Podcast appearances and mentions of carol hills

Iran's Revolutionary Guard launched ballistic missiles at what it called Israeli “spy headquarters” in Iraq's semi-autonomous Kurdish region Monday night. Experts say it's another sign that the Israel-Hamas conflict is expanding. And, the Israel Defense Forces have told the families of two hostages held by Hamas that they are gravely concerned about them. That's after Hamas showed a video in which two hostages appeared to be dead. Israelis are getting impatient with the slow progress by their government in negotiating another prisoner exchange. Also, the market is huge for NIL deals allowing student athletes to monetize their names. But international student athletes have been left out of the lucrative deals due to visa laws. Plus, pig poop pollution in Spain.Today we launch a new format to our show! Carolyn Beeler will begin co-hosting The World along with longtime host Marco Werman at the helm and host Carol Hills — produced by Boston-based GBH and PRX.

Volcanic eruptions are not unusual in Iceland, but they rarely require residents to evacuate their homes. One resident from the village of Grindavik talks about what it's like to watch lava engulf her town and set homes ablaze. Also, like many cities in the US, Dakar, Senegal, has a street named after Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Most residents there don't know the street name, but they do know about the man behind it. And, the art of hacking has become stealthier and smarter over the years. Chinese hackers are particularly capable of hiding their code used to infiltrate systems around the world. The "Click Here" podcast reports on how they're able to do this. Plus, Sunday marked 100 days of fighting in Gaza between Israel and Hamas since Oct. 7. The war continues unabated with little pressure on either side to end the fighting. We discuss the likelihood of a ceasefire and what the next period will bring in Gaza.Don't forget to join us tomorrow for a new format to our show! Carolyn Beeler will begin co-hosting The World along with longtime host Marco Werman at the helm and host Carol Hills — produced by Boston-based GBH and PRX.

Last year's winners from Ukraine are unable to host in-country this year due to ongoing conflict with Russia, so Liverpool is stepping in. To learn more about it, The World's Carol Hills spoke to Dr. Eurovision, himself, Paul Jordan.

The World's Carol Hills spoke to Anne Nejs, an urban ecologist for the city of Utrecht, who worked on creating the doorbell back in 2021. She says mid-April is the best time of the season to go fish-doorbelling.

The 15th-century Doctrine of Discovery provided the legal basis for the colonial-era seizure of Native lands. Sociology professor Cora Voyageur, who is also a member of the Athabasca Chipewyan First Nation, joined The World's host Carol Hills to discuss the significance of the Vatican's repudiation of the doctrine.

Eight billion: That's the number of people now living on planet Earth, according to a UN report. And it took only 11 years for the world's population to grow from 7 billion to 8 billion.In a symbolic move, a baby girl born today in the Philippines was welcomed as number 8 billion, especially since it's difficult to accurately calculate the number of people in the world, with sums possibly being off by a year or two.Meanwhile, India is projected to become the world's most populous country by next year, surpassing China.The World's host Carol Hills discussed the issue of population growth and what it means for society with Jennifer Sciubba. She is a demographer and author of the book, "8 Billion and Counting: How Sex, Death, and Migration Shape Our World," and joined the discussion from Washington, DC.Carol Hills: Jennifer, you've said the focus should not just be on the number of babies being born — that that's the wrong way to frame things. I wonder why and what is the right way?Jennifer Sciubba: Well, if we were in the last century, it would make a lot of sense for us to think about numbers overall, because we started last century with only 1.6 billion people and ended it with 6.1 billion. It was a century of exponential population growth. This century, even though we've already added 2 billion people, that's not what will characterize this moment for us. Instead, it's a story of differential population trends. We've never been further apart around the world in terms of births, deaths and migration. And that's where we really need to keep our focus as we go through this century, toward a time when actually global population trends will be converging. A graphic showing global human population milestones. Credit: Courtesy of Jennifer Sciubba Living standards is a big issue on this topic. And living standards for Americans — we consume a tremendous amount of resources. If the whole world lived like us, would we just be totally sunk?I think we would be. I think that where we really need to focus our innovation and our attention over the next few decades is places in the world that have standards of living that are rising to meet those in America. It's not necessarily places that actually have high fertility. I think the really remarkable place to look at is India, for example. On average, for the whole country, the fertility rate is actually below replacement, below the number needed just to replace who's already born. But we know that this is one area of the world that is about to be the most populous country in the world, really, any day now will surpass China, and standards of living there are rising. So, how do we equip Indians to have a rising standard of living, a better quality of life, but in a way that will be sustainable for them and their environment?A lot of the future growth in population is projected for Africa. What specific countries have the highest birthrate there and what are the implications of that?We might look at Nigeria. Nigeria's population is looking to double between now and mid-century, and Nigeria will replace the United States as the third most-populous country. And the leadership in Nigeria has not shown quite the level of commitment needed to rights-based family planning and reproductive health, girls education, ending child marriage, those kinds of policy measures that would help lower fertility. They lower preferences for the number of children, and they also allow people to exercise those preferences.Isn't there an inherent tension between living standards and population, meaning the higher the living standard, the fewer kids people have? Is that correct?Yes. So, when we think about 'why do people start to have fewer children?' — it's not just one thing. So, we know that with more educational opportunities, people will delay the time when they have their first child. And of course, when you delay the time you have your first child, eventually, biologically for women, you end up running out of time. We know when there are other economic opportunities outside the home, and we also know that there are some real negative pressures on fertility. I think something for us to watch out for are places where total fertility rates are very low. We're talking in South Korea, for example, less than one child per woman on average. And South Korea is not alone. It may be the lowest, but I think that a lot of countries are really seeing that very low pressure on fertility. A graphic breaking down the difference between healthy and overall life expectancy at birth. Credit: Courtesy of Jennifer Sciubba/Data from World Health Organization I want to turn to climate change. Many people worry that global population growth is bad for the fight against global warming. Others say that's not necessarily the case. Break down those two camps and how do you see it?Two out of every three people on the planet live somewhere with the low replacement fertility, meaning the number needed to just replace who's already born. So, if we want to frame the issue of population as one of overpopulation, that doesn't work when you're talking about places where people are already having few children. So, to frame it as overpopulation can be really ethically a quagmire. Certainly, there are places in the world that still have high fertility, and those places, we need to double down on our efforts to have education and family planning.We've talked about regions where populations are growing fast and regions where birthrates are crashing. There's a third dynamic, too, which is regions where populations are physically moving. How does global migration factor into understanding how 8 billion people fit together on this planet?Migration is the third pillar of population change and it's just as important as trends in births or deaths. But the impact of it is uneven. If we look globally, over 96% of us stay put. We don't move. The effect globally is that, while there are millions, hundreds of millions of people who move, the proportion of the world population who lives outside the country in which they were born has actually been steady and been quite low — below 4% — over the last several decades. But where these people move, and where they move from, is uneven around the globe.Bottom line, how many people can the planet feed and sustain?The planet can feed and sustain billions more. It is a matter of whether or not we have the political will and the know-how and the innovation to do so. This interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity. AP contributed to this report. Related: China now allows 3 kids per family, but many couples say they can't afford it

The World's Carol Hills and reporter Michael Fox explore institutional religion in Brazil, how President Jair Bolsonaro tapped into religion in his rise to the presidency, and the ripple effects of his alliance with evangelicals throughout the country. This special edition of The World is part of our reporting series called, Sacred Nation, focused on the intersection of religion and nationalism around the globe.

Darren Byler, a Uyghur scholar, joined The World's host Carol Hills from Vancouver to discuss the book, "The Backstreets: A Novel from Xinjiang."

► En este episodio suenan Carol Hills, Vetta Borne, Cléa Vincent & Mare Advertencia Lirika para hacernos sentir bien y sumarse a un playlist de aquí al infinito...► PLAYLIST INFINITO, un podcast con Efraín García Mora & Carlos Andrade.

If you have a podcast, want to start one, or just love listening, then Elsie is the voice to follow. Elsie is a Salvadoran podcasting mentor, thought leader, and hall-of-famer. We talk about the latino podcast audience and why it's important to create content that reflects our communities. We also talk about the cultural and economic barriers of entry into the world of podcasting for women and immigrants.  Elsie Escobar is podcasting veteran and inductee to the Academy of Podcasters Hall of Fame. She is a podcasting advocate, pundit, and mentor to primarily women podcasting leaders. She's co-host and co-founder of the She Podcasts show and community. She's also co-host/producer of Libsyn's The Feed. Show resources: She Podcasts Latino Podcast (non) Listener Report  2021 - Video Elsie's Yoga Class on Apple Podcasts Elsie on Podchaser Libsyn's The Feed with Elsie and Rob The Elsie Escobar on Twitter Music: “The Way I Really Am” by Carol Hills

Chinese political dissident and artist Ai Weiwei has published a new book called "1000 Years of Joys and Sorrows." He took the time to discuss with The World's Carol Hills what it was like growing up as the son of a dissident poet.

