The Inquiry

The economic fortunes of the Southern Africa country of Botswana were transformed back in the mid 1960's when shortly after gaining independence from Britain, its first diamond mine was discovered. A partnership with the world's biggest diamond firm DeBeers ensured Botswana's diamonds gained global attention and with some of the world's biggest diamonds been mined in the country, it now ranks just below Russia in terms of its importance in the industry. But post pandemic, the global market has seen a shift in demand for mined diamonds, with consumers in countries like China, who accounted for around thirty percent of global demand, falling away. Another reason for this shift is the emerging popularity of lab grown diamonds. Originally used in industrial machinery, lab diamonds are now been refined for the jewellery market at a fraction of the price of mined diamonds, with the majority of consumer interest coming from the United States. Botswana has been trying to ride this wave with a policy of diversification, to allow it to generate more export revenue. But its new Government, who have only been in power since October last year, are dealing with a large budget deficit not helped by the low level of diamond revenues. It faces a hard task in trying to revive demand for mined diamonds across the global market. So, on this week's Inquiry, we're asking ‘Are diamonds forever in Botswana?' Contributors: Dr Gloria Somolekae, Executive Director, BIDPA, Botswana Jessica Warch, Co-founder, Kimai, London Edahn Golan, Diamond Industry Analyst, Israel Dr. Keith Jefferis, Managing Director, Econsult Botswana Presenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Maeve Schaffer Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Craig Boardman Production Co-ordinator: Tammy SnowImage: Karowe diamond in Botswana Credit: Photo by Lucara Diamond Handout/EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock (14653888c)

Fungal diseases are becoming more common, more dangerous, and more difficult to treat. There's concern that they may cause the next global pandemic. Rising global temperatures, better survival rates for vulnerable patients, and increased medical interventions contribute to the rise in fungal infections. Access to effective diagnostics and treatment remains limited, with significant disparities between high and low-income countries. Treating fungal infections is becoming more challenging as they build resistance to the drugs used to treat them. New therapies are being developed, including treatments that disrupt fungal DNA replication or interfere with essential proteins, offering some hope for long-term control.Contributors: Adilia Warris, Professor in Paediatric Infectious Diseases, University of Exeter, UKRita Oladele, Professor of Clinical Microbiology, University of Lagos and Lagos University Teaching Hospital, NigeriaArturo Casadevall, Professor and Chair of Molecular Microbiology and Immunology, Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, USMichael Bromley, Professor in Fungal Disease, University of Manchester, UKPresenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Louise Clarke Researcher: Maeve Schaffer Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Richard Hannaford Production co-ordinator: Tammy Snow(Image: Aspergillus fumigatus, seen under an optical microscope. Credit: BSIP/Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images)

A domestic rice shortage in Japan has caused supermarket shelves to empty and prices to double. Rice is more than a staple food in Japan—it carries deep cultural, historical and even spiritual significance. The rice crisis highlights broader weaknesses in Japan's economy. Japan imports over half of its food and has experienced persistent inflation. The country's economic resilience is being tested by supply chain pressures, demographic shifts, and increased trade tensions.Efforts to address the shortage have focused on auctioning rice reserves, but underlying economic challenges persist.Contributors: • Yi-Chun Ko, Professor, Asian Growth Research Institute, Fukuoka, Japan • Emiko Ohnuki-Tierney, William F. Vilas Research Professor, University of Wisconsin–Madison, US • Stefan Angrick, Senior Economist, Moody's Analytics, Tokyo, Japan • Norihiro Yamaguchi, Lead Economist, Oxford Economics, Tokyo, JapanPresenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Louise Clarke Researcher: Katie Morgan Editor: Tara McDermott Technical producer: Richard Hannaford Production Management Assistant: Liam Morrey

“Measles is back, and it's a wake-up call,” proclaimed one regional director from the World Health Organisation who went on to add, “without high vaccination rates, there is no health security.”Measles is a childhood disease which can be deadly. We've been successfully vaccinating against it for decades. So much so that many younger physicians have never seen a child with the disease. But recently, the recorded number of cases has been rising - and this is a global trend. Measles is one of the most contagious viruses known to man. In an unvaccinated population it will spread like wildfire. So what's behind the rapid rise of measles cases around the world? According to one of our expert witnesses it comes down to three Cs: complacency, convenience and confidence.In this edition of the Inquiry, Sandra Kanthal looks into what's causing the rise in measles cases around the world and asks how this trend can be reversed.Contributors:Doctor Claudia Cojocaru – Romanian physician and neonatologistRobb Butler - Director of the Division of Communicable Diseases, Environment and Health: World Health OrganisationDr Benjamin Kasstan-Dabush -Assistant Professor, London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineFatima Cengic, Regional Immunization Specialist, Europe and Central Asia: UNICEFPresenter: Sandra Kanthal Production: Katie Morgan Production Management Assistant: Liam Morrey Technical Producer: James Beard Editor: Tara McDermott

Serbia's citizens have been protesting for over six months, taking part in demonstrations around the country in reaction to their government's alleged corruption. Though the country's president, Aleksandar Vučić, has attempted to appease them, the movement shows no sign of slowing down.Situated in the Western Balkans, Serbia has had a long history of conflict; from the Ottoman Empire to the dissolution of Yugoslavia, but the ongoing civil unrest comes at a crossroads moment for President Vučić. Serbia is awaiting approval to join the European Union yet remains closely tied with the Kremlin.As the Serbian government seeks to solidify its place in the world, protestors continue their calls for transparency and accountability. This week on The Inquiry we ask “Will Serbia's mass protests unseat the president?”Contributors: Gordana Andric, Executive Editor at Balkan Investigative Reporting Network, Belgrade, Serbia Dr. Andi Hoxhaj OBE, Lecturer in Law and the Director of the European Law LLM pathway programme, King's College, London Ivana Randelovic, Senior Programme Officer for Europe at Civil Rights Defenders, Belgrade, Serbia Dr. Helena Ivanov, Associate Research Fellow at the Henry Jackson Society, Belgrade, SerbiaPresenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Daniel Rosney Researcher: Maeve Schaffer Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: James Bradshaw Production Management Assistant: Liam MorreyImage credit: Srdjan Stevanovic via Getty Images

