Published
on
By
Authors: Ash Narain Roy and Jisha Jacob*
The Nobel Prize, says the 2022 literature laureate Annie Ernaux, is an institution “for men.” She further says that “speech has almost always been monopolised by men.” If even the hallowed Nobel Prize is still “bound to traditions” and “is perhaps more masculine,” as the French writer contends, what about the world of science and big tech?
The tech industry remains a male bastion. Citing the abysmally low percentage of female employees, the New York Times says, that the doors to the technology field “remain virtually closed to women.” The Los Angeles Times has similar observations about sexism in Silicon Valley. It says, the tech industry “lags decades behind other industries in its treatment of women.”
The big tech is far worse. Elon Musk, the new Twitter boss, often mocks advocates of the LGBT+ community. It is anybody’s guess where women will find themselves in his scheme of things. He would perhaps expect women to “follow the white rabbit.” (It is assumed if you follow the white rabbit, it will ultimately lead you to the truth). Or you may enter an alternate world. Musk isn’t playing “four-dimensional chess,” he is defending “the future of civilisation”!
Emily Chang in her book, Brotopia: Breaking Up the Boys’ Club of Silicon Valley, says that the big tech industry “has self-selected for men: first, anti-social nerds, then, self-confident and risk-taking bros.” No wonder therefore, “deep-rooted sexism prevails” in their universe and their meetings in hot tubs and at strip clubs are considered small ‘pecados’.
That women are under-represented and hold far fewer organisational positions in big tech companies like Meta, Google, Apple, Amazon and Microsoft is an open secret. As Francine Bermen and Jeniffer Lundquist say, a large number of high-profile whistleblowers are women. “Frances Haugen exposed personal data exploitation at Meta, Timnit Gebru and Rebecca Rivers challenged Google on ethics and AI issues, and Janneke Parrish raised concerns about a discriminatory work culture at Apple, among others.” (Bermen, Francine and Jeniffer Lundquist, 2022)
“Why can’t a woman be like a man” has been a grumbling refrain in most walks of life. Literature, science, films, politics have all perpetuated such perceptions. In the footnote of his famous lecture, “The two cultures and the scientific revolution,” eminent British scientist C.P. Snow said that since childhood women are given training to be a “good wife” and a “good mother.” He further said that women lack training to become a good scientist or a physicist. But he ended up saying “whatever we say, we don’t regard women as suitable for scientific careers” for which he would have been heavily trolled today. (Snow 1959) Technology is widely considered a male- dominated industry. Psychologist Janet Morahan-Martin of Bryant University explains that men are more comfortable using a computer since childhood than women. This exposure to technology in the early stage of their lives has led to the masculinization of computer culture.
Big tech and masculinity
What is masculinity? Does it really have to do anything with technology? In a larger sense, masculinity refers to how men perceive themselves. It is a manner of thinking and being that is socially formed. Victor J. Seidler of University of London offers an interesting explanation positing that men have assumed rationality as masculine based on a “rationality appropriated from and denied to others.” Men have made it a basis of male power “affecting what men see, hear and regard as important.” Brian Easlea, in his book Fathering the Unthinkable: Masculinity, Scientists, and the Nuclear Arms Race, argues that men’s propensity for science was mostly a “compensatory mechanism” for their inability to procreate and their vulnerability on the sexual level. (Easlea 1983)
Power and masculinity go hand in hand. The idea of masculinity is often associated with gaining increasingly greater power. Men now stand at the top of the technological pyramid thanks to this power. It appears that using power is fundamentally unbalanced. Men unquestionably make the important decisions. Whenever scientists are mentioned, “men” is always used as the pronoun. For instance, C.P. Snow referred to members of scientific communities as “men of science.” Men are thus at the top of the tech pyramid.
Lucie Greene, author of Silicon States: The Power of Politics of Big Tech and What It Means for our Future, cites the examples of Siri, Alexa, and all the verbal subservient assistants which normalize sexism. Twitter has an atrocious record of failing to address misogyny. Amnesty International has found women’s experience on Twitter as “toxic.” Women continue to be the victims of “digital violence.”
According to one source, women roughly represent about 25 % of technology workforce. When it comes to senior corporate leadership positions, the less said, the better. Only 8.8% of Fortune 500 CEOs are women and less than 1% of Fortune 500 CEOs are women.