Today in Khartoum, Sudan's capital, calls for civil disobedience came blaring from a loudspeaker attached to a mosque. One voice urged citizens not to go to work to punish the military for betraying the revolution.Related: Protests erupt across Sudan against military coup Yesterday, top generals seized power in Sudan. The military has cut most phone and internet services. Protesters have created blockades of burning tires, and soldiers are pursuing them — reportedly going door to door. Troops fired on crowds a day earlier, killing four protesters, according to doctors.Sudan's ruling general said Tuesday that deposed Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdock was being held for his own safety and would likely be released soon. But he warned that other members of the dissolved government could face trial as protests against the putsch continued in the streets.Related: Sudan's troubled attempt at education reformThe takeover came after weeks of mounting tensions between military and civilian leaders over the course and the pace of Sudan's transition to democracy. It threatened to derail that process, which has progressed in fits and starts since the overthrow of longtime autocrat Omar al-Bashir in a popular uprising two years ago.Related: After the revolution, a secular Sudan?Dalia Abdel-Moneim, a Khartoum resident, joined The World's host Carol Hills to discuss the situation in the nation's capital, where she says the city is tense after all businesses and shops closed, except a few local bodegas. "It's literally a major strike." Daliah Abdel-Moneim, protester, Khartoum, Sudan"It's literally a major strike," Abdel-Moneim said. "Anyone who's out on the street is either going to try and get supplies or just trying to get to family or something. But the city is pretty much dead, and that's, I think, the case throughout the whole country." Carol Hills: There were reports of protests in some places. Soldiers on the streets using live ammunition reportedly have killed at least 10 people — 140 wounded. Do you think the Sudanese army will back down in the face of this kind of violence?Dalia Abdel-Moneim: Absolutely not. If anything, when we went out in 2018 and we stood up strong against [former dictator] Omar al-Bashir and his army, it proved to us that, you know, nothing scares us and we've reached the point of no return. We really can't go back and accept this attempted coup by the military. We'll just keep pushing forward, we'll keep protesting, we'll keep going out in numbers and that the day we're 40 million, there's only so many bullets that the army can have. And even if they shoot at us, they can't kill us all. I mean, honestly, personally, for me, I've just reached that point where I'm like: Do it. Nothing's going to stop us. We really are not going to take it lying down, so to speak.You sound defiant. How broad is popular resistance to this coup? Does it extend beyond major cities? I mean, I'm getting videos of protests in Port Sudan. You know, we're getting calls from all other cities in the country. It's not just Khartoum. We've all been burned by the military in the past. I mean, we have history with the military. It's not good history, and there's no way we will allow history to repeat itself, so to speak. So honestly, I don't think anyone will accept this attempted coup. We're going to stand up to ... we will do whatever we can within our means, and within our limited means, to make sure that what we, the people, want comes to fruition. We want a civilian government. We fought long and hard to have a civilian government, and we're determined to get it. I can't fathom the idea that I can go back to being ruled by the military again. I just can't.Sudan's top General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan said today that Sudan's Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok is at his home and he was in good health and will return home when the crisis is over. He didn't use the word under "arrest." What do you make of that?OK, why wasn't he sitting next to him? If he's fine, if he's not under arrest, why not bring him out? Let him speak to the people. Why did you arrest the other ministers? Why are you firing at the protesters? If you're really trying to save him, be the savior of the revolution. Why cut the internet? Why switch off our phones? The transitional government was a partnership between the military and the civilians, and yet he's putting all the blame on the civilians. If you are a part of the revolution and you do want to save the revolution, you do not go about it by arresting ministers, beating them up, taking them to unknown locations and then coming up today and saying, "Oh yes, the prime minister is with me." Where is he? We want proof. Why isn't the prime minister speaking to us?It's always been a kind of fragile thing — the civilian-military government. Were you worried something like this would happen?Oh, please. I mean, all revolutions are messy. You know, you don't slice it and it comes out in perfect shape. There will always be mistakes made. There will always be problems arising. And we are talking about the destruction of a country for over 30 years. So you're not going to rebuild it in a day or even a year or two, it's going to take time. But we also have to look at the successes that the government has achieved in that short period of time. We were removed from the terrorist-supporting list. We got the sanctions lifted from Sudan. Our debt was relieved. You know, we're getting loans. We're getting help, financial, economic help and development help. You know, we've been welcomed back into the international arena, when for 30 years, we were treated as a pariah state. We were taking the steps in the right direction. And then for the military to come in and then announce that they've overthrown the government. No, you haven't overthrown the government because we, the people, choose the government that we want to govern us.Then, what is behind this power grab? I mean, did military leaders fear prosecution or just a loss of access to lucrative contracts? Why now? I think it's a number of reasons. I think the whole ICC [International Criminal Court] ​​issue coming up was a problem. They weren't enjoying the power that they used to before. I think there's also these fractions within the military itself. I mean, I'm not denying it. There were problems between the civilian and the military side, and there are problems in the country that weren't being addressed properly by the government, but at the end of the day, I don't think the military was willing to step aside and let the civilians take control, with the exception of Sadiq al-Mahdi's rule. The military has always been in power, always — ever since we gained independence. So I don't think it was easy for them to be shunted to the side, so to speak.The Biden administration yesterday suspended $700 million in financial aid to Sudan. Does that matter to the coup plotters? I mean, do they have other financial lifelines?Honestly, I don't think it would make an iota of a difference, because I think they have allies with much deeper pockets, and they will be more than happy to foot the bill, so to speak. Can you imagine military and civilian officials in Sudan sharing power again? Can that idea be revived or is it kind of all or nothing at this point?Honestly, that's the best solution that we could have, because the military is a strong presence. It is a strong entity. We can't ignore it. Can we do it without them? Realpolitik says no. But what we do need is we need two parties who will put the best interests of this country and its people at the forefront. It's not about my political party or your military leanings or my allies and your allies. It's about what's best for this country and its people. And if we can find leaders who are willing to do that, then I think we would be on the right track. But will we find leaders like that? On paper, yes. But in reality, things always change.Dalia, do you intend to keep protesting and to continue to fight back?We're all adamant. You know, we've come too far to go back now. I went out not expecting the numbers to be so large last Thursday, and I was shocked at how many people came out and just proved to me that we are all in the same boat. We all want the same thing. Doesn't matter what age, gender, race, class or where you're from. At the end of the day, we're all Sudanese and we want what's best for our country. And that gave me hope that we're more aware, we know what's happening. They can't fool us anymore, and we will protest until the very bitter end, if need be. But I honestly believe that just like they reached a compromise on June 30, 2019, they will reach a compromise again because our numbers are too big to be ignored.This interview has been lightly edited and condensed for clarity. AP contributed to this report. 

Saad Mohseni heads the MOBY Group, the media company that owns Tolo News in Afghanistan. He recently arrived in the US and spoke with The World's host Carol Hills from New York about the current situation in the country under Taliban rule.

A massive security flaw was discovered in Apple's iPhone this week — and it's a biggie. The phones could be broken into without the user doing anything to trigger the hack. Without even a click, your information could be at risk.That news left iPhone users scrambling to update their devices. It was security researchers at the The Citizen Lab at University of Toronto who realized that spyware from an Israeli cybersurveillance company known as NSO Group was behind it.Related: Security flaw exposed in Germany, followed by criminal investigationApple quickly released a critical software patch to fix a security vulnerability that researchers said could allow hackers to directly infect iPhones and other Apple devices without any user action.Citizen Lab researchers said the security issue was exploited to plant spyware on a Saudi activist's iPhone. The previously unknown vulnerability affected all major Apple devices — iPhones, Macs and Apple Watches, the researchers said. NSO Group responded with a one-sentence statement saying it will continue providing tools for fighting “terror and crime.”Related: Biden and Putin both place a 'high priority' on cybersecurityIt was the first time a so-called “zero-click” exploit — one that doesn't require users to click on suspect links or open infected files — has been caught and analyzed, the researchers said. They found the malicious code on Sept. 7, and immediately alerted Apple. The targeted activist asked to remain anonymous, they said.John Scott-Railton, a senior researcher with The Citizen Lab in Canada who discovered the breach with his colleagues, joined The World's host Carol Hills to talk about the international spyware marketplace that fosters these kinds of exploits. Related: US agencies hacked in monthslong global cyberspying campaignCarol Hills: John, how exactly did you and Citizen Lab discover the vulnerability in the iPhone software? John Scott-Railton: So, we were looking at the telephone of a Saudi activist and that phone was infected with a sophisticated piece of spyware. The spyware was made by an Israeli cybersecurity firm and mercenary hacking company called NSO Group. And NSO Group claims that it sells spyware to governments so they can track criminals. However, for the past five years, their spyware keeps showing up in cases where activists, journalists and human rights defenders are being hacked.Were you able to figure out who had used that spyware? Had a government, bought it, like the Saudi government? So at this time, we're not attributing the spyware to a particular NSO customer. What happened last week is that we were examining a backup that we had collected back in March of this activist's phone. We discovered some suspicious files and it turned out that those files, although they appeared to be GIFs, were actually malware and exploit payload. And what they would do is turn that phone into a spy in the activist's pocket. As soon as we spotted those files, we had a sense that we knew what we were looking at. We then shared them with Apple. And in less than a week, Apple moved to quickly figure out the vulnerability and push out an update to all Apple devices.Will you eventually be able to figure out who was behind putting that in the Saudi activist phone?One of the things that's important to realize here is that this is a spyware and an industry that is built around concealing itself from attribution and as a result, hiding from accountability. And it's cases like this that highlight both how seriously companies like Apple take the threat to their bottom line, but also the extent to which the industry needs to be exposed and needs to be called out and needs to be responded to. Now, some people have said, well, should I be concerned? I'm not a dissident. I've never criticized an autocrat. And the truth is, with respect to exploits, they may be used by a small number of people in the first year. But after that, who knows? Exploits have a bad habit of being used by an ever-widening circle of bad actors until they're being used by cybercriminal groups to target people just like you or me.Now, has Apple's response been effective? Will what they issued for people to fix this really work?Apple has moved quickly to close the specific exploit that NSO was using in this case. But the spyware industry is built around always having some exploits in reserve. And so, while this particular technique for gaining access to people's phones is gone, NSO itself remains a serious threat to phone users.Will NSO Group suffer any penalties? NSO is certainly forging ahead to make more spyware. They are doing their best to hire former administration officials in the US, and otherwise slosh their money around in an effort to keep their business going and growing. It's pretty clear that the tech sector is fed up with NSO Group at this point, and I think a lot of people are now looking to the government for some kind of help. And it's an interesting coincidence that yesterday, in an indictment the Department of Justice released against three Americans, former intelligence community members, helping the UAE government build hacking capabilities, the Department of Justice explicitly called out the international spyware marketplace and pointed out that that unregulated marketplace is causing global harm. That's an interesting case about these three former intelligence and military officials. How did that case move to a point where they could be charged? Well, this is a really interesting case. So a couple of years ago, Reuters reported on the existence of something called Project Raven, which, in a nutshell, was a group of former US intelligence and military officials who had gone to the United Arab Emirates and were helping them stand up a hacking capability. At the time, it was a scandal, but it pointed to something deeper, which is, there is a marketplace for former intelligence operatives to go and sell the contents of their brains to other regimes and to help those regimes leapfrog into the ability to hack at a nation-state level. This was obviously a really concerning case and if you read the charge documents, it seems pretty clear that what was going on is these people were giving the UAE things that they had learned and things which the US government alleges were protected by export regulations. What's interesting about that case is that it is a tip of the iceberg in terms of the marketplace of former officials turning around and monetizing the knowledge that they gained protecting the US. The harm that those people are causing is very concrete. In the case of Project Raven, the targets included activists and dissidents, but also US citizens.And my final question has to be, you know, there's about a billion-plus people with iPhones. Should all of us go and find the update? Everyone should update. And you should update for a couple of reasons. First, there is no way to protect yourself against this kind of spyware, short of doing your updates. But secondarily, we really have to send a message to players like NSO Group: "It's not OK to find this kind of thing and turn it into a tool to be used to target dissidents and truth-tellers," even though you may not think of yourself as the kind of person that an autocrat is going to be interested in. Think about what you're doing as increasing our group immunity against shady companies like NSO Group. This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. AP contributed to this report. 