Scientists at a bio-technology firm made headlines when they announced the “de-extinction” of the dire wolf, a species of wolf that went extinct on Earth over 10,000 years ago. Colossal Biosciences examined DNA from ancient dire wolf fossils and used it to create wolf puppies with traits of the extinct species. The gene editing technology sparked curiosity around the world, and although the new wolves were not exact replicas of the originals they had similar traits. The development raises serious questions about what de-extinction really means.Mass extinctions have shaped the history of life on Earth, and nature has adapted across the millennia, but with almost half of all species already in decline, including some frogs, how seriously is de-extinction technology being taken? Contributors: Dr. Beth Shapiro, Chief Science Officer, Colossal Biosciences, California, USA Dr. Daniel Pincheira-Donoso, Associate Professor of Evolutionary Biology and Global Change, Queen's University Belfast, UK Torill Kornfeldt, Science Journalist and author, Sweden Dr. Jay Odenbaugh, Professor of Philosophy, James F. Miller Professor of Humanities, Lewis and Clark College, Oregon, USAPresenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Louise Clarke Researcher: Maeve Schaffer Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Craig Boardman Production Management Assistant: Liam Morrey

Earlier this month President Trump announced radical new taxes on foreign imports amounting to what he described as ‘Liberation Day' for the United States. It was a promise he made to American voters during last year's election campaign but the scale of the tariffs caught many countries by surprise.Global financial markets plunged as investors braced themselves for a shock to the flow of international trade. Faced with prolonged market turmoil, within days the US President paused most of his plans.A to-and-fro between Washington and Beijing has left many world leaders confused who to side with, as many look towards the White House wondering if there is a detailed plan at the heart of these unprecedented few weeks.Contributors: ● Carla Sands, Vice Chair for the Center for Energy and Environment at America First Policy Institute and former US Ambassador to Denmark ● Emily Kilcrease, Senior Fellow and Director of the Energy, Economics and Security Program at the Center for a New American Security ● Victor Gao, Chair professor at Suzhou University and Vice President at the Center for China and Globalization ● Gillian Tett, Provost of King's College at Cambridge University and Financial Times columnistPresented by Tanya Beckett Produced by Daniel Rosney Researched by Katie Morgan and Ben Hughes Technical producer Nicky Edwards Production Co-ordinator Liam Morrey Editor Tara McDermott

For Russia's President Putin, the return of President Donald Trump to the White House ushered in a new world order. This has created new diplomatic space for Russia, as Trump's world view seems more closely aligned with Moscow's ambitions. Support for Ukraine has diminished, peace talks have been floated, and speculation has grown about a lasting ceasefire. While the relationship between Washington and Moscow appears to be warming, recent tensions show how unpredictable diplomacy between the two leaders can be.Putin's ambition for Russia as an influential superpower remains but with shifting global alliances how much potential leverage does Putin have to reshape the international order?Contributors: • Kadri Liik, Senior Policy Fellow, European Council on Foreign Relations • Maria Snegovaya, Senior Fellow, Center for Strategic and International Studies • Ivan Klyszcz, Research Fellow, International Centre for Defence and Security • Mark Galeotti, Director, Mayak Intelligence; Honorary Professor, University College LondonPresented by Victoria Uwonkunda Produced by Louise Clarke Researched by Katie Morgan Technical producer James Bradshaw Production Co-ordinator Liam Morrey Editor Tara McDermott

On the first day of his second term in office, President Donald Trump signed an executive order that paused funding for USAID, the US government's main foreign aid agency, for a 90-day review. While the long-term effects remain unclear, the order has already frozen vital programs relied on by millions of people globally, forced the closure of USAID's overseas offices, and jeopardised thousands of jobs.As one of the world's largest foreign aid providers, the US plays an essential role with no other country or organisation fully able to fill the gap. But some recipient countries see this move as an opportunity to seek solutions closer to home.This week on The Inquiry, Charmaine Cozier explores the consequences of this shift in US foreign policy, asking “What is filling the USAID funding gap?”Presenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Matt Toulson Researcher: Katie Morgan Editor: Tara McDermott Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Technical Producer: Richard HannafordContributors to this programme:Fatema Sumar, Executive Director of the Harvard Center for International Development (CID) and an Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy at Harvard Kennedy School, USMichael Jennings, Professor of Global Development at SOAS University London, UKFrancisca Mutapi, Professor of Global Health Infection and Immunity and Deputy Director TIBA Partnership at the University of Edinburgh, UKGeorge Ingram, Senior fellow in the Center for Sustainable Development at Brookings Institution, US

SpaceX has revolutionised space travel, making reusable rockets a reality and dramatically reducing the cost of reaching orbit. But two high-profile Starship explosions have raised concerns about the company's approach to innovation and risk.Commercial spaceflight has rapidly expanded, with private companies looking to harness space resources and build new economies beyond Earth. Reusability has been a game-changer, significantly lowering launch costs and enabling more ambitious missions.SpaceX operates with a philosophy of rapid iteration, treating test failures as learning opportunities rather than setbacks. While this approach has led to major breakthroughs, repeated failures raise questions about long-term reliability and safety. Meanwhile, growing competition from other private space firms suggests the industry is no longer dominated by a single player.With rivals gaining ground and technological hurdles ahead, does SpaceX still have the edge in the new space economy?Contributors: Professor Michelle Hanlon, Executive Director of the Center for Air and Space Law at the University of Mississippi School of Law in the USAJack Burns, Professor Emeritus in the Department of Astrophysical and Planetary Sciences and Professor Emeritus in the Department of Physics in the USADr Ella Atkins is Fred D. Durham Professor and Head of the Kevin T. Crofton Aerospace and Ocean Engineering Department at Virginia Tech in the USADavid Thomas is Director of the Thunderbird School of Global Management's Initiative for Space Leadership, Policy and Business at Arizona State University.Presenter Charmaine Cozier Producers Vicky Carter and Louise Clarke Researcher: Katie Morgan Editor Tara McDermott Production co-ordinator Liam Morrey Technical producer Matthew DempseyImage credit: Brandon Bell via Getty Images

In November, a far right, pro-Russia figure came from almost nowhere to become favourite for the presidency. Calin Georgescu, with no affiliated political party and whose campaign had been largely on social media, won the first round of Presidential elections in Romania. The result sent shockwaves across the continent. But serious allegations surfaced over the legitimacy of Georgescu's campaign, resulting in Romania's Constitutional Court annulling the vote and barring Georgescu from standing. After mass demonstrations across the country, it's clear Romania's political landscape has been upended. Ahead of the rerun of the vote for president on 4 and 18 May, what will happen now with Romania's elections? Will the country lean towards a more nationalist future or back the mainstream parties that were previously in power?Contributors: Veronica Anghel, assistant professor at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies at The European University Institute, Italy Oana Popescu-Zamfir, director of the GlobalFocus Center, associated expert at Carnegie Europe and associate researcher for the European Council on Foreign Relations, Romania Dr Radu Cinpoes, associate professor of politics and international relations at the University of Greenwich, United Kingdom Costin Ciobanu, political scientist with Aarhus University, DenmarkPresenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Vicky Carter Researcher: Katie Morgan Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Technical producer: Nicky Edwards Editor: Tara McDermott

