Search

In mid-2020, the World Economic Forum (WEF) announced the Great Reset, an initiative launched to assert, describe, and shape the direction of an epochal transition brought about by the global coronavirus crisis. Rooted in a European tradition of social theory, this article aims to articulate the broader social context of this scenario and pinpoint its implications for management and organization theory. One of these implications is that our fields face a significant risk of co-performing rather than studying the looming “great transformation” from an economy-to a health-dominated society, thus merely replacing one reductionism with another. It follows that what is required are management and organization theories that analyze rather than ride the macro social trends that shape organizations and their environments. The article concludes that if crises are the golden moments of alternative mainstreams, then for those interested in alternatives to the emerging “new normality” the golden moment to develop the next alternative mainstream theories is now.

December 2021 marks the 30th anniversary of the proclamation of Zambia a Christian nation. The leader of the Movement for Multi-party Democracy (MMD) party who came to power in 1991, a convinced Christian F. Chiluba, declared Zambia a Christian nation, arguing that Christianity was then professed by more than 70% of the population and that this was supposed to help the country to get rid of corruption and contribute to its prosperity. The article analyzes the reasons of decision to declare Zambia a Christian nation. It is emphasized that political goals prevailed then over religious ones, since the issue of preserving and strengthening power was high on the political agenda of the ruling MMD party. The economic background is also touched upon: as a pragmatic president Chiluba pursued a policy of economic liberalization and counted on financial assistance from Western countries and international donors. The following Christian presidents L. Mwanawasa, R. Banda and M. Sata used limited Christian rhetoric, but they collaborated with the Church with varying degrees of intensity. At the same time, the provision on the Christian nation in the Constitution was preserved. It is noted that the role of the religious factor in politics increased in the early 2010s. The politicization of religion, primarily Christianity, became apparent during the struggle for power led by the leader of the opposition Patriotic Front party Michael Sata, who was supported by some religious leaders. After Edgar Lungu (party Patriotic Front) came to power in 2015, Zambia was re-proclaimed a Christian nation, which was enshrined in the new edition of the 2016 constitution. At the same time, the country began the political rehabilitation of F. Chiluba, who, after leaving the presidency in 2001, was persecuted for corruption. The campaigns for the 2015 presidential elections and for the 2016 general elections have shown the relevance of the discourse on religion and politics in the political process, primarily in its aspect of the multiple relationships between religion, ethnicity and politics. The article shows that the issue of the proclamation of Zambia a Christian nation remains relevant in Zambian society and among African and Western theologians and researchers whose judgments and conclusions are often polar opposite. The author notes that the realities of the socio-political, socio-economic and cultural life in Zambia do not yet indicate the existence of the declared Christian nation. The high level of corruption, poverty, limited rights of some groups of the population do not correspond to Christian ideals and values and have become serious challenges for the modern Zambian society. The article emphasizes that, unlike a number of other countries south of the Sahara, where competition between Christianity and Islam has intensified in recent years, leading, among other things, to bloody conflicts, Zambia survives this conflict along the axis of competition between different directions of Christianity. The ruling PF’s manifesto for the August 2021 general election contains Christian rhetoric. The document states the PF’s commitment to partnership with the Church, which it recognizes as a key partner in the conversion of Zambians into a Christian nation. Further peaceful development of Zambia depends on a balanced internal policy of the authorities aimed at solving complex socio-economic problems in cooperation with representatives of all religions and their confessions.

Büyük Sıfırlama Covid-19 salgını sonrasında dünya ekonomisini yeniden inşa etme ve kapitalizmi yeniden tasarlama ana fikri etrafında şekillenmektedir. Büyük Sıfırlama yedi ana başlık altında açıklanır. Bunlar; dördüncü sanayi devriminden faydalanma, bölgesel kalkınmayı güçlendirme, küresel işbirliğini canlandırma, sürdürülebilir iş modelleri geliştirme, çevrenin sağlığını iyileştirme, sosyal sözleşmeleri, beceri ve işleri yeniden tasarlama ve ekonomik toparlanmanın şekillendirilmesidir. Büyük Sıfırlama konusunda yapılan açıklamalar genel olarak bu fikri meşrulaştırmaya yoğunlaşmaktadır, ancak bu sıfırlamanın nasıl yapılacağı konusunda net bir yol haritası henüz yayınlanmamıştır. Bu makalede büyük sıfırlamanın bileşenleri incelenecek; makro, mikro ve bireysel sıfırlama açıklanacaktır. Ayrıca erdemli bir kapitalizm türü olarak sunulan paydaş kapitalizminin büyük sıfırlamadaki yeri incelenecek ve büyük sıfırlamaya getirilen eleştiriler değerlendirilecektir. Görüldüğü kadarıyla bu sıfırlama bir kapatıp açma veya yeniden başlatma değildir. Büyük Sıfırlama Covid-19 krizi sırasında yaşanan köklü değişikliklerin tutumlarda, kurumlarda ve tüm ekonomik sistemde ortaya çıkaracağı değişimi anlama ve bu değişimi yönetme çabasıdır., The Great Reset is shaped around the main idea of rebuilding the world economy and redesigning capitalism after the Covid-19 outbreak. The Big Reset is explained under seven main headings. These are; harnessing the fourth industrial revolution, strengthening regional development, revitalizing global cooperation, developing sustainable business models, restoring the health of the environment, redesigning social contracts, skills and jobs, and shaping the economic recovery. Explanations on the Big Reset generally concentrate on legitimizing this idea, but a clear roadmap on how to carry out this reset has not yet been published. This article will examine the components of the big reset; and the reset in macro, micro and individual levels will be explained. In addition, the place of stakeholder capitalism, presented as a virtuous type of capitalism, in the big reset will be examined and the criticisms brought to the big reset will be evaluated. As it turns out, this reset is not a turn-off or restart. The Great Reset is an effort to understand and manage the change in attitudes, institutions and the entire economic system caused by the radical changes experienced during the Covid-19 crisis.