As the Taliban advanced on Kabul last weekend, the Afghan military retreated. They left behind weapons — combat aircraft, armored vehicles, machine guns and ammunition.Much of it had been provided by the US.Related: How the Kabul airport went from calm to chaos On Monday, Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby told reporters that the US does not want to see any US-made weapons fall into the hands of what he called "people that would use them to harm our interests." Related: This Afghan interpreter helped the US Army Special Forces. He's desperate to leave Afghanistan."I don't have an exact inventory of what equipment that the Afghans had at their disposal that now might be at risk," Kirby said. Jodi Vittori, a former US Air Force officer who served in Afghanistan, has a unique perspective on what this could mean for Afghanistan.Vittori now co-chairs the global politics and security program at Georgetown University and she joined The World's Carol Hills to talk about how the Taliban might use weaponry left behind by Afghan Security Forces. Related: US biometric devices are in the hands of the Taliban. They could be used against Afghans who helped coalition forces. Carol Hills: How significant is this weaponry?Jodi Vittori: We're not 100% certain how much equipment the Taliban have acquired because we haven't always taken terrific accountability of what equipment went where, at what times, particularly when it came to small arms. We have a better idea with aircraft. And what is the situation with the aircraft that was left over? A number of American aircraft flew to Uzbekistan and so did, of course, the pilots and the aircrew associated with them. But the Taliban have captured some American-made and other aircraft. We know that because they've shown pictures of them. Some of those aircraft were not operational at the time, however. And we do have reports that the Taliban are looking for aircraft pilots and aircraft maintainers that might be able to get that back into the air.Is there a possible scenario where the Taliban could coerce US-trained pilots still in Afghanistan to fly the remaining aircraft? Absolutely. I could see plenty of possibilities of being able to coerce pilots, unfortunately, not only threatening pilots with their own lives, but the lives of their families. We see continuing reports of the Taliban, for example, the blacklist, saying that if certain people don't turn themselves in to the Taliban, they will punish the families. So, they are certainly more than willing to do that. I can imagine they would be willing to do similar with pilots, as well. And, you know, if you're the pilot and your family members are being threatened, that's ... a hard thing to turn down. But bottom line, as somebody who served in the Air Force, is your sense that the Taliban don't instantly have an air force of their own. They need either other people or parts to make it work?Yes. They're going to need support of those former helicopter pilots and so forth that were serving with the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces. But also, do remember, the Taliban took over Afghanistan without an air force. Air force is a nice-to-have for them, but it's not the need-to-have it was for the Afghan National Defense and Security Forces. Do you know why Afghanistan's aircraft were not destroyed when the Taliban took control of the capital?I presume just because it happened so incredibly quickly? There just wasn't time to destroy all of those aircraft. It does take time to do that with explosives and so forth. Hopefully there weren't any deals made that involve those aircraft. We don't really know what completely went on at this point with the various Afghan senior leadership, individual generals acting on their own initiative when it came to negotiating with the Taliban.What about other hardware that the Taliban may now have? Howitzer artillery, machine guns and rifles, night-vision goggles? How easy will it be for the Taliban to get these into the field and operational?They should be relatively easy to get into the field and operational. [We've] seen lots of pictures of [Taliban] with US small arms, for example, M4s and M16s already, fighting. They've had long experience of using captured US Western gear, so they should be capable of putting those in to fight fairly quickly.It's interesting, there have already been protests in Afghanistan and the Taliban have been using violence to quell them. Over the weekend, the Taliban said hundreds of its fighters were heading to the Panjshir Valley, where there's strong resistance. Do you think that all these captured weapons will change the Taliban's approach to stifling dissent? I don't think it will change the Taliban's approach to stifling dissent because the Taliban have often been very willing to use violence to stifle dissent their entire reign, since they first came into being and since 1994. What it does do is it gives them additional capabilities, just an overwhelming amount of potential weaponry that they can use to stifle that dissent, whether it's in individual small villages, whether it's in cities or whether it's taking small arms and larger artillery pieces and so forth as much as they can given road networks and so forth up to places like the Panjshir Valley.This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. 

Con música de Soda Stereo, Valeria Wolf, Radio Futura, Carol Hills, Los Lobos, Carlos Sadness, Man Ray, Liquits, Cuchillas, Dandy Overdose, Los Punsetes, Three Souls in my Mind & Comando Groovy.

OK, here's the scene:A flight is heading from Greece to Lithuania, flying over Belarus. The pilots get notification of a bomb threat. A fighter jet forces the plane to land. A couple of passengers are then detained by Belarusian authorities.This isn't a plot point in an action film. And there was no bomb.Related: Belarus opposition figure demands 'new, democratic, open country'Yesterday, Ryanair Flight 4978 was intercepted and one of the passengers detained was 26-year-old Belarusian dissident Roman Protasevich. The operation was reportedly approved by Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, a man referred to as "Europe's last dictator."Related: Belarus targets journalists, activists in new raidsThis evening in Belarus, a new video was released of Protasevich after his arrest, posted initially on a pro-government Belarusian channel.In the video, Protasevich says he is in good health and is being treated well. Possibly under duress, he also confesses to plotting riots in Minsk — crimes that carry a 15-year penalty. His forehead appears bruised in the video.Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, the Belarusian human rights activist and politician who ran as the main opposition candidate in the 2020 Belarusian presidential election, shared the video on Twitter: The regime's propaganda channels posted a video of arrested Raman Pratasevich, saying that he is treated lawfully in the Minsk Detention Center №1. This is how Raman looks under physical and moral pressure. I demand the immediate release of Raman and all political prisoners. pic.twitter.com/zdolsbp6m5— Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya (@Tsihanouskaya) May 24, 2021The European Union has found itself at the center of this situation. RyanAir is headquartered in Ireland. The plane was registered in Poland. The flight was going from Greece to Lithuania. Today, heads of EU states met to discuss potential sanctions.Katia Glod, a Belarus analyst with the Center for European Policy Analysis, joined The World's host Carol Hills, from London, to share the latest insights on this operation and what it means for global politics. Carol Hills: First of all, who is Roman Protasevich?Katia Glod: Roman Protasevich is a Belarusian journalist, the famous blogger. Roman is a founder of the very popular Telegram channel, which is called NEXTA, which was behind mass protests in Belarus, which erupted last August. And Roman Protasevich, at the time, he was part of this NEXTA team. Nowadays, he is the editor of another very popular Telegram [messaging app] channel called "Belarus of the Brain," which has several hundred thousand subscribers, and is also very widely read in Belarus.Why did Alexander Lukashenko approve this brazen operation?Well, first of all, we have to realize that Lukashenko is a very revengeful person. He has been well-known for taking revenge against his opponents. And NEXTA, obviously, displayed Lukashenko and the regime, the security services, to a great extent, because, as I've just said, they mobilized people to organize protests. Another reason is an attack on mass media, which we have seen in Belarus basically since last summer. Now that Protasevich is in Belarusian custody, what is likely to happen tohim?Well, he's likely to face up to 15 years in prison. The likely charges are [going] to be organizing public disorder and also stoking social strife. So, that means that he's currently somewhere at the KGB prison or one of the detention facilities in Minsk. We know that his girlfriend was transported to one of the detention facilities in Minsk, the so-called Okrestina prison, which became very famous during the August protest, because this is where tortures and beatings of many protesters happened.You mentioned the mass protests against Lukashenko last summer. They were followed by a harsh government crackdown that continues to this day. Does this arrest change anything for Belarusians who oppose Lukashenko?Unfortunately, it doesn't change much for Belarusians inside Belarus. It's that perhaps more people will be thinking about immigrating, and leaving the country obviously creates another international precedent. It puts the Belarusian regime onto a new level of priority. If, for example, we can say that before, Belarus has been more of a moral issue, a moral dilemma, particularly for the European Union, it was not nice that human rights have been abused in Belarus or that the elections were rigged, but it has not really until now affected directly the rights of European citizens. Yesterday's incident has shown that now Lukashenko's regime became a real threat to international norms, and real threats to European security. And Belarusians inside Belarus do hope that the West could take tougher sanctions against the regime.It's interesting, President Lukashenko had to know that the world would harshly condemn him for doing this. And he knew of this and he did it anyway. What does that tell you? Well, it tells us that the regime has lost control of political thinking, that the regime is really waging a war because its goal [is] only to stay in power, regardless by which means. It tells us that the regime is not prepared to negotiate with the opposition or with the West and that it's not backing off.What role might Russia have here? Do you think Russian governmentofficials were in the loop on this?We do know that there were actually four people who did not board the flight back to Vilnius. And apart from or Roman Protasevich and his girlfriend, there were two Russian citizens. And the speculation is that either they were Belarusian KGB or that they were Russian FSB agents. And perhaps that Russia lent a helping hand to Belarus. Well, either way, Russia would not be the country that would try to punish Belarus or would try to tell it that that's not the right way forward.How do you think the United States should respond to this event?So far, we have seen only a statement of Mr. Blinken, who obviously condemned the situation and said that there should be given an adequate response. I think it will be a real test to the unity between the US and the European Union — whether the US will join the European Union in offering a very tough stance against the behavior of the Belarus regime.This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. 