European leaders have had cause to rethink their roles within Nato recently, in light of statements coming from the US Government. The Trump administration's dealings with Russia to try and broker a peace deal in Ukraine, have called into question America's support for the alliance. But whilst the Trump administration say they are not pulling out of Nato and remain committed to the defence partnership with Europe, they have warned that they will ‘no longer tolerate an imbalanced relationship with encourages dependency'. Nato currently asks member states to spend at least 2% on defence, but US President Donald Trump has consistently told European allies to spend much more than that target. The alliance's famous Article 5 holds that Nato members will come to the defence of an ally which comes under attack and the assumption has always been that the US would continue to be the anchoring power. But now Europe's leaders are having to consider whether they could potentially go it alone without American military aid. So, on this week's Inquiry, we're asking ‘Do we need a new NATO?'Contributors: John Deni, Author and Research Professor, US Army War College Strategic Studies Institute, USA Rachel Ellehuus, Director-General, The Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), London, UK Toomas Hendricks Ilves, Former President of Estonia, Professor at Tartu University, Estonia Irina Borogan, Deputy Editor Agentura.ru, Non-resident Senior Fellow, The Centre for European Policy Analysis, London, UK Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Katie Morgan Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Craig Boardman Production Co-ordinator: Janet Staples & Liam Morrey Image Credit: Leah Mills/Reuters via BBC Images

At the beginning of this year, South Africa's President Cyril Ramaphosa signed a bill into law which allows for private land to be seized by the government. Known as the Expropriation Act, it's a power that many democratic governments around the world can exercise – the seizure of private property for public use in return for compensation. But in South Africa's case, the plan is not to offer compensation, in certain circumstances, such as if land was needed for public use and all other avenues to acquire the land exhausted. And it is this caveat that has provoked strong reactions both domestically and on the international front. Even within the President's own party, the ANC, there are those who would prefer more consultation before the law can be implemented. Whilst the Democratic Alliance, the second largest party in South Africa's coalition government, says that it supports legislation addressing land restitution, it does takes issue with the process followed by the country's parliament to enact the law. It is testing the Act's constitutionality with legal action. And now President Trump has signed an executive order cutting US financial aid to South Africa, the order claims that this Act would enable the government to seize the agricultural property of ethnic minority Afrikaners without compensation. For his part, President Cyril Ramaphosa has announced that he'll be sending envoys to various countries to explain South Africa's positioning on the Expropriation Act, amongst other recent policy changes. So, on this week's Inquiry, we're asking, ‘Can South Africa solve land inequality'?Contributors: Thula Simpson, Author and Associate Professor, Department of Historical and Heritage Studies, University of Pretoria, South Africa Tanveer Jeewa, Junior Lecturer, Constitutional Law, Stellenbosch University, South Africa Dr Ralph Mathekga, Author and Political Analyst, Pretoria, South Africa Christopher Vandome, Senior Research Fellow, Africa Programme, Chatham House, UK and Ph.D. Student in International Relations, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa Presenter: Charmaine Cozier Co-Producers: Jill Collins and Bara'atu Ibrahim Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Craig Boardman Broadcast Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Image Credit: Shadrack Maseko, whose family has been residing on Meyerskop farm for three generations, looks over a piece of land, in Free State province, South Africa, February 9, 2025. REUTERS/Thando Hlophe

In just three months, Romania has gone from a stable and loyal member of the European Union and Nato, to a country where a far-right, pro-Russia figure has come from almost nowhere to become favourite for the presidency. A result which has sent shockwaves across the continent. In November Calin Georgescu, with no affiliated political party and whose campaign has been largely on social media, won the first round of Presidential elections in Romania. But then serious allegations surfaced over the legitimacy of Georgescu's campaign, resulting in the Constitutional Court annulling the vote and Georgescu facing charges, which he strongly denies. Presidential hopefuls have until the 15 March to register their candidacy for the new elections, which are being rerun on 4 and 18 May. As protesters take to the streets of Bucharest, will the Romanian Constitutional Court rule that Georgescu can or cannot stand? If he is allowed to stand, can he become President? And how might the Romanian elections affect the future direction of the EU and Nato?Contributors: Veronica Anghel, assistant professor at the Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies at The European University Institute, Italy Oana Popescu-Zamfir, director of the GlobalFocus Center, associated expert at Carnegie Europe and associate researcher for the European Council on Foreign Relations, Romania Anca Agachi, defence policy analyst at RAND Corporation and a nonresident fellow at The Atlantic Council, USA Costin Ciobanu, political scientist with Aarhus University, Denmark Presenter: Tanya BeckettProducer: Vicky Carter Researcher: Katie Morgan Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Technical producer: Nicky Edwards Editor: Tara McDermottImage credit: Andrei Pungovschi via Getty Images

Undersea cables form the backbone of global communication, with over 95% of global internet traffic relying on hundreds of fibre-optic cables criss-crossing the globe. But recent incidents such as disruption to cables in the Baltic Sea have highlighted concerns over their security and raised the possibility of ‘grey zone warfare'. The Inquiry examines who owns and runs this vast global network, what happens when things go wrong, and what the future holds for underseas cables. Are they powerful enough to sustain future communications, and what role could quantum technology play in their future? Presenter: Gary O'Donoghue Producer: Dan Hardoon and Vicky Carter Researcher: Katie Morgan Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Technical producer: James Bradshaw Editor: Tara McDermott Contributors: Lane Burdette, Research Analyst, TeleGeography  Jovan Kurbali, Director of the Diplo Foundation and Head of Geneva Internet Platform Erin L Murphy,  Senior Fellow, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington D.C. Kristine Berzina, Managing Director at the German Marshall Fund, Washington D.C.Image credit: Boris Horvat via Getty Images