It is high time for a fundamental review of the EU’s strategy towards Russia. After years of fruitless attempts to ‘reset’ relations with Moscow through a kind of engagement that has all too often ended up in appeasement, the EU and its member states should prepare for a long stand-off and put democracy at the centre of the relationship. This means doing better at defending our democracy against hostile interference from the Kremlin, strengthening democratic movements and the rule of law in the EU’s Eastern neighbourhood, supporting Russia’s civil society with more determination and creativity, and mentally preparing for a democratic post-Putin Russia. In short, we have to offer more help to Russia’s democrats and be more confrontational with the Kremlin. All this has to happen in close coordination with our transatlantic allies and as part of a global effort to support democrats and defend democracy against authoritarianism.

New Zealand’s Pacific Reset, a significant shift in New Zealand’s foreign policy towards the Pacific Islands region, was launched in 2018 by the government of Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern. The Pacific Reset emphasises engagement, partnerships, and collaboration, and a greater focus on soft power, public diplomacy and people-to-people measures. It has resulted in an increase in New Zealand public diplomacy in the Pacific, including a new broadcasting initiative, and enhanced domestic public diplomacy. The language and objectives of the Pacific Reset replicate key characteristics of the New Public Diplomacy, which is frequently distinguished from the ‘old’ on the basis of two way engagement. This article argues that whilst the Pacific Reset seeks to reflect the ethos of the New Public Diplomacy, in practice, New Zealand’s Pacific public diplomacy is a mixed bag. In a contested and crowded strategic and public diplomacy environment, putting into practice a New Public Diplomacy demands a greater focus on listening.

The coming decade was supposed to be a decade of action, a period of promoting of a common vision and accelerated execution of the "The Sustainable Development Agenda 2030” adopted in 2015 by the UN General Assembly and addressing 17 priority goals, from zero hunger and poverty to effective curbing of climate change. However, the rapid spread of the new COVID-19 virus in a short time has changed the world we are used to beyond recognition. Today it is impossible to find an area that would not be affected by the pandemic. In this article, the authors consider its negative impact on the achievement of the main goals of sustainable development and highlight that, despite “the forced retreat into the shadow” of sustainable development issues, the pandemic demonstrated the need to reformat priorities, “reset” the global world order and step-up work to achieve the SDGs at the national and global levels which, most likely, will again translate into practices already in the post-COVID era. © 2021. All Rights Reserved.

Coronavirus is the first global crisis of a digital age and the divergence in policy responses reflects the challenge of navigating an unprecedented global situation under conditions of enormous uncertainty. We ask what lessons can be learned from this experience and identify two, both of which push against mainstream interpretations of recent events. First, and contrary to the view that the crisis exposed social media and Big Tech as a source of dangerous misinformation that needs to be regulated more strictly, the paper argues that the less mediated spaces of the Internet—social media and Twitter, in particular—played an essential role in triggering a more effective policy response based around social distancing, lockdown, and containment. Second, and contrary to the view that things will go back to normal once the worst of the crisis has passed, the paper argues that, as a direct result of lockdown, the status quo has been shifted across multiple sectors of the economy. Three examples of this shift are introduced, notably the forced experimentation with digital technologies in education and health, the increased use of remote work in many companies, and a reduction in environmentally harmful behavior and decrease in pollution levels. The long-term effects of this ‘reset’ are impossible to predict, but a quick return to the ‘old normal’ seems unlikely. The paper concludes with the suggestion that this reset has created a unique historical opportunity for the reappraisal of regulatory approaches across multiple domains and exposed the need for regulatory models better aligned to a less mediated, more decentralized world. COVID-19 is a global tragedy, but—given that it has happened—it should be used as a learning experience to re-imagine a better, more socially, and environmentally responsible future.