Gunfire and air strikes rattle the scrubland on the outskirts of Marib in Yemen: Video of heavy fighting taking place between the Houthis and the resistance in Marib North Yemen.The Houthis are trying to control more ground before they can accept to negotiate. pic.twitter.com/2wru1HK28S— Summer Ahmed (@samwrax) February 13, 2021The Houthi militias, who control Yemen's capital city, Sanaa, and much of the country, have renewed their military campaign to take over the city, located just 75 miles east of the capital. Resistance fighters are defending Marib with military support from Saudi Arabia, which has provided air strikes and now ground troops. Related: In foreign policy reset, Biden ends US support for Saudi-led offensiveThis is happening just as a change in the White House signals a renewed effort to end the Yemen war — diplomatically.On Tuesday, Secretary of State Antony Blinken revoked the Trump-era designation of Houthis, known widely as Ansarullah, as a foreign terrorist organization in recognition of the dire humanitarian situation in Yemen. The label would have hindered the delivery of aid to parts of Yemen under Houthi control. Related: US State Department designates Yemen's Houthis as terrorist organization“By focusing on alleviating the humanitarian situation in Yemen, we hope the Yemeni parties can also focus on engaging in dialogue,” wrote Secretary Blinken in a statement.Related: Aid agencies fear impact in Yemen after US terror decisionPresident Joe Biden’s new special envoy for Yemen, Tim Lenderking, spoke with reporters Tuesday, saying the uptick in fighting will lead to the internal displacement of more people.“The potential for more IDPs [internally displaced persons] to either flee in or out of Marib is something that is going to push an already stretched humanitarian infrastructure beyond the breaking point,” Lenderking said.Related: Labeling the Houthis as 'terrorists' could cost Yemeni livesOn Thursday, the United Nations Special Envoy Martin Griffiths told the Security Council, in a Zoom call, that the Houthi attack on Marib must stop.He said, “The quest for territorial gain by force threatens all of the prospects of the peace process.”But not everyone sees a diplomatic solution at hand.Nadwa al-Dawsari is a scholar at the Middle East Institute and she is from Yemen. Dawsari knows the city of Marib well, and when The World’s Carol Hills reached her in Washington, Dawsari explained what’s at stake in the new push by the Houthis to take control of Marib."Marib is the last stronghold of the Yemeni government. It is also a city that hosts 3 million civilians, including almost a million IDPs [internally displaced persons] who fled mainly from the north, from Houthi persecution, but also from the war in general. Marib also sits on much of Yemen oil and all Yemen gas." Nadwa al-Dawsari, scholar from Yemen, Middle East Institute"Marib is the last stronghold of the Yemeni government. It is also a city that hosts 3 million civilians, including almost a million IDPs who fled mainly from the north, from Houthi persecution, but also from the war in general. Marib also sits on much of Yemen oil and all Yemen gas," Dawsari told The World. Carol Hills: So, you mentioned IDPs, internally displaced persons. How many people have fled to Marib during the civil war? Nadwa Al-Dawsari: Displaced people living in camps — almost a million. The numbers reported are 800,000 civilians. But a lot of people also relocated to Marib and rented homes and bought homes because the city has become an example of stability. There are services, there is electricity 24 hours, there are jobs. So, it has created a lot of opportunities during the war that other parts of the country did not have.  Given how strategic Marib is and the concern over a humanitarian disaster there, if the Houthis take over, who is defending Marib? Who is aiding the people of Marib to keep that from happening? The people who are defending Marib now are the tribes; they are defending their homes because they know that if Houthis take over, they'll do to them what they did to other tribes in areas they captured. They'll blow up their homes, they'll execute their tribal leaders, they'll rule with repression. So, they understand the risk, and they're willing to defend their homes to their death. You have built a solid reputation as a scholar who really understands Yemen's tribes. What does that tell you about what needs to happen to prevent Marib from falling to the Houthis? There is only one thing that can prevent Marib from falling into the hands of the Houthis. There needs to be one big military operation —  well-planned, well-executed — to push the Houthis far enough from Marib so that they don't pose a threat to the city in the future.  So, does that mean that the only country who can really help out is Saudi Arabia, the country being accused of stoking and keeping the Yemeni war going? Look, I agree. Saudi Arabia has contributed negatively to the Yemen war, but we're talking about an immediate risk. And having to deal with that immediate risk, unfortunately, entails military support.  But it's been six years and no one has seemed to be able to defeat the Houthis. Well, again, the reasons are two things: One, that the Saudis have not been providing enough military support to the tribes to fend off the Houthis. The second reason is that the UN has been calling for a constant ceasefire, which only the Saudis and the Hadi government accepted and abided by, but not the Houthis.  We've heard the United Nations and the US government, under Donald Trump and now under Joe Biden, all say some version of this sentence: "The war in Yemen cannot be won militarily; it must be a diplomatic solution." Who would have to be at the negotiating table for that to happen? First of all, this narrative is extremely naive. I mean, the Houthis are not listening. They're not willing to deescalate. They're not willing to accept others. So, how can you negotiate with that? There needs to be a military action to weaken the Houthis in order to force them to come to the negotiation table in good faith.  What if the Houthis do besiege the city? What happens then? If Houthis besiege the city, I think they're going to try to enter the city by force. I'm sure they will be faced with a lot of armed resistance. So, I think we're likely to see an escalation in fighting within the city and around the city for at least a while, because, again, Houthis are superior militarily, and they will be able to crush resistance. But I think it will come at a high cost. This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. 

American democracy prides itself on the peaceful transfer of power. What the United States has seen this week is anything but peaceful.After rioters backed by US President Donald Trump ravaged the US Capitol on Wednesday, the president tweeted Friday that he would not attend US President-elect Joe Biden’s inauguration on Jan. 20.For one writer in Sri Lanka, what's unfolding in Washington, DC, looks familiar. Two years ago, Sri Lanka had its own experience with a political leader refusing to leave office. Chaos and violence erupted not long afterward.Sri Lankan writer and podcaster Indi Samarajiva is a close observer of the US government. His prescient essay in November was called "I lived through a stupid coup. America is having one now." He spoke to The World's host Carol Hills about what the violent mob in Washington looked like from abroad and what Americans might learn from Sri Lanka's experience with a coup.Related: In pictures: Trump loyalists storm US CapitolCarol Hills: Indi, what were your first thoughts when you saw what was happening in Washington?Indi Samarajiva: So, when I heard about it [Thursday] morning, I thought it was crazy. But also I think you could very clearly see this coming — or look, I could see this coming. I think this was really telegraphed quite far in advance.You live in Sri Lanka. There was an attempted coup in 2018. Do you see these two events — what happened in Washington and what happened in Sri Lanka — in similar terms?I can show you two photographs, which are exactly the same photograph in two different situations. We had someone occupy the speaker's chair in parliament. You had someone occupy the speaker's chair in your Congress. It's basically the exact same picture, except your guys are more heavily armed. Our guys were just throwing chili powder.You're talking about the images of when the mob basically moved into the Capitol and were kind of hanging out and sitting in chairs and things like that.Exactly. So we had the exact same images, except those were our opposition MPs. Those guys were at least elected to be in parliament. So we elected our mob. You guys have a completely unruly, white supremacist, gun-wielding mob, and that's much scarier. And of course, four people have died. [Editor's note: As of Thursday, Jan. 8, five people have died.]In the article you wrote just two months ago, you sort of make the point that the US doesn't even understand what's going on with these kinds of protests. And that was before Wednesday's events. What do you mean by that?Well, I think there's a sense of American exceptionalism. So, there's a sense that these things can't happen to you. Whereas all over the rest of the world, we're kind of used to this. You guys have been inflicting all of this trauma on the world and now the chickens have, to a large degree, come home to roost. Look, when terrorists attacked on 9/11, when they attacked the Twin Towers, the Pentagon, and I think the other target was either Congress or the White House, those are symbolic attacks on your centers of power. This is a symbolic attack on your center of power. So, they have attacked. They've breached your Congress. So, you're under attack.And if you keep saying, "Oh, OK, we just have to hold out for 14 days until the inauguration, or "We just have to wait for this and it'll all go back to normal," I think you're not understanding where you are.What has happened in Sri Lanka in the two years since, — in terms of what might be in store for Americans after what happened Wednesday — that we're not even thinking might happen? What has been torn asunder, do you think?Even if a coup fails, it still damages your government. So what happened to us was the coup happened and the courts rolled it back. So, we had the elected government back and that seemed good. But that government was crippled, and then that government couldn't respond to a terrorist threat, which is, you know, three months down the line, and then then all hell broke loose, and then it was completely unstable. And then the people who staged the coup were able to point to the chaos that they helped create and say, "Hey, you need us in." And so that's who's been elected.I think perhaps what Americans may not be understanding is that it's not over. When you attack your center of government, when you attack Congress, even symbolically, that weakens your governance. And when governance is weak and it's like a Pandora's box, all sorts of other risks come out of there.Related: 'I fear for our democracy,' says Rep. Mondaire Jones in calling for Trump's removalYou mentioned earlier that the US foreign policy has caused a lot of rancor around the globe and it's coming home to roost. What do you mean by that?I don't mean that the rancor is coming home to roost. I mean, that's sort of the militarization of your society, the violence of your society. A lot of the people who would have attacked your Congress, they might have been serving in Afghanistan or Iraq, causing God knows what problems to the people there. The militarization has come to your borders. Your militarization at the edges of your society has come home to roost. And the violence of your culture, which has always been projected outward, is now falling in.Are there any other valid comparisons to make between the US and Sri Lanka in terms of — I'm thinking of your article and the sense of "something's happened here and we didn't really understand what" and in the US, maybe Americans not understanding what's really happened at some basic level, trying to think that this will all right itself.Look, I think the most valid comparison to make is that we are comparable — as in, you can learn something from someone in Sri Lanka. You can learn something from someone in Lagos, in Dhaka. So, people have been through similar experiences. And this is an exercise I think Americans don't do enough. Because as long as you think you're exceptional, as long as you think things can't happen to you, then you'll be constantly surprised and you won't learn from other human experiences. If you can just let go of this thing that "we're America, this can't happen to us, this isn't happening to us," and you can see that it is happening to you and then you can start to learn from the world, then perhaps you can join us.This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.