The International Criminal Court was founded to prosecute the world's worst crimes—genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. It has secured historic convictions, but its effectiveness is under scrutiny.US opposition has been a long-standing challenge. Donald Trump previously rejected the ICC's legitimacy, and now, early in his second presidential term, he has imposed sanctions on its top prosecutor. The move echoes past tensions but raises new concerns about the court's ability to function under external pressure.The ICC also relies on member states to arrest and transfer suspects. A recent case in Italy has highlighted the court's enforcement difficulties, as Italian authorities deported a Libyan suspect instead of extraditing him to The Hague. Such incidents fuel questions about the ICC's global authority.Despite its high-profile cases, the court has only secured 11 convictions in 23 years. Its slow trials and high costs have drawn criticism, leading some to question whether reform—or even an alternative—is needed. But with 125 member states still backing its mission, is the ICC an institution the world can afford to lose?Contributors: Dr Vivian Dietrich, Deputy Director of the International Nuremberg Principals Academy in Germany Gerry Simpson, Professor of International Law at the London School of Economics in the UK  Rachel Kerr, Professor of War and Society at King's College London in the UK  Mark Kirsten, Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice and Criminology at the University of the Fraser Valley in British Columbia, CanadaPresented by Charmaine Cozier Produced by Louise Clarke and Bara'atu Ibrahim Editor Tara McDermott Technical Producer Toby James Production co-ordinator Liam Morrey

Women have been using the female contraceptive pill for over sixty years, and many other options have followed. Yet, after decades of research, there is still no male version of a birth control pill. Male options for contraception are limited to the condom, vasectomy or withdrawal. However, clinical trials are underway around the world testing new innovations in male contraception. New options may be less than a decade away but, when they arrive, will people want to take them? In this edition of the Inquiry Sandra Kanthal asks: Are we are ready for the new male contraceptives? Contributors: Allan Pacey, Professor of Andrology, University of Manchester Dr Diana Blithe, Chief of the Contraceptive Development Programme, National Institutes of Health Dhananjay Vaidyanathan Rohini, Founder and Partner, Alstonia Impact Logan Nickels, Chief Research Office, Male Contraceptive InitiativePresenter/Producer: Sandra Kanthal Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Technical Producer: James Beard Editor: Tara McDermott

The Panama Canal, a crucial artery for global trade, is at the centre of growing tensions between the United States and China. Donald Trump has claimed that Chinese companies exert undue influence over the waterway, accusing Panama of overcharging US businesses. But does the US still have a legitimate stake in the canal?With Trump demanding action, Panama faces a difficult choice. Could a renegotiation of tolls or a review of Chinese port contracts ease US concerns?Contributors: Will Freeman, Fellow for Latin American studies at the Council on Foreign Relations Andrew Thomas, Academic and Author of The Canal of Panama and Globalisation Dr Yu Jie, Senior Research Fellow on China in the Asia-Pacific Programme at Chatham House  David Young, President of the Committee for Economic Development Presented by Gary O'Donoghue Produced by Louise Clarke Researched by Katie Morgan Technical producer Matthew Dempsey Production Coordinator Liam Morrey Editor Tara McDermottImage credit: Getty Images via MARTIN BERNETTI

In the decade that followed the Great Financial Crisis, inflation rates remained low and steady, and in some cases even threatened to turn negative, as economies around the world struggled to recover.This era came to an abrupt end in recent years following the double economic shocks of the COVID pandemic and Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Many central banks and senior policymakers were caught on the back foot as inflation rates soared to levels not seen for nearly half a century in some countries.Although rates have since come down from those highs, they're still proving tricky to completely get under control, causing concern among some observers.This week on The Inquiry, we explore what inflation is and where it comes from, what's been happening in recent years, and what the outlook might be.Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Ben Cooper Researcher: Katie Morgan Technical producer: Richard Hannaford Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Editor: Tara McDermottContributors: Stephen D. King, author and Senior Economic Advisor at HSBC Vicky Pryce, Chief Economic Advisor at the Centre for Economics and Business Research Marieke Blom, Chief Economist and Global Head of Research at ING Manoj Pradham, author and Chief Economist at Talking Heads Macroeconomics

China has approved the construction of what will become the world's largest hydropower dam in Tibet. Located in the lower reaches of the Yarlung Tsangpo river, it could generate three times more energy than the Three Gorges Dam – also built by China - and currently the worlds' biggest. This Inquiry examines how important hydropower is for China's economy, whether it will meet its climate goals and whether this new dam is a “safe project that prioritises ecological protection” as China claims. We look at how it'll be built, and why some in neighbouring countries have concerns. Presenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Vicky Carter Researcher: Katie Morgan Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Technical producer: Craig Boardman Editor: Tara McDermottContributors: Brian Eyler, Director of the Energy, Water and Sustainability Programme at the Stimson Center, Washington DC Neeraj Singh Manhas, special advisor for South Asia at the Parley Policy Initiative, South Korea & Subject Matter Expert at the Centre for Joint Warfare Studies, HQ IDS, Ministry of Defence, Government of India Prof Mark Zeitoun, Director General of the Geneva Water Hub and professor of Water Diplomacy at the Geneva Graduate Institute, Switzerland Prof Cecilia Tortajada, Social and Environmental Sustainability at the University of Glasgow, Adjunct senior research fellow Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, SingaporeImage credit: China News Service via Getty Images

In December 2024, the decades-old Assad regime in Syria fell following 13 years of brutal civil war.The Islamist rebel group, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, seized power in the capital Damascus, having co-ordinated a lightning offensive along with other opposition forces across the country.This week on The Inquiry, we examine how recent events led to the current situation, who the main players are vying for control, and the many challenges facing both the new government and the Syrian people. Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Ben Cooper Researcher: Evie Yabsley Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Technical producer: Toby James Editor: Tara McDermottContributors:Tim Eaton, Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham HouseDr Rahaf Aldoughli, Middle East and North African Studies at Lancaster UniversityDavid Schenker, Director of the Arab politics programme at the Washington Natasha Hall, Middle East programme at the Center for Strategic and International Studies

Drinks with toxic ingredients have been linked to deaths and poisonings in Turkey, Laos and India in 2024. Fake alcohol is unrecorded and unregulated alcohol that hasn't been registered in official statistics for sales, production or trade. The range of unrecorded alcohol includes alcohol smuggled across borders, counterfeit alcohol and homemade brew. This week of The Inquiry we look at how toxic and widespread fake alcohol is. What are the health risks of drinking contaminated alcohol? Bootleg alcohol is big business for criminals, are governments doing enough to combat the illicit alcohol trade?Presenter: Charmaine CozierProducer: Vicky Carter Researcher: Katie Morgan Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Technical producer: Toby James Editor: Tara McDermottContributors: Dr. Monica Swahn, alcohol epidemiologist and professor at the Wellstar College of Health and Human Services at Kennesaw State University in the USA, currently based in Uganda. Dr Dirk Lachenmeier, food chemist and toxicologist, director of department of plant-based foods at CVUA Karlsruhe, an official control laboratory, Germany. Piotr Stryszowski, senior economist at the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and head of the Working Party on Countering Illicit Trade (WP-CIT), France. Jeff Hardy, Director General of Transnational Alliance to Combat Illicit Trade, USA.