La llegada de la Covid-19 ha irrumpido con fuerza en nuestra sociedad y en el sistema sanitario. Esta razón ha llevado a que debamos reflexionar sobre algunos de los cambios que se necesitarán diseñar e introducir en el servicio público de salud para crear un mundo más inclusivo, resiliente y sostenible. Este análisis explora las causas fundamentales que motivaron e impulsaron la llegada de una nueva era digital en la que la inteligencia artificial podría ser la clave para un gran reinicio del sistema sanitario a nivel global. Además, se estudia las razones del porqué la inteligencia artificial constituye una oportunidad para liderar el restablecimiento del actual servicio público de salud más allá de los desafíos que propone la crisis pandémica.

The Biden administration faces the opportunity to reset U.S. policy towards Africa and possesses a variety of tools to use in doing so, including traditional diplomacy, economic statecraft, development assistance, and military engagement. With the increased militarization of U.S. foreign policy over the past few decades, there is an unfortunate tendency to default to military engagement when confronted with even remote threats to U.S. national security interests, and Africa is no exception. With vital security interests in Africa, it can be argued that military engagement should be limited in its application and targeted to those situations that do not lend themselves to solution through traditional diplomacy or development assistance.

This article considers the process of public funding of higher education with the account of international experience. Theoretically, the content of higher education is considered. Public and personal benefits in higher education determine it as a quasipublic good. World practice testifies to state financing of higher education. In the countries of the world, the state fully or partially finances higher education. The determining factor in human capital is higher education. State grants for higher education are in the form of vouchers and are applied on the principle of "money followed by the student." But there is a peculiarity of the implementation of the principle, which consists in securing the state educational grant to the institution of higher education chosen by the еnrollee. At the same time, social risks and burdens including psychological, stressful on enrollee were identified that necessitate a “reset” of the State Grants Program and the education system as a whole after COVID 19. In education, the necessity of changing the course from memorizing academic knowledge to the logic of thinking, acquiring professional competencies. Relatively low results of participation of Kazakhstanis in international comparative studies PISA, PIAAC, ICILS are presented. The relatively low level of education of Kazakhstani youth is systemic in nature. State funding of higher education is primarily desirable for secondary school graduates from low-income families.

Anti-Russian sentiment - what some call “Russophobia” - is subtle, but visible in the American foreign policy discourse since the end of the Cold War. Most recently, it can be found in the Obama-era discourse about Russia, despite the positive bump in relations after the so-called “reset” of 2009. This paper contends that, among the many irritants in Russia - U.S. relations, anti-Russian sentiment among the American foreign policy leadership is an understudied phenomenon. Russophobia matters because it is present even at times of promise in the relationship; it impedes striking a “normal” relationship with Russia, and it influences policy decisions. This paper conceptualizes Russophobia, considers the source of its persistence in the American foreign policy discourse, and identifies examples of anti-Russian sentiment among key members of Barack Obama’s foreign policy team through an examination of memoirs and personal reflections about Russia. The paper asserts that anti-Russian attitudes in the American foreign policy discourse throughout the post-Cold War era must be identified and understood in order to gain a better understanding of why forging stronger, mutually beneficial relations with Russia continues to evade American policy makers. Anti-Russian sentiment undermined the Obama - Medvedev reset and, while it is certainly not alone responsible for deteriorating relations with Russia, it helped to perpetuate the downturn in relations and must be identified and better understood. The arguments made in this paper and in the selected citations herein, are based upon non-partisan scholarly inquiry and are not a consequence of the author’s personal or political views.

COVID-19 is exposing the fragility of the goals adopted by the United Nations — two-thirds are now unlikely to be met. COVID-19 is exposing the fragility of the goals adopted by the United Nations — two-thirds are now unlikely to be met.

Analysts emphasize that nothing will be the same after the pandemic and refer to the “new normal” that is likely to prevail everywhere in the world. It would be a legitimate question to ask if this would provide a conducive environment for Turkey and the United States to reset their relations that have much deteriorated lately. This article will, first, highlight the contours of the “new normal” narrative by referring to the views expressed by politicians, academics, analysts, journalists and intellectuals from around the world. Second, the article will assess the implications of the parameters of the “new normal” for key actors in world politics, such as the United States, China, the European Union and Russia, as well as Turkey’s Middle Eastern neighbors, with respect to the issues that will be at stake in the international security environment. Finally, the article will make a call for a reset in Turkish-American relations in order for the two long-standing allies to adapt themselves better to post-COVID international politics.