The US has presented itself as a beacon of democracy around the world. How have the events of this week impacted the US’ image? And, among those who stormed the Capitol on Wednesday were supporters of QAnon, a dangerous conspiracy theory that has grown internationally. Also, host Carol Hills speaks with Sri Lankan writer Indi Samarajiva who shares his experience living through the recent coup in his country and the violent events that followed.

Never depict an Arab leader literally in drawing or print: That was a long-established rule across many Middle Eastern and North African countries until 2011 — when uprisings swept across the Arab world. Political cartoonists quickly broke that long-standing rule by drawing Arab leaders literally — not just symbolically — and their artwork spurred protesters to continue to take to the streets and demand regime change after decades under authoritarian rule. Related: 7 cartoonists who have faced violence and threats for their workThe World's Carol Hills catches up with two cartoonists who broke those rules during the Arab uprisings: Syria's Ali Ferzat and Egypt's Mohamed Anwar.The cartoons of Mohamed AnwarRelated: Egyptian political cartoonists Anwar and Andeel struggle to portray Sisi Untitled, by Mohamed Anwar, Egypt, 2007 This image, one of Mohamed Anwar's early cartoons, shows a person sitting in a chair but the viewer can’t see their face. Anwar drew this cartoon after he saw a fellow cartoonist he admired daring to cross the red line and depict then-President Hosni Mubarak, but from the back. You don’t see Mubarak’s face but everyone knows it’s him. The man we can see is holding the Quran and says to the man in the chair: "The infidels want to change your words, your majesty, and make amendments to the constitution!"Anwar drew this after Mubarak changed the Egyptian constitution to allow his son to run for president. The opposition was calling on him to remove these amendments. Untitled, by Anwar, Egypt, 2007.  Credit: Courtesy of Anwar ‘Congratulations, you got your country back!’ by Anwar, Egypt, 2011 This is the first cartoon Anwar drew after the Jan. 25, 2011, revolution in Egypt. A doctor emerges from the hospital room holding a new baby and tells the Egyptians gathered that they have a new country, a new Egypt. Anwar now considers this one of the silliest cartoons he ever drew because it shows what a romantic view he and others had of the revolution and the changes it would bring. "Congratulations, you got your country back!" by Anwar, Egypt, 2011.  Credit: Courtesy of Anwar ‘Dear reader, can you help this poor citizen make his way through these monsters?’ by Anwar, Egypt, 2012 This cartoon shows the maze of politics that Egypt experienced in the first year after the Jan. 25, 2011, revolution. You see a member of the military council that ruled after Mubarak stepped down, the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, and a representative of the old regime. The cartoon illustrates the political trap Egyptians were finding themselves in and how the dreams of the revolution had not yet been realized.  "Dear reader, can you help this poor citizen make his way through these monsters?" by Anwar, Egypt, 2012.  Credit: Courtesy of Anwar ‘Advice,’ by Anwar, Egypt, 2015 Devil: “You know what we’ll do? We’ll change the constitution.” This cartoon was drawn in 2015 after the initial calls to change the constitution to allow Egyptian President Abdul Fattah al-Sisi more presidential terms. The effort failed but three years later the constitution was changed to allow Sisi to stay in power until 2030.  "Advice," by Anwar, Egypt, 2015.  Credit: Courtesy of Anwar The cartoons of Ali FerzatRelated: Slideshow: Syrian cartoonist not silenced by attackThe Dictator,’ by Ali Ferzat, Syria, January 2011For decades, Ali Ferzat had never criticized the Syrian government directly — it was not allowed. Instead, he used a symbol to represent it: an empty chair. In this cartoon, Ferzat is moving toward a direct criticism of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. For the first time, there is someone in the chair but he is so small his legs don’t even touch the floor. But the epaulets on the shoulders show that it’s someone high up. And significantly, a bird is pecking at the chair leg. This government is going to break.  "The Dictator," by Ali Ferzat, Syria, January  2011.  Credit: Courtesy of Ali Ferzat Untitled, by Ali Ferzat, Syria, June 2011This is one of the early cartoons by Ferzat, where he broke the rule about criticizing the government and drew the actual face of Syrian President Assad.  Untitled, by Ali Ferzat, Syria, June 2011.  Credit: Courtesy of Ali Ferzat ‘Reforms,’ by Ali Farzat, Syria, June 2011 By June 2011, thousands of Syrians were out on the streets demanding reforms. This cartoon is a comment on how serious Ferzat believed Syrian President Assad was about real reform.  "Reforms," by Ali Farzat, Syria, June 2011.  Credit: Courtesy of Ali Ferzat.  Untitled, Ali Ferzat, Syria, July 2011By summer 2011, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi had been forced out of the capital, Tripoli, and was on the run. Syrian President Assad was facing more and more criticism and protests from his own people. A few weeks later, Ferzat was pulled from a car and beaten and left for dead. Shortly after, he moved to Kuwait and has been in exile ever since. Untitled, Ali Ferzat, Syria, July 2011.  Credit: Courtesy of Ali Ferzat  

► En este episodio suenan Espanglish, Instituto Mexicano del Sonido, Sade & Carol Hills listos para hacerte sentir bien y sumarse a un playlist de aquí al infinito... ► PLAYLIST INFINITO, un podcast con Efraín García Mora & Carlos Andrade.

Relations between the US and China seem to be in freefall. The two nations are trading barbs over trade, sanctions and control of the South China Sea.One-third of the world's shipping passes through the area south of China, which touches several Asian nations. In a statement this week, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the world will not allow Beijing to treat the South China Sea as its "maritime empire."Related: China announces sanctions targeting Rubio, CruzHis statement was the first time the United States had taken the position that China's claims to the South China sea were "completely unlawful."China claims 90% of the potentially energy-rich South China Sea, but Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam also lay claim to parts of it.Bonnie S. Glaser, a senior director for Asia at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, joined The World's Carol Hills to discuss the significance of this policy shift and what it means for China-US relations. Related: 'World War C': How did national security miss the coronavirus? Carol Hills: For months, Mike Pompeo has been saying that China is basically acting like the neighborhood bully when it comes to its behavior. But with a statement this week, has the US stance on China's presence in the South China Seas changed? Bonnie S. Glaser: Well, I think that the new US position is really a clarification and a bit of a toughening of the prior US stance. The United States has opposed Chinese coercive actions against neighbors, interference with their efforts to develop oil and gas that are off their coastlines. But the United States has actually never said that those activities were illegal. And so the clarification of this policy is not taking a position over who owns what land features, but it is taking a clear position over the maritime rights and resources and who should develop them. And it's clearly saying that China just doesn't have the right to do so. Remind us what the Chinese have been doing in the South China Sea. What kind of incursions or what sort of things have they been doing to try to lay claim to it? The Chinese have been, on occasion, sinking fishing boats from other countries. We know that they sank a Vietnamese fishing boat last fall and the Chinese have also been interfering with oil and gas exploitation. And we did see this off the coast of Vietnam, also off the coast of Malaysia. And the Chinese are sending their survey ships and using their Coast Guard vessels to harass and intimidate the oil rigs of other countries. These are the kinds of things that the United States is saying is now illegal. Related: Chinese-US tensions in South China sea put the Philippines at risk The US recently sent two aircraft carriers to the region. Is this a significant move? Well, the last time that the United States sent two aircraft carrier battle groups to the South China Sea was 2014. So, I do think that it is significant. It is a signal to China that the United States is not going to stand silent while the Chinese are seeking to control the waters and the airspace in the South China Sea. Politically speaking, why is the US taking this on now? What do you think about the State Department's timing? Well, I think that we've seen increased Chinese coercion against other countries. So I do think it's in response to Chinese actions. But it's also part of a larger strategy to step up pressure on China because of actions that China is taking across the board. We have seen Trump administration tougher policy used recently in Hong Kong, where the Chinese are implementing very harsh national security legislation. Also in Xinjiang, where the Chinese have built reeducation camps and incarcerating essentially millions of Uighurs and also Kazakhs. So, the South China Sea policy is of a piece. It is toughening Trump administration's policy toward China. If you were to advise the Trump administration right now on this matter in the South China Sea, what would you tell them? Well, I think the Trump administration is taking some of the right actions. They are conducting what's called the freedom of navigation operations to make sure that the waters of the South China Sea are open to all. I support that. And I support this change in policy. And I would advocate that the United States follow through in a way that it will continue to have on board, with them, other countries — because we cannot take on China unilaterally. We have to get the support of other countries. So I would advocate coordination with our allies and with individual countries in the South China Sea, Malaysia, Indonesia, Vietnam, Philippines, Brunei and Taiwan. All of those countries are claimants. And so if we coordinate with them and we try to together put more pressure on China, I hope that we can persuade China to refrain from engaging what are clearly illegal activities. This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. Reuters contributed to this report. 