The Google UK: Gender Pay Report 2018 says that there are more males than women working at Google in top leadership positions and technical occupations, Due to the underrepresentation of women in senior leadership, technical and engineering roles, and roles with a lengthy tenure, the percentage gaps persist in the majority of the leading tech businesses. Men are more likely than women to fill senior positions. Only four women appear on a random Google search of the top 48 or so tech companies.
Stereotypically gendered technology
The masculinization has produced what is known as stereotypically gendered technology. It is crucial that women work in an industry that is predominately male. Who designs a product and who stands to gain from it should be taken into consideration when it is designed. Men may design a product that is primarily used by women, which could result in subpar design. It might not fit the specifications set forth for technology that women can use. An average-height woman, for instance, cannot reach the bottom of a washing machine tub to pull the items out. Another dated example is the fact that since the 1970s, the crash test dummies used to test car safety have been modelled on men for an average male weight and height. It has only now been rectified. This digital world needs more female designers because it is mostly created by men for men.
Ironically, the early programmers were not men, but women. The 1940s saw computer operation and programming as women’s space. By the 1960s when computing gained prominence, men displaced women who were experts and as Marie Hicks states in her book, Programmed Inequality, the space was altered from a “feminized field of endeavour” to a “distinctly masculine image”. (Hicks 2018)
As per the data provided by Planet Money: NPR, women’s presence in various fields clearly shows that, while medicine, law, and physical sciences saw a significant rise in the number of female students enrolling after 1984, science and technology have seen a sharp decline in the number of female students. There was a perceptible increase between 1975 and 1984, but the trend did not last long as women were ejected from cyberspace.
Women had to learn how to utilise the room-sized supercomputers that the US employed to decipher codes during World War II. A person who programmed the first general-purpose electronic computer during the Second World War was known as a “computer.” Women were portrayed as confident, attractive, and ready to do their part to win the war. They were encouraged to join the workforce by glorifying and glamorizing the role of the working women.
Women made up a significant portion of the tech workforce throughout the World War Two and up until the 1960s. They made important contributions to science and technology.
STEM education’s impact
Women make up approximately 43% of all STEM (Science, technology, engineering, mathematics) graduates in India, one of the highest percentages in the world, but just 14% of scientists, engineers, and technicians in universities and research-development organisations. (Economic Times 2022) The underrepresentation of women in STEM fields is a problem around the world but India’s case is a curious one, despite an increase in the number of female STEM students each year, these higher education levels have not led to greater employment opportunities.
Lack of job opportunities has prompted them to turn to other avenues. Clinical psychologist Joy Harris describes such a phenomenon as “learned technological helplessness”. (Harris 2008)
Studies have shown that young girls would decide if they were good at math or science by the age of 8 – 10 years of age. It is critical to provide them the right opportunities at that young age.
The data further shows that disparity becomes acute at the undergraduate level. They prefer psychology, biological and social sciences over engineering (22%), computer science (20%), and physics (21%). Similarly in the STEM workforce, women show not much interest as compared to men. They have a very low share in the computer and mathematical sciences (26%), and engineering (16%).
Post- COVID era
Even in normal times, women bear what sociologist Arlie Hochschild calls “the double burden.” While they work for a living, they do significant amount of unpaid household work. According to a survey made in 2022, as many as 58% of Indian women lost their employment mostly due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Women were driven away from the corporate sector thanks to the rise in home duties. (Sethi 2022) This was also the time where people showed a greater dependence on technology than ever. Most jobs demanded workers to be tech-savvy. The gender gap in the economy also worsened because of the pandemic.
Rising domestic violence further accentuated the disparity. According to one source, 1 in 3 women worldwide experienced physical or sexual abuse at the hands of an intimate relationship. As a result, women were experiencing assault and looking for employment options. (UN Women: Gender equality matters in COVID -19 response)
During the worst phase of Covid and after, some people began to use social media to share their daily emotions, which allowed them to connect with others who share their perspectives. According to Statista portal, as of January 2022, Snapchat had more female users, while platforms like Facebook, LinkedIn and Twitter had more male users than female. According to another source, men use LinkedIn more often as compared to women which are 54% and 44% respectively.
The active presence of women on the social media platforms have made them vulnerable to abuses and threats of various kinds.
Online gender-based violence (OGBV) is perpetrated by using technology or a digital interface -specifically the internet or smart devices. Cyber stalking, zoom bombing, identity theft, online threats, blackmailing and cyber flashing are familiar forms of online gender-based violence. According to the toolkit, 85% of women globally face online gender – based violence. 88% of women in Asia and the Pacific have experienced OGBV. (Toolkit: 30 for 2030 UN Women 2022)
A survey on online violence against women by the Amnesty International suggests that 70% of the women who experienced some forms of online harassment have altered how they use social media, and a third of them claim they no longer express their thoughts on certain topics.