COVID-19 is a massive geopolitical disturbance that will reset the international system once the fuzz is lifted, accelerate de-globalization as well as de-regionalization and establish new political and trade alignments, and probably a new world order. This virus divided the world into three narratives, foremost is in favor of the US and against China, and second is in favor of China and against the US, and the third represents the neutral people who believe it is a natural virus. Multiple conspiracy theories have emerged about the origin and spread of the virus. Hence, it has generated pandemic animosity among the people of different nations. China and the US need to be more transparent on the origin and spread of the pandemic and step back from confrontation. This is a time to be united to fight with the virus. COVID-19 has also opened the gateway avenue for future researchers in multiple disciplines of academia.

We already know that the COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way actors see transnational mobility, as well as the appropriation of spaces for leisure purposes, for the foreseeable future. But will t...

After a quarter of a century of oscillating relations between Washington and Moscow, Trump’s 2017 National Security Strategy named Russia as one of the main challengers to the US-led order. Power transition theory is used to explain the alternating cooperative and competitive phases during each of the first three post-Cold War US presidencies: first, initial attempts at cooperation are driven by US willingness to integrate its former rival into the liberal order; then, regression into competition follows as Washington’s influence rises in territories that Moscow considers sensitive for its national security

As the world looks to the future and ways to safely return to normal, in light of the Covid-19 pandemic, we have a unique opportunity to reset our priorities and redefine what this normal looks like. For education communities, this is a chance to take a close look at aspects of education systems that we have taken for granted for far too long.

This essay examines media and environment during the pandemic through the conceptual lens of environmental communication. We take the pulse of environmental communication under COVID-19, noting that while the quantity of media coverage on key environmental issues has fallen during the blanket coverage of the pandemic, COVID-19 has acted on multiple levels as a moment of discursive change in environmental communication. We contend that mediatised discourse on the environment during the pandemic has offered new insights, and an opportunity for a reset in environmental understandings, including a new consciousness of global connectedness in environmental responsibility, and an opportunity to improve publics’ environmental literacy. *** This essay is intended for the extraordinary issue, on Coronavirus, Crisis and Communication ***

In 1919 the attempt was made to reset the institutions governing international relations, with new patterns of expected behaviour and new international organisations. The key organisation, the League of Nations, effectively remains in place, albeit rebranded as the United Nations, but in 2019 great power relations have reverted to pre-1914 modes of conduct; attempts to extend the range of international institutions after the end of the Cold War have failed at the level of the central system. Outside of this central system, an extensive human rights regime, new notions of sovereignty and the development of international criminal law have produced a new set of institutions and expectations, an embryonic ‘global polity’ based on post-1945 European political experience and extending to democracies in Latin America and Africa. The rise of populism is placing strains on this global polity and the relations between this mode of doing international relations and that of the three major powers is also a source of tension – the fate of the liberal internationalist ideas set in train in 1919 remains in the balance.

We have been researching the distinctive ethical issues raised by what we have called “the reset period,” when non-Covid services resumed alongside the continuing pandemic in the UK. In this commentary, we will first consider the similarities and differences between the reset and contingency phases, as described by Alfandre et al. We will then unpack Alfandre et al.’s position that the contingency phase should be characterized by operating a standard of care that is functionally equivalent to “usual” practice, arguing that in the reset and contingency phases, the standards of “usual” care may be unobtainable and, in these circumstances, we cannot fall back on the primacy of “patient centered care.” Consequently, different ethical principles and balancing strategies are needed when care is neither “crisis light” nor “business as usual.” We will conclude by reflecting on what these should be.\ud \ud

Paul De Lay and co-authors introduce a Collection on the design of targets for ending the AIDS epidemic.

The Proceedings of 5th International Scientific Conference organized by University of Maribor, Faculty of Economics and Business entitled »Is It Time for a Total Reset?« comprises four sections. Economics is covered by convergence trends in human development indicators in EU, characteristics of savings in North Macedonia, response of households to Covid-19 epidemic and its effect on food and beverages industry. The second part is devoted to management and it presents a case study of market entry of emerging small enterprises, circular economy in case of secondary use of raw materials in Poland, a simplification of administrative procedures in Italy, and most common approaches to motivating employees in public administration. The digitalization section includes general presentations of digitalization and its challenges in marketing and education. The fourth part displays effects of Covid-19 epidemic to legal order, to teaching business English and to EU strategy for growth, competitiveness and sustainable development.

The aim of the paper is to present and compare the three major European Union (EU) strategies/instruments designed to promote the dynamic economic development of the EU. Since the beginning of the 21st century, the EU has clearly demonstrated its ambitions related to economic growth, competitiveness and sustainability. Despite the progressive ideas reflected in the Lisbon Strategy, its limitations have logically resulted in only partial success. The 2008 world economic crisis has led to important changes, reflected in the Europe 2020 Strategy, but – despite certain progress – no spectacular success was seen. 2020 will not be remembered as the closing year of the Europe 2020 Strategy, but as the (first) year of the world-wide shock caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. The changes caused by this shock can be seen in EU actions, as well: the Next Generation EU instrument is an innovation that could not have been imagined without such a shock. The paper discusses the potential ways of changes of the EU’s approach to the objectives of economic growth, competitiveness and sustainability as a result of the COVID-19 shock.

