds carrying the words “not worthy” and “depression.”

But later, at an improvised talent show, he jumps onto the stage and, joined by his new friends, performs a rap song in isiXhosa to the flashing of torchlights. His favorite takeaway from the camp is something Mr. Kossie said. “[He] said you must have belonging in your life,” the boy says. “Belonging is a powerful thing.”

“What I stand for”

The morning after Mr. Kossie’s first session about breaking the cycle, the boys explore the roots of their anger. Counselors encourage them to describe what rage feels like. 

“It’s like hot water boiling up inside,” explains Corbin, who is 13. 

“Like your body is forcing you to do something,” another boy pitches in.

Julie Bourdin

A boy roasts stokbrood (bread on a stick) on the first evening of a weekend camp organized by the Justice Desk outside Cape Town.

For Mr. Gcelu, the junior counselor, the discussion feels personal. “I had too much rage, growing up. I was like a grenade,” he remembers. After graduating from the program last year, he came back this year at the age of 19 as a “big brother.” “Sometimes I wish I could live at the Justice Desk all year,” he says, smiling.

Jamie, a lanky 15 year-old with a mischievous smile who is in his fifth year with iNtsika yeThemba, also takes pride in introducing the newer boys to the camp. “I feel like it’s my job to help them understand that this is a safe place,” he says.

If it wasn’t for the program, “I probably would be roaming the streets with my friends, doing bad stuff,” Jamie admits. “Now ... I know what to stand up for.”

Case in point: Last year, the teenager broke up an incident of domestic violence in the street. “At first, the woman didn’t want to lay charges, but I stood up for her because I knew she was scared of her boyfriend,” he remembers.

He convinced the woman to open a case, and says that the perpetrator is still in prison. “I feel like that won’t be my last time,” he says. “I will do it again.”

AP

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen attends a press conference in Berlin, Germany, June 10, the day after the election for the European Parliament.

In a year of big elections worldwide, one of the biggest – with 27 countries voting for a new European Parliament June 6-9 – has just delivered a message similar to those of other recent contests: Voters want leaders to try harder to define a political center.

While right-wing parties made gains in the Continent-wide vote – even forcing a parliamentary election in France in a few weeks – the real story is how much politicians of both the left and the right have been listening to disillusioned voters across Europe, from angry farmers to young people fed up with established parties.

In Germany, for example, a centrist party founded just six months ago by a former leftist leader, Sahra Wagenknecht, won 6% of the vote for the 720-strong European Parliament. In Italy, the party of right-wing Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni did well but only after she moderated her views on migration, support for Ukraine, and the European Union. In France, the leader of the far-right National Rally, Marine Le Pen, has learned to accept the Eurocurrency.

Most of all, the center-right party of European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen held its own as the Parliament’s major force – after moderating its green policies and tightening migration flows. The election result, said the commission leader, “comes with great responsibility for the parties in the center.”

Being meek enough to listen to voters might pay off. Ms. von der Leyen is expected to be chosen for another five-year term, although much depends on the political parties in Parliament that have repositioned their views and are willing to accommodate each other.

Ms. von der Leyen once worked under longtime German chancellor Angela Merkel, who advised leaders to find a political space within which “different interests can be balanced and compromises reached.” Ms. Merkel also said the best leaders have an inner compass “that is based on overarching values.”

Europe’s identity relies less on victories for the left or right than on how well EU leaders listen to voters who feel left behind – the ones prone to back extremists. “The political earthquakes in Europe are more than just electoral shifts,” wrote pundit Diego Fassnacht in the Asia Times after the election. “As traditional power structures face challenges, new alliances and priorities are emerging.”

And EU leaders again learn that the art of consensus-based decision-making depends how well they listen.