Saturday marks the 25th anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre, in which Bosnian Serb forces killed about 8,000 Muslim men and boys during the Bosnian War.It was the worst atrocity on European soil since World War II. Over the past few days, citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina have been commemorating this tragedy and reminding the world that they're still seeking full justice. Some nations, including Serbia, deny the nature of these crimes.Last year, the remains of 33 newly identified victims of the massacre were buried at a memorial site near Srebrenica at a formal ceremony. Some war criminals had not faced justice until recent years, others are still free. Related: Thousands remember Srebrenica massacre victimsToday, war crimes continue to be perpetrated in major conflict zones such as Yemen and Syria. David Scheffer, who was the US ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues from 1997 to 2001, spoke with The World's host Carol Hills about Srebrenica's legacy and why it’s so difficult to prosecute those who have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity. Carol Hills: David, give us some more background on the Srebrenica massacre. Why is it so significant, and why is it so important that we remember what happened there?David Scheffer: Well, it's extremely important. The Srebrenica massacre was the final large atrocity of the Bosnian conflict of the early 1990s. It was not really supposed to happen. There were considerable efforts to reach a negotiated settlement between the Bosnian Serbs and the Bosnian Muslims. And so having suddenly a huge genocidal event ...On the one hand, it was horrific. And on the other hand, it was such a shock to the system, and it galvanized the West to finally use military power to bring the conflict to an end. It has sort of an ironic consequence at the end of the day that the atrocity itself actually brought the war to an end.Who was responsible for these atrocities?In Srebrenica, it was the Bosnian Serbs. And of course, there was complicity on the part of the Serbian government, which was supporting the Bosnian Serbs. And that has been proven in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, with the convictions of General Radislav Krstić, General Ratko Mladić and President Radovan Karadzić at the time. And did you have a role in getting any of these men prosecuted?Yes. As ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues in the late 1990s, I was responsible for helping bring as much evidence as possible to the Yugoslav tribunal in The Hague that would implicate senior leaders.Are there still war criminals who were involved in the Srebrenica massacre who roam free today?  Yes. These are mid-level and low-level individuals. Now, many of them have been brought to justice before the war crimes chamber, which sits in Sarajevo. That's a domestic Bosnian court. But others are living in Serbia, and some of them have been brought to justice, but many have not. So there's a large number of actual physical perpetrators of the genocidal acts at Srebrenica who continue to evade arrest or evade justice, depending on where they're living and what the authorities consider to be appropriate for bringing them to trial.Related: UN envoy calls on Turkey to prevent Srebrenica-style massacre in KobaniI want to jump to today. Unfortunately, war crimes and crimes against humanity are still happening across the globe, often in conflict zones and places like Yemen and Syria. What's being done about these crimes today?  Not enough is being done. But I think there are very brave and committed individuals and even governments around the world that are doing the best they can. For example, with Syria that the US and France and the UK on the Security Council have sought to have the whole Syrian situation referred to the International Criminal Court for investigation and prosecutions. But that referral has been vetoed by Russia, which of course is aligned with the Assad government in Syria. Frankly, why there has not been a referral of the Yemen situation to the International Criminal Court pretty much boggles my mind, although I can understand the politics of it.In the case of Yemen, who or what entity would be the one to bring that to court to make that an issue?  Well, because Yemen is not a state party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, you have to get a referral by the UN Security Council to the court. In the case of Yemen, of course, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are prominent parties in the conflict in Yemen. And I can imagine that politically, the Trump Administration would not necessarily be the one to refer Yemen or bring it up in the Security Council, given its relationships with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. But at the end of the day, you would have to get all five votes of the permanent members of the Security Council. But that's extremely difficult with Yemen because of the politics concerned.  You were the first US ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues. The current US ambassador-at-large for war crimes issues is Morse Tan. What's he been working on within this administration?    I am not conversant with that since I'm not in the government anymore. I do know that Ambassador Tan has a long background in understanding the crimes against humanity that have been committed and continue to be committed in North Korea. And so I would anticipate that his office, under his leadership, continues to look at that issue, that it was something the US could take the lead on and even if one fails in the Security Council, at least go on record of trying.This interview has been condensed and edited.

It’s still unclear if there’s any truth to the allegations that Russia paid bounties to Taliban troops to kill American soldiers in Afghanistan.Some American intelligence officials reached the conclusion Russia did so. But the White House says there's no consensus within the intelligence community around the claims.Meanwhile, Moscow has categorically denied the allegations. “This is 100% b***s***,” said Dimitry Peskov, a Kremlin spokesman, in an interview with NBC News.  On Thursday, Pentagon officials told members of Congress there is no evidence that any payments led to the deaths of American service members. "That is a unique, discrete piece of information that is not corroborated," Army General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the House of Representatives Armed Services Committee in comments echoed at a hearing by Defense Secretary Mark Esper.Related: Petraeus on Russian bounties in Afghanistan: 'We were looking for this kind of activity' President Donald Trump, who has worked to cultivate warmer relations with Moscow, has downplayed the significance of the intelligence and denied being briefed on the matter before it was reported by news outlets last month.The World's host Carol Hills discussed the allegations with Mark Galeotti, a senior associate fellow at the Britain-based Royal United Services Institute and an expert on Russia’s security services. Carol Hills: What do you make of the allegations?Mark Galeotti: Well, they are pretty extraordinary. It's hard to say. I'll be perfectly honest,  I'm not yet convinced that it's true, but nor would I be so precocious to say they're definitely not. But if it is true, it represents an astonishing escalation by the Russians.In what way?  Up to now, essentially — yes, the Kremlin kills, but it kills people it regards as traitors. In other words, its own people who have turned against it. They have a very different calculus for the potential costs of going after outsiders and especially Americans. They would know there'll be a massive political price tag on any dead Americans that could be ascribed to Russian machinations.Now, according to most of these allegations, it was Russia's notorious unit 29155 from Russia's military intelligence organization that was leading this bounty operation. What is this unit 29155?There’s a danger in making too much of it. It seems to be essentially one of the Russian military intelligence’s in-house group of throat slitters. They're the guys that they turn to precisely when they have what they call “wetwork,” in other words, killings to be done. On the other hand, they are not grand planners. They are not sophisticated geopoliticians. But if you did have to take suitcases full of cash into the mountains of Afghanistan, you'd want to send tough guys to make sure it arrived in the right place, and its people from this unit are precisely the kind of tough guys you might send.If we're to zoom out for a moment, what are Russia's geopolitical motivations here or what would they be here? From Russia's point of view, Afghanistan matters for all kinds of reasons. It matters because of the massive heroin trade there. Russia has the highest heroin consumption per capita in the world. And it also matters because they're worried that if it fell into an explosion of radicalism, that could well stretch into neighboring Central Asia, and from there into Russia itself. So they need to keep tabs on what's going on. The second thing is, Russia is trying to once again assert itself as a great power. If the United States withdraws as is meant to happen, it’s an opportunity for Russia to then reintroduce itself as some kind of power broker. What do you make of how US officials have reacted to these reports? I mean, as you point out, the National Security Agency dissented from the claims of other US intelligence agencies. What do you make of all this?  From an intelligence point of view, you have to have pretty high confidence in an assessment if you're actually going to make a potentially very inflammatory claim. And on the whole, intelligence agencies are conservative. This is one of the reasons why it has not come up through the formal channels but instead has been leaked. More broadly, this speaks to something that a lot of Americans and non-Americans think — looking at Washington, the American debate about Russia is not about Russia. It's about the White House. It's about whether or not Trump is [Vladimir] Putin's puppet or whatever. And very quickly, this became mobilized to point the finger at Trump. And it's certainly true —What do you mean by that?Well, you know, did he actually sort of basically refuse to confront President Putin about this? Did he bother reading his presidential daily brief? Is he someone who, frankly, doesn't even bother paying attention to the intelligence assessments, or is he surrounded by people who shield him? I mean, all these questions are entirely valid questions to ask, frankly. It matters to know the answer to these, whether or not you have a chief executive who really is on top of international affairs. But in some ways, the whole issue about how this is managed within the administration has actually overshadowed the more fundamental question of what is actually going on in Afghanistan.Or whether it's true or not.Exactly. Of course, the Russians are involved in Afghanistan and of course, Russian military intelligence are the people whom they would put out on the ground to form their alliances and build their networks of agents. That's understood and accepted. What we don't know is whether that kind of relationship has gone further into actually indicating that they're willing to pay money for American dead or similar. This is a very specific and difficult thing to trace. And at the moment, it doesn't sound like that's where the current main emphasis is going.This interview has been condensed and edited. Reuters contributed to this report.