Nordic exceptionalism?
Nordic countries score higher than others on gender equality parameters. While Sweden gets top score in perceptions of gender equality, Norway tops all other nations in terms of income equality. This has been possible as the Nordic nations have established a higher degree of political consensus around issues like social equality and social solidarity. They pay women in technology more than others. As the 2018 OECD report, “Is the last mile the longest? Economic gains from gender equality in Nordic countries” notes, it is this region’s past improvements in gender equality in employment that have “contributed to economic growth.” The Nordic nations’ global reputation notwithstanding, they continue to have gender gaps in technology. Anneli Häyren, a researcher at the Centre for Gender Research at Uppsala University, Sweden, points out that there exists an idea of being gender equal, but “we have a long way to go before we are gender equal.”
The Nordic Gender Effect at Work, a report from the Nordic Council of Ministers, an advisory group, further notes that there has been “a disturbing pattern” in businesses: “the higher up the hierarchy you look, the more men you notice.” This report raises serious concerns about the gender gap. It is thus apparent that even in societies where gender equality is the norm, women and other different gender groupings may not necessarily be equally represented in all sectors, specially technology.
Some academics contend that women are less likely to pursue degrees in STEM even in countries where there is already a culture of gender equality. This behavioural pattern involves teaching topics to girls when they are still very young. It has come to surprise many like University of Essex professor Gijsbert Stoet who says, “It is a paradox…. nobody would have expected this to be the reality of our time”.
Maddy Savage’s write-up for the BBCwebsite, “the paradox of working for the world’s most equal countries,” appears puzzling. Even in Denmark, the most inclusive country in the world, “mainly white males sit at the top of many of the best-known corporations.” One explanation is that women prefer to work in public sector which limits the pool available for top private sector roles.
Engineers and IT specialists are already in short supply in the Nordic labour market. According to a study, it will soon be necessary to solve the problem because new technology will be created practically entirely by men. In the Nordic labour market, women have established themselves in the service industry. According to a survey, women have benefited most from the region’s service industry, which accounts for 80% of all employment.
Conclusion
Women in the tech sector continue to face toxic and gendered environment. The so-called male technical prowess as an organising principle marks the work culture. As the UN’s Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific points out, the existing under-representation of women in the technology industry is reinforcing social inequalities. “It is meaningless to talk about technological advancements if half of the population is being left behind.”
It is ironic that such gender inequalities should exist while the world embarks on the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Another worrying trend is that the Covid -19 pandemic impacted men and women differently “exacerbating current asymmetries and risking a reversal of progress made towards closing the gender gap.” Gender stereotypes have led to a gendered division of labour in the tech industry.
In 2021, the percentage of women in CEO positions globally was a mere 5.5 % and in STEM fields, it was only around 3 %. A way forward would be women’s larger presence in the STEM careers. That will not only lower the untenable existing disparities, it will embolden other women to follow suit.
Nalini Malani, a contemporary Indian artist whose creative works reflect pressing feminist issues, says that though science and technology have given us so much allowing us to talk to each other over oceans, “the human psyche hasn’t kept abreast.” However, Malani is confident that “the future is female’ and the world needs the instinctual knowledge of the female side of our brains, “otherwise we are doomed.”
Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, has announced that from February 2023 teenagers will only receive ads based on their age and location. It has also announced that it will be “removing gender as a targeting option.” It is perhaps too late, too little but it is a welcome move. If the big tech companies don’t mend their ways, they will be blamed for what Churchill chastised the Balkans: “they produce more history than they can consume.” They will be judged by the new generation for showing their own shame.