Cancer is a disease that will affect 1 in 5 people in our lifetime, and it's estimated that around 20 million people worldwide will be diagnosed with some form of cancer in 2025.But how might a vaccine help in the treatment of cancer?Numerous trials began testing the viability of cancer vaccines in 2024, including one for Melanoma and another for Lung Cancer. With all the promise that these new cancer vaccine trials bring for cancer patients, we explore the different ways in which vaccines could work within the body, and how the time at which future vaccines are administered may vary according to the cancers they are targeting.This week on the Inquiry we're asking: Are we close to a cancer vaccine?Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Matt Toulson Researcher: Katie Morgan Production Coordinator: Tim Fernley Editor: Tara McDermott Studio Director: Craig Boardman Contributors: Meredith McKean, director of Melanoma and Skin Cancer Research for Sarah Cannon Research Institute at Tennessee OncologySamra Turajlic, Chief Investigator of translational studies into melanoma and kidney cancer at the Francis Crick Institute and Professor at the Institute of Cancer Research Eduardo Vilar-Sanchez, professor in the department of Clinical Cancer Prevention at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterPatrick Ott, Clinical Director at Melanoma Disease Center at the Dana-Farber Institute

Robert F Kennedy Jr, nephew of America's 35th President, John F. Kennedy, has been nominated to be the next US health secretary by President-elect Donald Trump. The post oversees everything from medical research to food safety and public welfare programmes. Kennedy has been the face of “Make America Healthy Again”, a movement dedicated to “public health, sustainable practices and a government that truly serves the people”.This week of The Inquiry, we look at how MAHA wants to tackle chronic disease, in particular obesity. Will RFK carry these ideas into public office? How will food corporations and colleagues in the US Congress react? How feasible is it for the US Health Secretary to shift the dial on healthy eating?Contributors: Bill Dietz, Director of the Stop Obesity Alliance at the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University in Washington, D.C., US Matthew Bartlett, a Republican strategist and former Trump State Department official, US Professor Jerold Mande, CEO of Nourish Science, US Professor Colleen Heflin, Professor of public administration and international affairs at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs at Syracuse University, USProduction Team: Presenter: Charmaine Cozier Producers: Vicky Carter and Matt Toulson Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Technical producer: Richard Hannaford Editor: Tara McDermottPhoto Credit: Bloomberg via GettyImages

The Himalayan Kingdom of Bhutan, sandwiched between China and India, is perhaps best known around the globe for its unconventional measure of national development: Gross National Happiness. The concept was introduced back in 1972 by the fourth King of Bhutan, Jigme Singye Wangchuck. It assesses the country's overall wellbeing on the basis of sustainable and equitable socio-economic development; environmental conservation; preservation and promotion of culture; and good governance. But the Bhutanese are now finding that their cautious approach to balancing economic growth with the well-being of their citizens, is proving difficult to sustain in light of mounting economic problems. The country which has a population of less than 800,000, is experiencing high levels of youth unemployment and many young people and skilled workers are leaving for countries like Australia and Canada. To try and counter this brain drain and to attract new investment into the country to help the economy grow, Bhutan has plans to create a ‘Mindfulness City'. This multi-million dollar project is being spearheaded by the current monarch. At its core will be a scaled up, less cautious version of Bhutan's key concept, which the Bhutanese Prime Minister has called Gross National Happiness 2.0. So on this week's Inquiry we're asking ‘Can Bhutan retain its happiness?' Contributors: Dr Ha Vinh Tho, Founder and President, Eurasia Learning Institute for Happiness and Well-Being, Switzerland.Dr Rishi Gupta, Assistant Director, Asia Society Policy Institute, New Delhi, IndiaDr Lhawang Ugyel, Senior Lecturer, Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.Jan Eeckhout, Professor of Economics, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, SpainPresenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: James Bradshaw Production Co-ordinator: Tim Fernley and Liam Morrey

Accusations of sabotage have been made after a Chinese merchant ship cut through two important undersea cables in the Baltic Sea. Eight of the nine states in the Baltic are members of NATO but Russia has access to the sea from St Petersburg and for its Kaliningrad exclave. With previous incidents of damage to underwater pipelines and cables, there's concern that the security of critical underwater infrastructure is at risk from ‘grey zone' activities - damaging but deniable incidents below the level of outright war. David Baker hears how countries' security is threatened by incidents like these. The pipelines that were cut ran between Finland and Germany and Sweden and Lithuania. He asks who can intervene to protect these assets in the Baltic. Can NATO respond?EXPERTS: Elizabeth Braw, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council Scowcroft Centre for Strategy and Security, a thinktank based in Washington DC in the US and the author of an upcoming book called The Undersea War.Helga Kalm, director of the Lennart Meri Conference in Tallinn, Estonia, an annual meeting dedicated to international security and foreign affairs.Marion Messmer, senior research fellow in the International Security Programme at Chatham House, an international relations think tank in London, UK.Tormod Heier, a professor at the National Defence University College in Oslo, Norway and a former officer in the Norwegian Intelligence Service.CREDITS: Presenter - David Baker Producer - Philip Reevell. Researcher - Katie Morgan Editor - Tara McDermott Technical Producer - Craig BoardmanImage Credit - Rex/Shutterstock via BBC Images

When Chancellor Olaf Scholz fired his finance minister, Christian Lindner this month, Germany's ‘traffic light' government collapsed, an uneasy coalition between parties with differing perspectives, the Social Democrats, the Greens and the Free Democrats.At the heart of the dispute lie deeply opposing views about spending plans and how to fund much needed investment in infrastructure projects such as transport, education, green energy and digital technology, in order to boost Germany's international competitiveness.Falling demand both domestically and overseas for manufacturing goods, the pandemic, war in Ukraine and high energy costs have weakened Germany's economy. So how can Germany reinvigorate its exports and economic growth? On this episode of The Inquiry, we're asking: Does Germany need to reinvent itself? Contributors Michaela Kuefner, Chief Political Editor, DW Deutsche Welle. Marcel Fratzscher, President, German Institute for Economic Research & Professor of Macroeconomics, Humboldt University. Julian Hinz, Professor of International Economics, Bielefeld University & Director, Trade Policy Research Group, Kiel Institute for the World Economy. Monika Schnitzer of Economics & Chairwoman of the German Council of Economic Experts.Presenter: Tanya Beckett Production: Diane Richardson and Matt Toulson Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Technical Producer: Matthew Dempsey Editor: Tara McDermott