John Tingle and Amanda Cattini discuss some current ‘buzzwords’ that raise important issues in patient safety policy development and practice

Cobus de Swardt explains how Transparency International (TI) attempts to make a new beginning: it votes out its existing board and installs a new leadership committed to address the breakdown of good governance and ethics in the organisation. This new leadership face immense challenges: they have to deal fairly and decisively with the abuses of the immediate past; unite a divided TI Movement; motivate despondent staff and perform an ethical reset of the organisation. De Swardt also describes how being a whistleblower to TI mars his reputation, undermines his attempts to secure new employment, and threatens his livelihood.

Photo by Evgeni Tcherkasski on Unsplash ABSTRACT Public health ethics has been contingent on a political landscape leading to several operational hurdles, especially during global health emergencies. Several scholars have pointed out that liberal decision-making has prevented public health institutions from achieving their goals. Thus, the need for a substantive outlook on public health has never been stronger. First, this article highlights the ethical tension and limitations of a presumptive approach to public health that a vaccination policy might produce in a liberal political landscape. Second, influenced by the works of Angus Dawson, this article emphasizes the importance of a substantive approach to public health, especially in a post-COVID era. Last, it looks at how TM Scanlon’s theory of contractualism aids in framing a substantive approach to health policy design and the added advantages of the theory. INTRODUCTION A public health intervention like a vaccination program for COVID-19, let alone a mandatory one, faces difficulties in implementation as it presents a clash between the role of the government and liberty of its citizens.[1] The clash stems from public health operating in a liberal political landscape that accords great regard for individual liberty. The government, in good conscience, is right in feeling morally obligated to act in ways that serve to prevent the pandemic from escalating. To represent the citizens, governments and policymakers prioritize achieving and maintaining herd immunity. The tension of the state versus individual liberty questions the extent to which governments can go to implement a vaccination policy. In trying to balance the considerations of individual liberty and the scope of the state to impose an intervention, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics came up with a design known as the ‘intervention ladder.’[2] The takeaway from the intervention ladder is that the state has the burden of proof in justifying reasons for implementing a particular policy.[3] Such justified trade-offs envisioned from the intervention ladder have guided policymakers in their attempt to design and shape interventions. However, public health ethics and even the intervention ladder view public health through a presumptive or a moderate liberal lens.[4] In a presumptive approach or a moderate-liberal approach to public health, policymakers regard values like liberty or autonomy as more prominent when weighed against values like creation of public goods and their maintenance.[5] A libertarian approach favors liberty and autonomy even more strongly. The substantive view of public health holds that values, such as liberty and autonomy, do not automatically hold precedence over community-oriented values such as public goods creation.[6] Some have critiqued the intervention ladder endorsed by the Nuffield Council of Bioethics. Angus Dawson remarks that the intervention ladder as a metaphor prevents the act of climbing. He claims the ladder assumes that liberty is the only guiding principle in policymaking. Such a view neglects any responsibility the citizens have in achieving public goods and maintaining them.[7] The emphasis on the drawbacks of a presumptive approach, especially in a situation like the COVID-19 pandemic, leads us to question should public health undergo a redefinition? The approach in public health focusing on non-interference stems from traditional clinical bioethics.[8] However, I argue that public health ethics in a pandemic should accord less emphasis to individual liberty and evaluate every ethical value on a level playing field. Individual liberty provides less platform for action in situations where the community has not established herd immunity. Accountability for the harm principle and maintenance of public goods override concerns surrounding liberty.[9] Angus Dawson argues that with more participation in a vaccination program, protection of public goods from disease can be created faster.[10] Characterizing public health as an antagonist to individual liberty undermines the confidence in public health institutions and interventions for which public trust is vital. Although the government may propose a mandatory vaccination policy when voluntary measures fail to meet public health requirements, clear scientific evidence and accountability for public welfare should be the guiding principle. Thus, resetting the parameters gauging a public health intervention is the starting point to prepare for future pandemics. In Resetting the Parameters, Angus Dawson suggests that utilitarianism or contractualism could serve as philosophical frameworks that may aid in framing a substantive approach to public health.[11] Evaluating utilitarianism and contractualism according to the COVID-19 facts would help clarify which is better suited to framing a substantive public health approach. l. Is Utilitarianism Substantive? Under utilitarianism, the morbid circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic urge us to act in ways that translate to maximizing the overall good. Utilitarianism is a philosophical theory that prides itself on maximizing the best of outcomes for the maximum number of people. In an ideal utilitarian framework, a morally right act does good for all. Utilitarians consider utility the single determining variable that should guide actions.