*Jisha Jacob has done Masters in Political Science from University of Delhi
Big Data is watching you, and Big brother is controlling you
Ash Narain Roy did his Ph.D. in Latin American Studies , Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi. He was a Visiting Scholar at El Colegio de Mexico, Mexico City for over four years in the 1980s. He later worked as Assistant Editor, Hindustan Times, Delhi. He is author of several books including The Third World in the Age of Globalisation which analyses Latin America’s peculiar traits which distinguishes it from Asia and Africa. He is currently Director, Institute of Social Sciences, Delhi
Induction of Women in Indian Armed Forces
Investment and Innovation in Agriculture, Education and Energy Will Drive Jobs and Growth
African-American Diaspora Engagement at the Core of U.S.-African Relations in Multipolar World
Indonesian women entrepreneurs adapt to a changing world
Celebrating women fighting for their rights
Hosting the First Finland’s Female President
Published
on
By
Authors: Md. Sohrab Hossen and Md. Obaidullah
Big brother is watching you” is a repeated phrase used throughout the whole novel 1984 by George Orwell to characterise the ruler of Oceania, a totalitarian society in which the governing party, Ingsoc, has complete control over the public “for its own sake.” Every inhabitant in the society Orwell depicts is always being watched by the government, mostly through telescreens. It was the imagination of Orwell of the future London of 1984, as the book was published in 1949.
What can we say now? Should we change the phrase, or is it still valid? I would say “No”! We would rather say, “Big Brother is controlling you”. How is it so? Moreover, even if it is, why should you care?
In recent years, with the tremendous advances in every field of science and technology, some issues of personal freedom, choice of expression etc., have emerged. Big data is likely watching you, or the algorithm knows your google search history. Not only modern technologies such as 5G, AI, machine learning, big data, IoT, blockchain, cloud computing, virtual reality, and cybersecurity have been transporting significant advances in the quality of life and experience of homo sapiens, but also these sophisticated techs have brought many ominous complications.
These technologies may pose a threat to liberal democracy, and the government can use technologies to control and monitor people all the time. Dictators may use IT to exercise their illegitimate power or to violate citizens’ rights.
While the traditional dictatorship system was characterised by a single leader or group of leaders who used military power to dominate mass people, there was no scope for political pluralism and freedom of voice; big data and the advancement of AI enable the processing of massive amounts of data, which might make a centralised system. Thus, the fascinating inventions of science, such as AI and robotics, might be used to help tyrants achieve their goals by just writing a line of code. Robots do not hesitate to carry out commands. If it were the robot’s action, the Military coup attempted in Turkey against the Erdoğan government on 15 July 2016 could be successful.
Furthermore, robust surveillance algorithms can be the worst thing ever to happen to humanity if used by an authoritarian ruler. For example, in Palestine, already today, Palestinians are likely to be monitored by Israeli microphones, cameras, drones, or spy software Pegasus anytime they make a phone call, post anything on Facebook, or travel between cities.
While the Palestinian Authority administers several cities and villages in the West Bank, Israel controls the skies, radios, and the Internet. As a result, it takes a relatively tiny number of Israeli troops to successfully oversee the West Bank’s 2.5 million Palestinians. The same thing is happening in Kashmir, where even during performing Friday prayers at the local mosque, multiple police surveillance drones are seen hovering above them. Furthermore, the children’s unsuccessful attempt to bring down the drones by hurling stones high into the air took place on 23 August 2019. Followingly, it would be an injustice if we did not mention the Chinese IT-backed authoritarianism over the Uyghurs.
The Chinese government uses technology to perfect its censorship mechanisms. An AI system can filter and prevent unfavourable content from the regime. During the Hong Kong protests, the Chinese regime tightened its “Great Firewall,” eliminating subversive content from mainland China’s Internet almost promptly. To prevent opposition members from communicating, organising, or publicising their messages, digital autocracies can limit all citizens’ access to the Internet (or significant portions of it). The government successfully turned off the Internet nationwide during widespread protests in Iran.
Besides, biotechnology advancement is also seen as anti-democratic. Can you imagine a situation when you had a minor operation and someone, maybe the authoritarian ruler, has placed a micro cheap inside you that directly connects your brain and controls your ideology? What if, in this way, you become an active player of a tyrant ruler from a threat to his regime?
Therefore, we have to be careful and aware of our data. We must first be conscious and then careful so that none becomes able to misuse our personal or financial data. We should not disseminate our very personal information on the Internet or social media, yet, night and day, that is what we, homo sapiens, are doing with great enthusiasm. So, halt; otherwise, you lose the war before even you meet your enemy.