The car industry across the European Union employs over thirteen million people, both directly and indirectly, that's around six percent of the bloc's workforce. But in recent years, Europe's manufacturers have been struggling to cope with issues like economic downturns, clean energy requirements and the digital revolution. Some of the oldest, biggest carmakers are considering plant closures and job cuts in order to try and stay afloat. They are also facing fierce competition in the electric vehicle market from China, who have taken a lead in producing cars that are much more competitively priced and equipped with much more sophisticated technology. China's own economy has been flagging, so the EU provides it with its largest overseas market in terms of the electric car industry. But now, in a bid to protect their own car industry, the EU has introduced tariffs on electric cars made in China. These tariffs are set to rise from ten percent up to forty five percent for the next five years. Beijing has condemned them as protectionist and there are concerns that it could spark a trade war between Brussels and Beijing. So, on this week's Inquiry, we're asking ‘Is Europe's car industry at a crossroads?' Contributors: Carsten Brzeski, Global Head of Macro Research, ING, Germany Tu Le, Founder and Managing Director, Sino Auto Insights, United States of America Beatrix Keim, Director, CAR Centre for Automotive Research, Germany Stefan Deix, Director, EUCAR, European Council for Automotive R&D, Belgium Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Matthew Dempsey Production Co-ordinator: Liam Morrey Image Credit: Westend61 via Getty Images

When protests against decades of rule by the Assad family were crushed by Syrian government forces in the spring of 2011, opposition groups took up arms and the country descended into civil war. The conflict drew in Syria's Kurds, jihadi groups including Islamic State and al-Qaeda, and the international community.13 years on President Assad controls around two thirds of the country, but northern Syria remains out of the regime's grip and is highly volatile. Internal divisions, international influences and a worsening humanitarian situation may be about to further destabilise the region, with potentially serious consequences for Syria and the world. So, in this episode of The Inquiry, we're asking ‘What's the future for Syria's divided north?'Contributors Dr Burcu Ozcelik, Senior Research Fellow for Middle East Security at the Royal United Services Institute. Charles Lister, Director of the Syria and Countering Terrorism & Extremism programs, Middle East Institute. Qutaiba Idlbi, Director of the Syria Initiative at the Atlantic Council. Emma Beals, Senior Advisor at the European Institute of Peace and a non-resident scholar at the Middle East Institute in Washington.Presenter: Emily Wither Production: Diane Richardson and Matt Toulson Broadcast Co-ordinator: Ellie Dover & Liam Morrey Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Cameron Ward

Aerospace giant Boeing has had big problems to overcome since the crashes of two of its 737 Max aircraft. Its situation was compounded this year with another safety scare and a strike losing it billions of dollars. It has a new CEO who has pledged to return the company to its engineering roots and away from cost cutting and in October, Boeing managed to raise 21bn US dollars by issuing new shares in the company. However, catching up on lost production will take time and money and financially the company is nowhere near out of the weeds.Can Boeing regain the trust of regulators, airlines and passengers? Contributors: Richard Aboulafia, AeroDynamic Advisory, a US aerospace consultancy Sharon Turlep, an aviation industry reporter at the Wall Street Journal Christine Negroni, an aviation journalist specialising in safety Scott Hamilton, aviation analystPresented by David Baker. Produced by Bob Howard. Researched by Matt Toulson. Edited by Tara McDermott. Mixed by David Crackles.

Earlier this year the global video sharing platform You Tube dominated TV viewership in the United States, knocking Disney off the top spot and leaving major media names like Netflix, Paramount, Amazon and Fox in its wake. In a first for the streaming platform, the time people spent watching YouTube on television accounted for 10.4 percent of total TV in the month of July. In terms of its world reach, the platform is now available in more than one hundred countries and pulls in nearly three billion users every month, the majority of which are between 25 and 34 years old, that's younger than the core audience for traditional television. Launched in 2005, YouTube has since expanded and diversified, but it's niche area for dominating the market is still in user generated content and the advertising income it draws in provides the platform with its main source of revenue, leaving the traditional TV market in its wake.So, on this week's Inquiry, we're asking ‘Is YouTube's disruption of TV now complete?' Contributors: Mark Bergen, Reporter with Bloomberg Technology, Author of ‘Like, Comment, Subscribe: Inside YouTube's Chaotic Rise to World Domination', London, UK.Chris Stokel-Walker, Journalist, Author of ‘YouTubers: How YouTube Shook Up TV and Created a New Generation of Stars', Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Rahul Telang, Professor of Information Systems, Carnegie Mellon University, Co-Author of ‘Streaming, Sharing, Stealing: Big Data and the Future of Entertainment', Pennsylvania, USA Dr. Marlen Komorowski, Professor for European Media Markets, Vrije Universiteit Brussels, Senior Research Fellow, Cardiff University, Wales, UK Presenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Kirsteen Knight Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Cameron Ward Production Co-ordinator: Tim FernleyImage: Silhouettes of laptop and mobile device users are seen next to a screen projection of the YouTube logoCredit: Reuters/Dado Ruvić

The International Space Station will be decommissioned in 2030 and crash down into the Pacific Ocean, ending more than three decades of international cooperation. Launched in the wake of the Cold War, the ISS is seen as a triumph of global diplomacy between the US, Russia and other nations. Its demise will mark the end of an era.Nasa has awarded contracts to commercial companies to develop potential successors to the ISS, and maintain a U.S. presence in low earth orbit. Meanwhile Russia and India have said they plan to launch their own individual stations, and China has already got its own space station, Tiangong. As the era of the International Space Station nears its end, this week on The Inquiry, we're asking ‘What happens after the International Space Station?' Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Matt Toulson Researcher: Kirsteen Knight Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Operator: Ben HoughtonContributors: Jennifer Levasseur, Museum Curator at the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum, Washington D.C., USMark McCaughrean, former Senior Advisor for Science & Exploration at the European Space Agency and astronomer at the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy, Heidelberg, GermanyMai'a Cross, Professor of political science at Northeastern University, and director for the Center for International Affairs and World Cultures, Massachusetts, USWendy Whitman Cobb, Professor of strategy and security studies at the School of Advanced Air and Space Studies, Alabama, USCREDIT: State of the Union address, 1984; Courtesy Ronald Reagan Presidential Library