[12] The actionable aspect of a utilitarian framework is its ability to quantify thresholds or markers that mostly dwell in the abstract. In Utilitarianism and the Pandemic, Savulescu et al. outline certain determinants as aids in applying utilitarianism.[13] Looking at the aids in the context of a mandatory vaccination policy in light of COVID-19, shows some pitfalls of utilitarianism. The first utilitarian aid is to save the maximum number of lives.[14] Rightly so, an intuitive starting point in a pandemic with striking mortality rates is attempting to save the most lives. However, implementing and justifying a policy with the aim of saving the highest number of lives is complex. While a high number of deaths is a concern, it is reductionist to concentrate only on the end goal and not the means through which such a goal is attained. The second utilitarian aid is the length of life.[15] The length of benefit gained from an outcome is crucial for utilitarians. The duration of a benefit determines the quantity of good produced. As an extension, younger people should then, theoretically, count for more than older individuals in prioritizing benefits. Such prioritization has been a matter of concern during the COVID-19 pandemic. While it is true that younger people might tend to benefit more, the pathology of COVID-19 goes against such logic. Elderly populations have experienced disproportionately more severe cases. Therefore, prioritizing youth when the elderly are suffering more of the harm would be ethically contentious.[16] The third utilitarian aid is the quality-of-life post-intervention.[17] Through measures such as QALYs and DALYs,[18] utilitarians have attempted to quantify each individual's quality after an intervention. This quantification can result in connecting an individual’s quality of life to their social worth. From a utilitarian viewpoint, a person's ability to produce relevance in society becomes a key determinant in shaping public policy. By extension, people born with disabilities such as mental illness or late-stage dementia can be overlooked merely because they lack "social value.”[19] And yet, “taboo trade-offs occur when we are forced to put a finite monetary value on these sacred values [life, health, ability], when we acknowledge that there is a maximum ‘price’ that we want to pay to uphold values that should be of ‘infinite’ value.” [20]. As such, it is unethical to place a value on someone's life based on the duration or quality of life they may have after an intervention. Besides creating difficulty in assessing the quality of life, measures such as QALYs do not address the nuances in providing healthcare. In Economic Evaluation of Mental Health Interventions, Luyten et al. discuss several operational changes that account for these nuances.[21] Utilitarians believe in a moral indifference between actions and omissions as the fourth aid.[22] It does not matter how a result is achieved as long as it benefits the common good. Putting forward a bad policy is the same as not putting forward a policy. In the ever-changing and unpredictable dynamics of the COVID-19 pandemic, actions and omissions have different moral implications. Equating them often places an unfair burden on lawmakers, leaving them emotionally and morally exhausted as they weigh the advantages and risks of various outcomes. Actively avoiding social biases, feelings, intuitions, and heuristics is the fifth aid.[23] The pandemic elicits strong feelings and aggressively tests beliefs. During the pandemic, some profoundly troubling ethical dilemmas stemmed from bias. In a utilitarian system, a mandatory vaccination policy aimed at crossing the threshold for herd immunity may overlook groups of people who are vulnerable due to a lack of access to the social determinants of health. Attempting to avoid feelings and intuitions all the time does not always result in the creation of a fair policy. Anti-vaccination activists use emotion to further their cause, hence it is critical that politicians consider the feelings at stake for the general public when enacting a mandatory vaccination policy. While utilitarianism has benefits such as developing simple operationalizable concepts, providing a quantitative check, and a balance sheet of risks and benefits, it is based on an ethical dystopia. Utilitarian policies can treat people as a means to an end by focusing solely on outcomes. Utilitarianism rests on a presumptive outlook toward public health by replacing liberty with utility. It ignores fair and just distribution and allocation of resources. Utilitarianism is not the most ethical approach to pandemic vaccination policy. ll. Is Contractualism Substantive? The libertarian and utilitarian frameworks assume positive and negative connotations to different actions. They hold that certain acts are right and certain acts are wrong. A libertarian might hold that unnecessary infringement of individual liberty is not acceptable, while a utilitarian might be of the opinion that actions that contribute to disutility are unfavorable for the promotion of the greatest happiness principle.[24] Contractualism is a philosophy that values the social contract. A contractualist approach begins its discourse by arguing that actions have inherent neutrality.[25] By saying that, “being valuable is not always a matter of being ‘to be promoted’”[26], Scanlon does not neglect the value of certain actions but urges us to respond to value through other means, as well as to find value in plurality. In What We Owe to Each Other, Scanlon finds morality through the ability to reason while attributing inherent neutrality to our actions. A discourse in contractualism does not begin by presuming that values such as liberty or autonomy hold precedence among other ethical values, i.e., it is not presumptive in its approach. Instead, he locates morality in the ability to reason and find justifications for certain actions. Thus, compared to utilitarianism, contractualism allows for a substantive approach by holding all the relevant ethical values in a level playing field. Liberty would gain precedence when justifications for safeguarding it are strong and cannot be reasonably rejected. The same goes for other values, such as promoting public goods. In short, an action is termed wrong when “the principle that allows for it, can be reasonably rejected.”