World

In the cold war of contemporary identity politics, it might seem strange that the only flash of heat has come in the battle over the rights of transgender women. Clashes between trans activists and radical feminists have been violent – metaphorically and literally. At Speakers’ Corner in Hyde Park last fall, in an unprovoked attack, a trans activist jumped and beat a feminist – I know, because I was present and recorded the footage of the attack that went viral. More recently, in Channel 4’s Genderquake: The Debate aggressive feminist hecklers threw vicious insults at the trans women speakers in the panel. The animosity and emotional investment in the debate

Never does the disdain for state education become more apparent than when the conversation turns to Oxford and Cambridge admissions. Not from the distinguished universities themselves, mind you, who, despite what the media might have you believe, welcome all applicants regardless of their background. But from our political classes, particularly those on the left, who seem to believe state school pupils are so universally hopeless they can’t get in without demanding the universities lower the bar. Politicians such as David Lammy, whose obsession with Oxbridge knows no bounds, demand changes to the Oxford and Cambridge admissions system – such as moving from collegiate to centralised admissions – because it is

Happy GDPR week everyone! This Friday, the General Data Protection Regulation comes into force, the most ambitious data privacy ruling since, well, ever. I’m not going to go through the specifics – there are plenty of vastly overpriced seminars for that – but it’s basically about giving EU citizens more rights and control over their personal information, info on how and why it’s being collected and used, and the chance to opt out if they want. Some of this was already in law – but now there are monster fines if companies don’t comply.  You will probably know it from those endless emails. Hundreds of them, from places and people you’d completely forgotten. All of them cajoling, begging or pleading for you to ‘stay in touch’ or ‘to never let go’. They’re being sent because

‘Trump Make Israel Great’ reads the banner on the deserted hotel next to the new American embassy in Jerusalem. Unlike most of the world population, Israelis regard the US President as a big improvement on Barack Obama. In government, his decision to move the embassy here from Tel Aviv has elevated him to near godlike status. ‘We are very lucky that the strongest kid in the classroom is on our side in this crazy school,’ is how Yoav Galant, Israel’s housing minister, puts it. There is evidence for Trumpophilia all over the place. Signs proclaiming the US President a ‘friend of Zion’ are dotted around the Holy City and ‘God Bless

Gaza has a galvanising effect on Europeans. Jeremy Corbyn, for example, appeared to have no consolatory words for France after last week’s Islamist knife attack in Paris, yet on Monday he posted messages on Twitter and Facebook expressing his disgust with Israel. Likewise in France, the far-left, curiously quiet whenever there’s a terrorist attack on their patch, have this week staged protests in Lyon, Marseille, Rouen, Paris and Bordeaux to voice their opposition to Israel’s killing of 62 Palestinians, the victims including several children and fifty members of Hamas, an EU-designated terror organisation. But what do the protestors in France hope to achieve? Emmanuel Macron reportedly “condemned the violence and underlined

It was a moment to cherish, not to spoil. But I wasn’t the only one at the grand Charlemagne prize ceremony for Emmanuel Macron in Aix-la-Chapelle last week to wonder if the French President has already accepted that the federalist game is up. The medal is awarded for services to the cause of European unification, a cause that Macron has done his best to advance. But first the Brits bailed out. Then the Hungarians and Poles dissented. Now Italy looks set to become the first of the EU’s six founding states with a government abandoning the federalist project. Angela Merkel and her German conservatives had poured cold water on Macron’s idea

Oh Israel, why must you do it? Why must you make such an almighty balagan of these things? Hamas is out to provoke you and you are evidently in the market for provocation. Would it kill you to step back and find a way of resolving a crisis that doesn’t involve dead Palestinians and international censure? You could have dispersed the crowds without opening fire on them. You could have used non-lethal rounds. ‘T’nu L’Tzahal L’Natzeach’ is fair enough when you’re bombing Hamas installations but these were unarmed protestors. If you haven’t spent the past few days with these thoughts rattling around your head, you are a stauncher Zionist than

The International Studies Association (ISA) meeting in San Francisco is a chance for academics the world over to come together. A few years back, I was voted ISA “distinguished scholar of the year.” But I’ll remember this year’s meeting for a different reason. Heading back to my hotel room in a crowded lift one day, the male attendant asked people to shout out their floors so he could press the relevant buttons; in response, I said: “ladies lingerie.” Several days later, I learned that a fellow member of the ISA had filed a complaint against me and that I had been referred to its ethics committee. In an attempt to resolve matters, I

Was it, do you reckon, a felicitous birthday present from the Eurovision judges for Israel, with Netta standing in, a bit incongruously, for a 70-year old state? If so, it’s a tribute to the way that a Middle Eastern country actually counts as European to at least the same extent as Turkey just across the Bosphorus – actually probably more so. Israel seems like an intelligible outpost of our kind of culture and values in what now is the Muslim world. If Netta is Israel, she’s a terrifically attractive embodiment of its most appealing aspect; way more than the country’s embarrassing president. She’s its avant garde side: an Orthodox Jew

The point behind the argument about the Iran nuclear deal goes beyond precise nuclear facts. It is like the row over SALT II when Ronald Reagan succeeded Jimmy Carter as US President in 1981. SALT (the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty) was not formally junked, but it did not operate because, after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan at the end of 1979, the Americans felt the necessary trust was absent. Better times, including the coming of Mikhail Gorbachev, allowed Reagan to pursue negotiations which culminated (under his successor, the first George Bush) in START I (the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) being signed in 1991. By then, the United States and its

The point behind the argument about the Iran nuclear deal goes beyond precise nuclear facts. It is like the row over SALT II when Ronald Reagan succeeded Jimmy Carter as US President in 1981. SALT (the Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty) was not formally junked, but it did not operate because, after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan at the end of 1979, the Americans felt the necessary trust was absent. Better times, including the coming of Mikhail Gorbachev, allowed Reagan to pursue negotiations which culminated (under his successor, the first George Bush) in START I (the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty) being signed in 1991. By then, the United States and its