This year wildfires in Canada have caused devastation to the country's treasured town of Jasper. The wildfires have ravaged the landscape, destroyed communities and displaced hundreds of thousands of people.The causes are many, and fires are a natural occurrence. But humans, and the climate, are making them worse. As the number and intensity of fires increase, the methods used to both prevent and fight them may need to change.How can Canada fight its wildfires?Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Louise Clarke Researcher: Anoushka Mutanda-Dougherty Editor: Tara McDermott Technical producer: Cameron WardContributors: Mike Flannagan, Professor of wildland fire at Thompson Rivers University in Kamloops, British Columbia Liz Goldman, World Resources Institute John Keeley, senior research scientist with the U.S. Geological Survey and an adjunct professor at the University of California in Los Angeles Cordy Tymstra, former wildfire science coordinator for the Alberta Wildfire Management Branch(Image: Getty/ Anadolu)

Ukraine's President Zelensky recently presented his ‘Victory Plan' to end the war in Ukraine to both Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, the two candidates competing to be the next President of the United States of America. President Zelensky's view is that if his plan is supported by Ukraine's allies, then the war could be ended by next year. But both US Presidential candidates, whilst in agreement that the war has to stop, have expressed a very different approach to how they would work towards that. And there are concerns from Ukraine that there will be a significant decrease in getting support in the future, regardless of who will be sitting in the White House. The United States is the top donor to Ukraine in terms of military, financial and humanitarian aid, but if their support did wane, it would mean Ukraine would have to become much more reliant on European backing. Whilst Europe has pledged much in terms of military support, it has yet to deliver everything it has promised. And there is the issue of Europe's political will and financial backing to fulfil its pledge. In light of this President Zelensky is hoping Europe too will be convinced by his ‘Victory Plan' and perhaps act as an insurance plan to keep the US focus on this war. So, on this week's Inquiry, we're asking ‘How might the next US President affect the war in Ukraine?' Contributors: Mariia Zolkina, Head of Regional Security and Conflict Studies, Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation, Kyiv, Ukraine Mary Anne Marsh, Democratic Strategist and Political Analyst, Boston, USA Matthew Kroenig, Vice President and Senior Director, Atlantic Council's Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Washington DC, USA Matthew Savill, Director of Military Sciences, Royal United Services Institute, London, UK Presenter: Charmaine Cozier Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Ben Houghton Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui Johnson(Image: BBC file photo)

A court room in the US State of Nevada provided the setting for the recent hearing between media mogul Rupert Murdoch and his children, over who will inherit his empire on the 93 year old's death. The succession battle, worthy of the TV drama Succession, which was partly inspired by the Murdoch dynasty, was played out behind closed doors and it's unlikely that the decision, when it comes, will be made available to the public. Murdoch's News Corp owns hundreds of newspapers and media outlets around the world. It includes the right-leaning Fox News in the US, which gave Donald Trump a major platform in the run-up to the 2016 Presidential election, as well as widely read newspapers like the Sun in the UK. Speculation over who is most likely to take control of the multi-billion dollar business currently centres around the eldest son Lachlan Murdoch, the sibling most closely aligned to his father in terms of their vision for the future. But at this point the outcome all depends on whether legally such a takeover can happen. So, on this week's Inquiry, we're asking ‘What's the succession plan for Murdoch's empire?' Contributors: Walter Marsh, Journalist and Author of Young Rupert: The Making of the Murdoch Empire, South Australia David Folkenflik, Media Correspondent NPR News, Author of Murdoch's World: The Last of the Old Media Empires, USA Reid Weisbord, Distinguished Professor of Law, Rutgers Law School, Visiting Professor, Columbia University, USA Alice Enders, Chief Economist, Enders Analysis, UK Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producers: Louise Clarke and Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Nicky Edwards Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui Johnson (Image: Reuters/Mike Segar)

With Lebanon, Gaza, and Israel all under fire and a death count running into tens of thousands, the Middle East has never been in a more dangerous position.The United States has been a big diplomatic influence on attempts at peace negotiations in the Middle East. The last major attempt at peace negotiations was in the spring of 2024 when the US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken visited the region to try and broker a ceasefire. But despite the efforts of not just the US, but Egypt, Qatar and Europe, there has been no agreement to cease hostilities.What would bring all the different parties to the negotiating table? And is there any country or organisation credible enough that will be listened to by all parties?This episode of The Inquiry asks: Can anyone broker peace in the Middle East? Contributors: Hugh Lovatt, Senior Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations Bilal Y Saab, Head of the US-Middle East Practice and an Advisor in the Scientific and Academic Council of TRENDS Research and Advisory Professor Christopher Phillips, Professor of International Relations at Queen Mary University of London Dr Burcu Ozcelik, Senior Research Fellow in Middle East security at The Royal United Services InstitutePresenter: Victoria Uwonkunda Producer: Louise Clarke Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical producer: James Bradshaw Production support: Jacqui Johnson(Image: Getty/FADEL ITANI)

In September Greek Tourism Minister Olga Kefalogianni announced the introduction of special fees for passengers disembarking from cruise ships at Mykonos, Santorini and some other ports. The fees are part of a broader strategy to manage the resurgence of mass tourism post-covid, reducing some of the negative impacts such as pressure on water supplies, waste management and overcrowding, while spreading the economic benefits more fairly across society. Greece is not alone in considering how to alleviate the tensions arising when exceptional numbers of tourists arrive during peak holiday times. Venice has limited the size of tour groups, charging visitors a daily entry fee and the mayor of Barcelona has pledged to eliminate short-term tourist lets in the city within five years, to ease housing pressures. With revenues from international tourism reaching USD 1.8 trillion last year according to the United Nations World Tourism Organisation, many governments and experts are thinking carefully about how to strike a balance between the economic boost, the tourist experience and the welfare of local communities. Can tourists be enticed away from those Instagram hot spots and what potential solutions could Greece employ to deal with overtourism? Contributors Katerina Kikilia, Head of Tourism Management, University of West Attica, Athens Sandra Carvão, Director of Market Intelligence, Policies, and Competitiveness, UN World Travel Organisation Kumi Kato, Professor in Tourism Studies, Wakayama University, Japan Cevat Tosun, Eisenhower chair and professor of Tourism Studies and management at George Washington University School of BusinessPresenter: Charmaine Cozier Production: Diane Richardson and Matt Toulson Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui Johnson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Toby James (Image: Oia, Thira, Greece / Getty Images: Fernando Vazquez Miras)