[27] For Scanlon, justifiability to others is the normative determinant of right or wrong.[28] He proceeds to say that the value of justifiability is the underlying premise of our duties. Additionally, Verweij argues that treating people rationally occurs by treating them in “ways they cannot reasonably reject.”[29] By disregarding any a priori assumptions about the importance of different values, people can find and construct values that cannot be reasonably rejected as they would be justified. Scanlon believes that this can be attained if we reflect on what we owe to each other. lll. The Inherent Moral Neutrality Allows for a Substantive Approach A contractualist approach has implications for framing a substantive approach to public health. These values have been adapted from Scanlon and Verweij, and the elaboration has been framed in the context of COVID-19. The inherent neutrality of principles that contractualism holds becomes crucial while devising a public health intervention. The COVID-19 pandemic presents a situation where otherwise acceptable ethical principles require scrutiny. A blank state where there are no a priori principles that suggest which acts are morally justified and which are not helps us navigate the operational principles involved in a vaccination policy. Thus, values such as liberty, utility, and autonomy are viewed on the same level as the creation of public goods, fairness in contribution, and avoiding collective harm. a. Arriving at Principles Starting with the inherent neutrality, the state, policymakers, and the public can identify ethical principles that would form a part of the vaccination policy smorgasbord. In a public health framework where negotiation is a crucial aspect in its implementation, it is important that all the stakeholders aim to find principles that are acceptable for everyone. This would culminate with principles of action that would produce the least number of complaints by all the parties involved. If an individual has very strong reservations against a principle, these cannot be outweighed by weaker reservations held by others.[30] b. Reasonable Rejection as a Marker of Deliberation A mandatory vaccination policy in a contractualist framework would then have to incorporate reasonable rejection. A framework based on reasonable rejection includes a variety of moral considerations that shape well-being and provide a basis for fairness, choice, and responsibility. Scanlon makes an important remark in the thesis of What We Owe to Each Other: the acceptability of a principle depends on a one-by-one assessment of the strength of individuals' reasons for rejecting the principles compared to any existing alternatives. In other words, for Scanlon, what is foundational for contractualism is not minimizing what is undesirable but constructing principles no one can reasonably reject. In the context of COVID-19, a person should be able to justify the level of precaution he takes to anyone who would bear the risk of exposure. Each individual would then have strong reasons for contributing to herd immunity with regard to their duty to protect the vulnerable. The justification to forego vaccination would need to be strong.[31] The difference in a contractualist approach is that it provides a platform for valid concerns from the public. This allows more room for dialogue and for individual liberty, which seems to form a significant part of the critique. A plan of action that allows for individual concerns such as safety, efficacy, and strong medical reasons to forego vaccination encourages inclusivity in policymaking. Another public concern is that public health institutions have alienated themselves from society in general.[32]A dialogue between the stakeholders would remedy such a notion and help redefine public health according to how Dawson and Verweij view “public”– as a social entity/target as well as a mode of intervention (requiring collective action).[33] Contractualism, like the rest of the ethical frameworks, has its own set of critiques. In Obligatory Precautions Against Infection, Marcel Verweij argues that a contractualist theory inadvertently ends up asking for excessive precautions. The first claim that contractualism asks for excessive precautions arises from the fact that a contractualist approach does not consider the consequences of individual actions.[34] He believes that since consequences are not weighted, one individual’s wish to forego precautionary measures does not justify another’s non-compliance towards precaution, culminating in the other having to take excessive precautions. He also criticizes the contractualist deliberation for its failure to focus on the consequences of individual acts but on creating universalizable principles.[35] While this may seem true, such a conclusion rests on the fact that the consequences of individual acts are not weighted. However, an excerpt from Verweij’s paper offers evidence that contractualism does weigh individual acts: Suppose that we both aim to find moral principles that regulate our interaction and that can be accepted by both of us. If you then propose a principle that imposes many risks on me but none for you, then it would be reasonable if I were to reject it (especially if there are alternative principles that would yield much lower risks).