For American universities, catering to international students is big business. Each year, more than 1 million come here to study. About a third are from China.But come fall, many may be absent. This week, the Trump administration announced that international students would not be allowed to enter or remain in the US if their colleges and universities are online-only this fall. The move drew swift backlash from higher education administrators and advocates. Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology filed a lawsuit against the government Wednesday to block the measure.Unlike domestic students, international students often pay full tuition — which helps universities to fund scholarships and their general operations. International students injected nearly $45 billion into the US economy in 2018. For some international students, remote learning could mean attending classes in the middle of the night, dealing with spotty or no internet access, losing funding contingent on teaching, or having to stop participating in research. Some are considering taking time off or leaving their programs entirely.Frank Wu, president of Queens College in New York, has written about the US government's complicated relationship with students from China. He joined The World's host Carol Hills for a conversation on the Trump administration's new guidance and its impact on international students in the US. Related: Universities scramble to help international universities stay in US after new visa restrictions Carol Hills: Frank, how do you interpret this move by the Trump administration? Is it about politics or public health? Frank Wu: It's about everything. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Even before this, there was suspicion and statements, including by the president himself, that almost all students coming from China are spies. That was said by the president at a private dinner. And it made the news, but the story didn't stick, which was just one of many things that are said along similar lines. About 350,000 students per year have been coming from China. That's pre-pandemic. So they're the biggest part of the international student population. But there is a public health piece to this. I mean, one could say that you're working on the basis of public health if you're restricting students from overseas from coming to the US.  What's your sense of that? Oh, absolutely. That probably isn't the reason, because at the same time this ban on foreign students was announced, the president said he would pressure states to pressure schools, including colleges, to reopen. So, it doesn't make sense to say, well, let's have everyone reopen, but then let's keep out people from places with lower rates of the coronavirus. Do you think many Chinese students enrolled at American universities will just say, "Forget it, I'll enroll in a university in Asia or Europe instead"? That's already happened. For many international students, the United Kingdom looks very popular, or just staying home. We face a real risk of a reverse brain drain. So, I'm an American. I was born here in the United States, grew up in Detroit. My parents, they were born in China. They grew up in Taiwan, and they came to the United States in the 1960s, that bygone era when America was welcoming people. And America invested in them. They didn't just come. They came as scholarship students. America wanted to recruit them. It was a good investment because my parents became citizens, taxpayers, contributors. My family has staked its fortunes on this side of the Pacific Ocean. It's pretty clear you interpret this move by the Trump administration as a move against China and Chinese students. What does the US lose if many of these students decide to go to another university and not wait it out for trying to finish at a US university? America risks losing its competitive advantage. What we have is freedom and opportunity — and that attracts the most talented from everywhere else. Imagine if everyone of Chinese descent just vanished overnight. What would happen to the physics department at most universities? What would happen in Silicon Valley? What we risk losing is the talent that we've been able to recruit that has driven American entrepreneurial activity, scientific research and progress. As president of Queens College in New York, how are you responding to these new guidelines on international students? The chancellor [Félix V. Matos Rodríguez] of the CUNY system — we're part of a system — issued a powerful statement as soon as the guidelines came out saying that this is bad, not just for our students, it's bad for our institution. And I stand with him. We want to support all of our students regardless of their identity. We want to provide a high-quality, affordable education. Do you have students who are directly affected by these new guidelines? We're taking a look. I am sure we have students who could be affected. We're looking at everything that we can do to support them, to keep them in the system and to ensure that they're educated and that they value what America has offered. This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. Reuters contributed to this report. 

For American universities, catering to international students is big business. Each year, more than 1 million come here to study. About a third are from China.But come fall, many may be absent. This week, the Trump administration announced that international students would not be allowed to enter or remain in the US if their colleges and universities are online-only this fall. The move drew swift backlash from higher education administrators and advocates. Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology filed a lawsuit against the government Wednesday to block the measure.Unlike domestic students, international students often pay full tuition — which helps universities to fund scholarships and their general operations. International students injected nearly $45 billion into the US economy in 2018. For some international students, remote learning could mean attending classes in the middle of the night, dealing with spotty or no internet access, losing funding contingent on teaching, or having to stop participating in research. Some are considering taking time off or leaving their programs entirely.Frank Wu, president of Queens College in New York, has written about the US government's complicated relationship with students from China. He joined The World's host Carol Hills for a conversation on the Trump administration's new guidance and its impact on international students in the US. Related: Universities scramble to help international universities stay in US after new visa restrictions Carol Hills: Frank, how do you interpret this move by the Trump administration? Is it about politics or public health? Frank Wu: It's about everything. Nothing happens in a vacuum. Even before this, there was suspicion and statements, including by the president himself, that almost all students coming from China are spies. That was said by the president at a private dinner. And it made the news, but the story didn't stick, which was just one of many things that are said along similar lines. About 350,000 students per year have been coming from China. That's pre-pandemic. So they're the biggest part of the international student population. But there is a public health piece to this. I mean, one could say that you're working on the basis of public health if you're restricting students from overseas from coming to the US.  What's your sense of that? Oh, absolutely. That probably isn't the reason, because at the same time this ban on foreign students was announced, the president said he would pressure states to pressure schools, including colleges, to reopen. So, it doesn't make sense to say, well, let's have everyone reopen, but then let's keep out people from places with lower rates of the coronavirus. Do you think many Chinese students enrolled at American universities will just say, "Forget it, I'll enroll in a university in Asia or Europe instead"? That's already happened. For many international students, the United Kingdom looks very popular, or just staying home. We face a real risk of a reverse brain drain. So, I'm an American. I was born here in the United States, grew up in Detroit. My parents, they were born in China. They grew up in Taiwan, and they came to the United States in the 1960s, that bygone era when America was welcoming people. And America invested in them. They didn't just come. They came as scholarship students. America wanted to recruit them. It was a good investment because my parents became citizens, taxpayers, contributors. My family has staked its fortunes on this side of the Pacific Ocean. It's pretty clear you interpret this move by the Trump administration as a move against China and Chinese students. What does the US lose if many of these students decide to go to another university and not wait it out for trying to finish at a US university? America risks losing its competitive advantage. What we have is freedom and opportunity — and that attracts the most talented from everywhere else. Imagine if everyone of Chinese descent just vanished overnight. What would happen to the physics department at most universities? What would happen in Silicon Valley? What we risk losing is the talent that we've been able to recruit that has driven American entrepreneurial activity, scientific research and progress. As president of Queens College in New York, how are you responding to these new guidelines on international students? The chancellor [Félix V. Matos Rodríguez] of the CUNY system — we're part of a system — issued a powerful statement as soon as the guidelines came out saying that this is bad, not just for our students, it's bad for our institution. And I stand with him. We want to support all of our students regardless of their identity. We want to provide a high-quality, affordable education. Do you have students who are directly affected by these new guidelines? We're taking a look. I am sure we have students who could be affected. We're looking at everything that we can do to support them, to keep them in the system and to ensure that they're educated and that they value what America has offered. This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. Reuters contributed to this report. 

After the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union in 2016, large industries have struggled to handle the ramifications of the upcoming Brexit. One affected industry that does not get much coverage is prostitution.Laura Watson is the spokesperson for the English Collective of Prostitutes in London. She spoke with The World's Carol Hills about what Brexit has meant for the numerous foreign prostitutes residing in the UK and what her organization is doing to help foreign sex workers who are being unfairly threatened and deported from around the country. Laura Watson: We are a sex worker organization based here in the UK, but we have an international network, including a sister organization in San Francisco. We also campaign for alternatives to prostitution, so that nobody is forced into it if they don't want to be. We campaign for decriminalization and the removal of the prostitution laws, so that sex workers can work together for safety, which we currently cannot do. Police are going around very regularly threatening women with arrest for prostitution for just working together with a friend. Women are having to move around a lot more and are running from the police. Therefore, it's very hard to establish basic safety, such as CCTV. It's a pretty scary time to be working.Carol Hills: Is there a way to put simply what rights sex workers in Britain have, whether British or non-British?Sex workers have the rights that other people have. For example, you don't have to let the police in if they don't have a warrant and you don't have to give the police a statement. It's legal to work as a sex worker, but it's illegal to work with somebody else and it's illegal to loiter and solicit on the street. To be working legally, you can work from premises, but you have to be completely on your own. Women don't want to work in that way. It's a very scary way to work. You're completely isolated.Related: After seven years in the Dublin sex trade, Rachel Moran says prostitution is always abuse.Your group recently put out a brief very memorably called "Sex workers are getting screwed by Brexit." How?We had a lot of women coming to us from Europe, mostly from Eastern Europe. In fact, mostly Romanian women who were working in the UK consensually and independently and wanted to keep on working but were being harassed by the police constantly for arrest and deportation.So is your sense that police in the UK are using pro-Brexit sentiment and the feelings around those who support Brexit to crack down on non-British prostitutes, in this case Romanian, as just an extension of anti-foreigner feeling?It certainly feels like that way to us and we do have some evidence that suggests that. We saw a number of women coming to us with cases including threats of deportation and racist abuse from police and from immigration officers.Related: A Dutch brothel where women work for themselves.Have you been able to prevent any of the women you represent from getting deported?Yes, we have, and many women did appeal their deportation orders because they couldn't go home or didn't want to go home and this was their home. We did appeal many of those specifically on the grounds that women were exercising their treaty rights in other ways, like that they were students or working in another job and that's how women have won the right to stay here. We have had some success and we hope that this dossier gets the message out there and leads to more success in stopping deportations.This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity. 