Published
on
By
We are living in the era of “Pervasive Robotics,” where robots will be merged into the fabric of day-to-day life as smartphones are today, accomplishing many specialized tasks and often working side-by-side with humans. The robotic revolution will create a future that is more vivid and vibrant than the present. By 2022, robots will have gained such traction that they will be visible on battlefields as military robots, drones, driverless cars, and telepresence robots. Military robots are in the field today. Drones are in the skies, driverless cars are driving on the roads, and telepresence robots are allowing people halfway around the world to see each other over the Internet. However, the expanded structure of robots within the framework of human interaction has raised significant concerns about the meaning of robotic integration into human life. Making a future with customized and ubiquitous robots is a major challenge. Mark Weiser, a chief scientist at Xerox’s Palo Alto Research Center in the 1990s, who is regarded as the architect of so-called ubiquitous computing, said: “The most profound technologies are those that disappear.” “They weave themselves into the fabric of everyday life until they are indistinguishable from it.” Computers have already achieved that type of pervasiveness. Tomorrow, robots will, too.
At home, at work, and at play, robots have the potential to improve our lives. With customized robots in the workplace, new jobs will be created, and existing jobs will be improved. In addition, people will have more time to focus on what they find interesting, meaningful, and exciting. As people commute to work in driverless cars, they will be able to read, respond to e-mails, watch videos, and even nap. A driverless car will drop off one passenger, pick up its next passenger, and coordinate with other self-driving vehicles to reduce traffic and wait times while driving safely and efficiently.
In the future, robots will be a normal part of human lives. However, it is a matter of concern that robots have a need to be ethically as conscious as humans are in the 21st century. Yet the purpose of robotics is not to supersede humans by mechanizing; it is to uncover methods for appliances to aid and collaborate with humans more effectively. Robots are better than humans at many tasks like crunching digits, lifting heavy things, and, in specific contexts, changing positions with accuracy. Humans are better than robots at generalization, abstraction, and imaginative reflection, thanks to their capacity to explain and draw on previous knowledge. By working together, robots and humans can expand and complement each other’s abilities. The future will revolve around the interaction of machines and humans, but at the same time, it can create a dystopia of machines and automation.
We will combat a future in which robots will evaluate the boundaries of our ethical and legal processes with audacity. To meet this challenge, it is critical that intelligent machines and robots acquire the highest level of ethical and regulatory literacy in order to coexist with humans. If we want to survive in a world with robots and machines who behave more and more like humans and who make ever more “personal” choices, then we should urge that robots also be competent to communicate with us about what they learn, how they learn it, and what they desire.
Democracy and capitalism are based on two principles: people must have access to information and the freedom to make choices. In the era of “pervasive robotics,” big data provides a vast quantity of information. Robotic technologies that collect and analyze all types of information about humans without regard for ethical codes and regulations may jeopardize access to validated information and human agency. Automation technologies and human interaction could yield unyielding outcomes in the form of tainted electoral franchises and the anti-democratization of society.
A major shift has occurred in the economic markets. Classical exchanges between customers and companies are based on immediate economic exchanges: customers pay for goods and benefits, and companies deliver them. In the digital economy, however, customers profit more and more from the provision of free services. Corporations yield not by instantly charging buyers but by amassing and then monetizing data about buyers’ behavior, often without their understanding or consent. This type of fundamental data mining has become commonplace. Automation and access to information in the hands of wireless technology and computers have democratized access to information and altered the way people live and think. In the future, robots will expand this digital process further into the physical domain and deeper into everyday life, with outcomes that will be equally profound.
Today, all civil engineers are instructed to study ethics because an inaccurately planned bridge can result in tremendous public damage. Roboticists today face a similar obligation since their inventions are no longer mere academic pursuits. To make robots livable with humans in the future, it is necessary for computer science departments to follow the lead of civil engineering. This is because they must require that every designer and candidate for robotic studies has sufficient training in ethics and sociology.
Published
on
By
Like Ukraine-Russia war, the world is now facing another war, named semiconductor or chip war. The competition between the U.S and China becomes intense for the chip. Semiconductor is an integral part of the electronic and military industry. What are causes behind this war, what is the current situation, what will be the implications in the future and who will win this war is going to be discussed in this article.