Just over three years ago the Taliban seized Kabul and stormed to power in Afghanistan. They soon declared a new government which is still not recognised by any other country. The Taliban claim they have made improvements to the country. War is over and, they say, there is more peace and security than before they came to power.But millions of people are struggling to survive in the country, there is a restrictive rule of law that is imposed by a very hierarchical government structure and half the population need aid. This week on The Inquiry we're asking ‘How are the Taliban governing Afghanistan?'Presenter: Emily Wither Producers: Louise Clarke and Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producers: Nicky Edwards and Cameron WardContributors: Dr Weeda Mehran, co-director for Advanced Internationalist studies at Exeter University Graeme Smith, senior analyst for the International Crisis Group Dr Orzala Nemet, research associate at ODI Overseas Development Institute Javid Ahmad, non-resident scholar at the Middle East Institute in Washington DC(Photo by WAKIL KOHSAR/AFP via Getty Images)

At the beginning of September, the far-right party Alternative for Germany or AfD, won an election in the eastern state of Thuringia. The result marked the far right's first win, in a state parliament election, since World War Two. In the more populous neighbouring state of Saxony the party came in a close second. Whilst in both states the party has been officially classed as ‘right-wing extremist', the results nonetheless, signify a sharp rebuke from the voting public towards Germany's established political forces, including the ruling coalition. The Afd was founded in 2013 as an anti-euro party to challenge the government. It entered the German parliament for the first time in 2017 and now it's focus has shifted to immigration and Islam. As the country faces federal elections next year, Germany's Chancellor Olaf Scholz has urged mainstream parties to block the AfD from governing in Thuringia by maintaining a so-called firewall against it. But in terms of the voting public, the polls currently suggest the party could also take the most votes in Brandenburg state's election coming up. So, on this week's Inquiry we're asking, Can Germany's far right win the country?Contributors: Thomas König, Professor Dr. of Political Science, European Politics, University of Mannheim, Germany Dr. Michelle Lynn Kahn, Associate Professor, Modern European History, University of Richmond, VA, USA Christina Zuber, Professor Dr. of German Politics, Department of Politics and Public Administration, University of Konstanz, Germany Jörn Fleck, Senior Director of the Europe Centre, The Atlantic Council, Washington DC, USA Presenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Nicky Edwards Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui JohnsonImage Credit: CLEMENS BILAN/EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock

In August this year, a US court in Washington DC ruled that Google acted illegally to crush its competition and maintain a monopoly on online search and related advertising. This is just one of a number of lawsuits that have been filed against the big tech companies, as US antitrust authorities attempt to strengthen competition in the industry. Now Google is facing another legal case in Virginia, USA, over its advertising technology. Whilst in Europe it has been fined billions in monopoly cases. Google themselves dispute they are a ‘monopolist' and presented evidence in the US court case in August to show that they face ‘fierce competition from a broad range of competitors'. The court did find Google's search to be ‘superior' to its competitors. And Google's executives say consumers stick with them because they find Google ‘helpful'. Google is everywhere in our online lives and it handles billions of search queries every day, so on this week's Inquiry, we're asking ‘Can we trust Google?'Contributors: David Vise, Pulitzer Prize winning Journalist and Author of ‘The Google Story', New York, USA Professor Douglas Melamed, Visiting Fellow, Stanford Law School, Washington, DC. USA Jonathan Stray, Senior Scientist, UC Berkeley Center for Human-Compatible AI, California, USA Cristina Caffarra, Independent Expert Economist, Honorary Professor, UCL, London, UK Presenter: David Baker Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Nicky Edwards Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui JohnsonImage Credit: Reuters/Steve Marcus

Hezbollah has both political and military wings both of which are designated by several countries as terror organisations. It emerged several decades ago in Lebanon.Since Israel launched its war in Gaza in the wake of the Hamas attacks of October 7th, it has intensified its military activities along the border between Israel and Lebanon.The persistent question has been what is it trying to achieve? Are the attacks intended as a show of support for the Palestinians in Gaza or an attempt to take advantage of Israel's diverted military focus? And could this dangerous front lead to an all-out war in the Middle East?This week on the Inquiry we are asking: What does Hezbollah want?Contributors: Aurélie Daher, Associate Professor in political science at the University Paris-Dauphine Lina Khatib, Associate Fellow with the Middle East and North Africa program at Chatham House Dr Bashir Saade, Lecturer of Politics and Religion at the University of Stirling in Scotland Mehran Kamrava, Professor of government at Georgetown University in QatarPresenter: Tanya Beckett Producer: Louise Clarke Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Gareth Jones Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui JohnsonImage: Hezbollah Fighters and Mourners Attend Funeral of Top Commander Fuad Shukr in Beirut / NurPhoto / Contributor via Getty Images

In 2018 an historic document known as the ‘Provisional Agreement' was signed between the Catholic Church and the People's Republic of China. So far this agreement has been renewed every two years and the expectation is that it will be renewed again this year. The only detail that has been made public is that the Agreement allows the Pope final approval on Bishops appointed by the Chinese authorities, other than that it is cloaked in secrecy. But there have been occasions since its signing where the Communist Party have reneged on this Agreement, approving its own choice of Bishops.There are an estimated 13 million Catholics in China, split between the official Chinese state recognised church and the underground church. And one of the Catholic Church's most senior members, Cardinal Joseph Zen, the former Bishop of Hong Kong, has in the past, referred to this Provisional Agreement as betrayal of those in the underground church. For the Pope, the Agreement is a pragmatic attempt to unify the church in China and make peace with the state, but the underground church see this Agreement as a sell-out by their spiritual father. So on The Inquiry, we're asking ‘Is Pope Francis ‘betraying' China's Catholics?' Contributors: Martin Palmer, Theologian and Sinologist, UK Fr. Jeroom Heyndrickx, CICM (Scheut) Missionary, Belgium Samuel Chu, President, Campaign for Hong Kong, USA John Allen, Editor of Crux, Italy Presenter: William Crawley Producer: Jill Collins Researcher: Matt Toulson Editor: Tara McDermott Technical Producer: Craig Boardman Broadcast Co-ordinator: Jacqui Johnson Image Credit: A worshipper waves the flag of China, as Pope Francis leaves the weekly general audience at St Peter's Square in the Vatican. Photo by Filippo MONTEFORTE/AFP via Getty Images.