Fans of the Vancouver Whitecaps, a professional soccer club in Canada, are walking out on their team during games. They’re angry with the club for the way it’s handled abuse allegations against a former coach, which date back to 2008.At the time, members of the Whitecaps’ women’s team said their coach, Bob Birarda, behaved inappropriately and sent players sexually charged text messages.The allegations resurfaced recently after former Whitecaps player Ciara McCormack wrote about her own experience in a blog post.The World’s Carol Hills asked her what caused her to come forward again now.Ciara McCormack: The CBC did a big story about abuse in sport. And I think for me, that was the first time that I saw it being spoken about and recognized in Canadian society. I was asked to go on a TV show around this article and ask questions and ask experts about if national sport organizations could properly investigate themselves. The answers were so, I thought, subpar, in terms of saying things like, "Oh, we've got policies on our website," and all this kind of stuff that I knew didn't work. All the people that are involved with the Whitecaps, like [team president] Bob Leonarduzzi, [chief operating officer] Rachel Lewis, people that were involved in our situation in 2008, were still there. And just feeling that it's the same situation for players. There was a situation in 2017 that a mom was on the news talking about how her son had been assaulted and how the Whitecaps tried to handle it internally, which was sort of the same protocol. So, I think it was just a combination of knowing all the factors were the same.Carol Hills:  So, just to be clear, in 2008 no one went to team officials. So, the charges have happened now in 2019. Am I correct in that?No. So, things have come out, obviously, since I've written the blog — lots people have stepped forward. Our manager with the Whitecaps at the time went on record in the media in Vancouver to say that she went to the Whitecaps management numerous times with concerns as an adult in the situation. So, they were well aware that this was going on but not really doing anything about it. There was an investigation that they told us was handled by a third-party ombudsman. But since then, it has come out that it was actually a lawyer that they hired. They never interviewed the girls on the team that experienced those things. So, all this has been coming out since.So, how has the current Whitecaps management handled these allegations as of your blog and as of the current news media cycle that's focusing on it?I think the strategy seemed to be, in the beginning, they thought this was just going to go away. Nobody reached out to us. It was just all very, very generic statements.That statement we refer to, it said, “The club holds itself accountable for creating a respectful, progressive workplace for all staff and players, that club players have access to an ombudsperson to share information on a confidential basis and that, in this case, that ombudsperson had no recommendations for further action.”Now, let's talk about Bob Birarda, the coach at the center of this. What is he doing at this point? What's his situation?At this point, he hasn't been charged, which I think is an important thing to say. He hasn't commented publicly.Is he coaching women's soccer currently?He was actually coaching right up till the day after my blog. He was suspended from his club. He's been on the field essentially three months after he was let go by the Canadian Soccer Association and the Whitecaps. He was back on the field coaching teenage girls because there wasn't anything publicly that was said that could have made a club do anything about it from a technical standpoint. Since then, he's been suspended from his club, but he still has his coaching license. The Canadian Soccer Association, or BC Soccer, as far as I know, haven't suspended his coaching license.Was he let go from the Whitecaps because of this controversy?From what we were told, yes. The timing of it was six weeks before the World Cup, they had won the CONCACAF [tournament] and beaten the US. So, the team was playing well on the field. We were told behind the scenes that he was let go because of this, but it was announced publicly as a mutual decision and the Canadian Soccer Association went as far to say in their statement that they wished him the best of luck in the future.How do you feel about Whitecaps fans, I mean fans of the men's Major League Soccer team, supporting you so publicly by staging walkouts during soccer games?I mean, it's been incredible and not something I think that any of us were expecting. Change needs to happen. It can't just be the group that had something happen to [it], it has to be other people stepping forward. I've been so inspired by them getting involved in this.Ciara McCormack played for the Vancouver Whitecaps soccer team in 2008 and she's one of the players who allege inappropriate behavior by former coach Bob Birada.This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.

Globally, people are living longer. What are the most compelling ways to ensure a sustainably healthy life? In this exciting live-streamed event, world-renowned author and speaker, Deepak Chopra, discussed the important connections between mind, immunity, genes and body. Dr. Chopra explored how chronic stress and inflammation can undermine immunity and health, ultimately seeking to empower people who wish to nurture their wellbeing over their lifetimes. He also discussed how these insights play out within public health, particularly as individuals and societies cope with epidemics, environmental threats, superbugs, aging and other challenges. He included takeaways from his new book, The Healing Self: A Revolutionary New Plan to Supercharge Your Immunity and Stay Well for Life, co-authored with esteemed Harvard neurology professor Rudolph Tanzi. This special Forum presentation featured Dr. Chopra in conversation with The World's Carol Hills, following some brief remarks. Dr. Michelle Williams, Dean of the Harvard Chan School, welcomed the audience and introduced the speaker. This Forum event was presented jointly with PRI's The World & WGBH on September 12, 2018. Watch the entire Forum series: https://theforum.sph.harvard.edu/

Six months after Hurricane Maria devastated Puerto Rico, a panel of experts assessed persistent public health challenges on the island and the outlook for long-term recovery. Power restoration, health care coordination, and medical services delivery on the island are just some of the pressing issues the panelists explored. They discussed the potential threats of extreme hurricanes more broadly, noting that 2017 was one of the most destructive seasons on record. What can be done to better prepare and respond to killer storms, and to build resiliency to combat such disasters? How can the public and private sectors work together? And what have we learned generally from past hurricanes - and specifically from ongoing efforts in Puerto Rico - to meet the many challenges ahead? This Forum event was presented jointly with PRI's The World & WGBH on Friday, March 9, 2018. Watch the entire series at ForumHSPH.org.

“Lose belly fat.” “Build muscle.” “Lower your cholesterol.” “Improve your sex drive.” Browse the shelves of any supermarket or pharmacy, and you will find dietary supplements that promise to do all this, and more. Supplements are a multi-billion-dollar business, and today more than half of American adults take them, many at the advice of their doctors. But dietary supplements can have real risks. They are not required by federal law to be proven safe “to the FDA's satisfaction” before hitting the market, raising concern among critics about a perceived lack of safety oversight and consumer education. Using the latest science as the basis for discussion, Forum experts examined the risks and benefits of supplements. How effective are they? What about dosages — or interactions with prescription medications? Should supplements be subject to more stringent rules and tests? What role should doctors, pharmacists, and drugstores have in helping consumers make safe, educated choices about supplements? This panel attempted to help sort the facts about supplements and health. Part of The Dr. Lawrence H. and Roberta Cohn Forums, this event was presented jointly with PRI's The World & WGBH on May 11, 2017. Watch the entire series at ForumHSPH.org.

More than 30 million Americans — women and men, children and adults — grapple with eating disorders. These complex illnesses, which include anorexia, bulimia, and binge eating disorder, severely undermine health and cost lives. This event explored the many dimensions to eating disorders, including their biological bases, risk factors and treatment options. What role does body image play, and how do industries, such as fashion and advertising, often promulgate unrealistic societal standards of beauty? How might women and girls, in particular, be affected by such pressure? And what's to be done? For example, would enacting legislation that requires minimum BMIs for models, or requiring disclosures of digitally altered ads, help? This panel included expertise in psychiatry, children's health, policy and eating disorders prevention. Part of The Dr. Lawrence H. and Roberta Cohn Forums, this event was presented September 20, 2016 in Collaboration with PRI's The World and WGBH. Watch the entire series from The Forum at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health at www.ForumHSPH.org.

A series of terrorist attacks — including recent bombings in Belgium — has shaken the public's sense of security as they go about the most mundane tasks of daily life. Images of carnage at subway stations, restaurants, workplaces, concerts and sporting events have flashed across the world's social media and traditional news outlets. Afterwards, questions inevitably surface about what could have been done to prevent attacks in the first place, while people are encouraged to carry on with their usual lives. But has the shadow of terrorism become part of that “new normal” and, if so, what are the public health implications? This Forum — which took place a week after the 3rd anniversary of the Boston Marathon bombings — asked what makes a society resilient in the face of attacks or perceived threats. Experts in homeland security, psychological resiliency, crisis leadership, and disaster preparedness and response participated. Presented April 25, 2016, in Collaboration with PRI's The World & WGBH. Watch the entire series from The Forum at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health at www.ForumHSPH.org.

1. Abre los ojos - Los Mustangs (60s) 2. Un hombre llorará - Los Kiriaps (60s) 3. Promesa - La Pita Vieja (90s) 4. Rumba Rumbero - Hielo Ardiente (70s) 5. Abriendo Camino - La Banda del Sol (70s) 6. Songs I wrote about you - Carol Hills (2011) 7. Renee de Marie - Corimbo (70s) 8. Figitiva - Sergio de El Salvador (fin 70s) 9. Indoamerica - Simiente (ini 80s) 10. Tarabadiri - Simiente (ini 80s) 11. Luna - Ovni (mid 80s) 12. Pellejo - Fiebre Amarilla (70s) 13. Tu crees en mi - Los Vikings (60s) 14. Vendedor de sueños - Broncco/B-Rock (fin80s) 15. Ya no estas aqui - Broncco/B-Rock (fin80s) 16. En el reino de la rosa - Ovni (mid80s) 17. Vuelve a mi - Prisma (ini90s) 18. No queria perderte - IAS(ini90s) 19. Discurso de amor - Signo Azul(ini90s) 20. Amanecer - Crisol(ini90s) 21. Porque llorar - Los Beats (70s) 22. London Tea - Akumal (2008) 23. No volveras - Sobre tierra (ini90s) 24. Hacer nuestro el universo - Prueba de sonido (ini90s) 25. Que tonto es el amor - Roberto Salamanca (fin80s) 26. Mermelada de tristeza - Ricks&Parker (ini90s) 27. Viento de enero - Jenna Jacobsen (mid90s) 28. Oscuridad - Adrenalina (mid90s) 29. La MAldita - Adrenalina (mid90s) 30. Abajo del agua - Nativa Geranio (mid90s) 31. Detengan la guerra - Anastasio y los del monte (fin90s) 32. Voy a matar la soledad - Juan Mejia (fin2010) 33. Can't stop moving - Frigüey (2013) 34. Sin Fronteras - Adhesivo (2013) 35. Hombre en trance - El Atico (2011) 36. El camino de mi vida - Insomnio (2009) 37. Entonces - La Cosa Encantada (2013) 38. Kitsch en C - Cartas a Felice (2014) 39. El viaje - Polly Class (2012) 40. Xendra - Akumal (2008)