Semiconductors, also known as chips, are the materials that have a conductivity between conductors and insulators. The semiconductors can be consisted of pure elements such as germanium or silicon. Semiconductors use in electronic equipments and devices including diodes, transistors, integrated circuits, consumer products like mobile phones, laptops, game consoles, microwaves, cars. Now it is considered as “The new oil” and ” A 21st century horse shoe nail.” Moreover, semiconductors is the core component in the manufacturing industries. The U.S.A, Asian countries like Taiwan, China, South Korea and Japan are the largest semiconductor producers in the world. Taiwan, China, South Korea’s companies account for 87% of the global market. Supply chain uncertainty, Covid-19 pandemic, the increasing demand of consumers that lead to the world in semiconductor war. Especially, the COVID-19 pandemic played a massive and dimension role in this crisis. Industries were failed to meet the supply and demand of the consumer in that climate, semiconductors companies were lagged behind and unstable to cope with the severe demand pressure from various sectors. According to the semiconductor Industry Association, the global semiconductor sales were hoped to be maximized by 20% in 2021. As demand for consumer electronics decreased, the paucity of advanced elements waned rapidly. Hence, the industry is now dealing with intense stock. The automotive chip insufficiency is now struggling to protect the unwavering supplies of chips. In 2022, they were predicted to rise 9%. The declining of semiconductors production will help to lead the production process of the electronic industries in 2023. By the end of the 2027, silicon market is expected to reach USD70 billion and annual growth rate of 5.1% over the next five years.
The United States of America is the semiconductors race leader in the worldwide market whose market share value was at over $200 billion in 2020. They are also a harbinger in the export of semiconductors 50% of the world market.Basically, semiconductors are the top export goods of the United States of America and they invest more than one-fifth of the sales on research and advancement, second only the pharmaceutical business. America still depends on Taiwan for exporting semiconductors. On the other hand, China is now an emerging major participant in the semiconductor race. Its semiconductor industry has been expanding since 2015. The Semiconductor Industry Association hopes China to excel Taiwan by 2030 with a 24% market share and supported by its ” Made in China 2025″ initiative. China has already devoured Taiwan in the semiconductor business during the previous two years. America always wants to halt China but China’s semiconductor industry continuous to advance at the 9%, its annual sales might reach $114 billion by 2024. In order to Taiwan’s geopolitical kismet precarious, both America and China are racing to make their own malignance as well as self-contained in the semiconductor industry. China works for long to catch up America’s advanced technologies and competes in microchip. The rise of techno-nationalism in china will lead to both the competition and conflict with the U.S.
The U.S has recently passed the CHIPS Act that involve Impressive financial support for science and technology because their main goal is to maintain a magnificent, competitive benefits over China. The most panorama controls on chip imitation, the U.S Department of commerce’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) implements. On October 2022, the Biden Administration amplified its controls on the exports of semiconductors associated inputs and equipments to China. On December 6, Biden visited the site of Taiwan semiconductor Manufacturing Co. new plant in Arizona and called a potential project for the U.S chip supply chain.In mid December, The U.S administration included 36 additional Chinese chip makers from entrancing U.S chip technology, including YMTC. Not only 40Billion investment delineates the U.S endeavors to attain hegemon over China in chip industry but also America has stepped to strength entrance to flourished semiconductors technology by Chinese companies. It is now crystalline that America has announced a semiconductor war on China.
Now it is a question of trillion dollars who will win the chip war? Chip war is now a war more than the geopolitical conflict. It is very difficult to determine the winner of the chip war. As the U.S is the global hegemon, some countries will try to make a coalition with the U.S and its allies. The U.S will dominate the semiconductors technology for artificial intelligence and military installation. China takes the conduct in microelectronics like cloud computing and electronic devices. According to some Economists, there will be no winner, only losers will remain. And the ultimate losers are the consumers.
We have passed 2022 with many environmental problems and the impact of a changing climate, natural disasters that cannot be…
The visit of the new Chinese Foreign Minister “Qin Gang” to a number of African countries and Egypt is the…
For most of the past months, the Biden administration has struggled to find ways to ease oil prices, amid the…
Authors: Ash Narain Roy and Jisha Jacob* The Nobel Prize, says the 2022 literature laureate Annie Ernaux, is an institution…
The policy of No First Use (NFU) of nuclear weapons has for long remained central to India’s nuclear doctrine. India…
The gender of an individual is not a hindrance when it comes to applying for a position in the armed…
Authors: Md. Sohrab Hossen and Md. Obaidullah Big brother is watching you” is a repeated phrase used throughout the whole…
Upgrading Bretton Woods: A Case for “Currency Baskets”
Ukraine can be the next Denmark: Zelensky Peace Formula and new territorial realities
Robots and the Future
Peace supporters versus peace breakers on the Lachin Road
South Korean Arms for Canada and Poland: NATO’s Reserve Arsenal for Ukraine?
The Ukraine War: Continuation of U.S. Policies of Containment and Limited War
Will 2023 be a good year for the real estate market in the USA and globally?
Inda’s Defence Diplomacy: An Overview
Copyright © 2021 Modern Diplomacy