[36] Both a consequentialist approach and a contractualist approach share the language of risks and burdens. For the utilitarian, risks and burdens are consequences of an action, whereas, for the contractualist, they are consequences of accepting or rejecting a principle. In the excerpt above, when an individual assesses the risks imposed, a consequentialist way of thinking is incorporated in contractualism and consequences to individuals do matter and are weighed. Verweij’s contention that a contractualist approach does not focus on individual consequences is not supported, and, as a logical extension, the argument of excessive precautions begins to fade. Being vaccinated would absolve us of having to take excessive precautions. Upon crossing the threshold of herd immunity, excessive precautions such as masks, social distancing, rigorous testing pre- as well as post-travel, and obsessively checking our phones for exposure can be done away with. The COVID-19 pandemic has immersed us in routines of excessive precautionary measures that it has become normalized for most of us. Thus, being vaccinated and covering society with a blanket of herd immunity removes the need for excessive precautions. lV. Bridging What “Is” and What “Ought” To Be Although contractualism presents a perspective that best suits a substantive approach to public health, it appears desirable only in theory. There exists a distinct reality outside of academia – politics, societal engagement, and governance reflect a different picture. This can be thought of as the gap between the is and the ought. We could envision and claim that a mandatory vaccination policy ought to be implemented in a certain manner, however, it might not be. In her paper, Realizing Bioethics’ Goals in Practice: Ten Ways “Is” Can Help “Ought,” Mildred Z. Solomon provides several reasons for this disconnect.[37] The general theme is the importance of empirical research – the need to find a balance between normative assumptions and empirical evidence – and how policymakers can, in turn, use such evidence to fine-tune the policy design process. Contractualism can prove especially useful to bridge the divide between is and ought. Theories of libertarian philosophy and utilitarianism rest on a design based on a normative approach that values liberty and utility and should guide the policymaking process. However, contractualism separates itself from these theories since constructing principles justifiable for all, and the idea of reasonable rejection must rely on empirical evidence. Engagement between various stakeholders and recognizing the plurality in values helps bridge the disconnect between the is and the ought. This is more important in the context of a mandatory vaccination policy since its requirement arises only if voluntary vaccination policies fail. Knowing why vaccination rates are low and how better to reach herd immunity will be important empirical evidence that can fine-tune the policy. In Re-enchanting Democracy as a Mode of Governance, Patsy Healey acknowledges that a struggle for political change often focuses on installing new policy designs.[38] Healey provides a list of qualities to keep in mind when designing a more people-centered policy initiative. The first quality is recognizing a shared, diverse, and conflictual political community where distributive justice is vital. The second is to foster is respect for different arguments, positions, and feelings— considering groups with conflicting values as adversaries but not enemies. The third quality is that of an ‘intelligent’ and multi-sided discussion of issues and reasoning ‘in public.’ The fourth is the fostering of respect for the role of the government while simultaneously recognizing the complexities of interactions. The fifth, and a key value in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, is fostering respect for people who perform public services. Liberalism and utilitarianism create combative ethical discourse around those qualities, while contractualism could elevate shared public values. While liberal democracies arguably have the makings of those qualities, public engagement must be fostered at an intellectual level to promote cohesion. Another important aspect to consider is the question of what a framework should aim to answer. In Building an Ethical Framework for COVID-19 Resource Allocation: The How and Why, Angus Dawson addresses the goal of a framework, especially at the time of a pandemic.[39] He stresses the importance of context in constructing a framework and urges to engage with a diverse group of people. Value-laden normative approaches such as the libertarian and utilitarian frameworks provide less opportunity for different stakeholder claims. Dawson then argues that explicit discussions provide more clarity and help policy makers better understand the role of context in shaping a framework. Dawson asserts that a frame chosen sympathetically can help the public better appreciate the moral content involved in deliberation, whereas aiming for goals such as liberty and utility is a distraction from the workings of reality. In evaluating stakeholders, those with lower incomes often are unable to work remotely. They face a greater risk of COVID-19 due to workplace exposure as well as commutes and living conditions.[40] Although a mandatory vaccination policy has the clearly defined goal of achieving herd immunity, ensuring distributive and procedural justice should not be viewed as being mutually exclusive. CONCLUSION Societal change relies on justifiable goals, policies, and a multitude of viewpoints. As such, a contractualist approach best accommodates a multitude of views of what we owe each other. Moving forward, if pandemic-type circumstances do disseminate within the constructs of our society, public policy should further consider contractualist approaches as a healthy, inclusive means. - [1] Luyten, Jeroen. "Mutual Moral Obligations in the Prevention of Infectious Diseases." In Justice, Luck & Responsibility in Health Care, pp. 85-100. Springer, Dordrecht, 2013. [2] Council, Nuffield Bioethics. "Public Health: Ethical Issues." Nuffield Council on Bioethics (2007) [3] Dawson, Angus J. "Snakes and Ladders: State Interventions and the Place of Liberty in Public Health Policy." Journal of Medical Ethics 42, no. 8 (2016): 510-513. [4] Dawson, Angus, ed. Public Health Ethics: Key Concepts and Issues in Policy and Practice. Cambridge University Press, 2011. [5] Dawson, Angus. "Resetting the Parameters." Public Health Ethics (2011): 1-19. [6] Dawson, Angus, ed. Public Health Ethics: Key Concepts and Issues in Policy and Practice. Cambridge University Press, 2011. [7] Dawson, Angus J. "Snakes and Ladders: State Interventions and the Place of Liberty in Public Health Policy." Journal Of Medical Ethics 42, no. 8 (2016): 510-513. [8] Dawson, Angus, ed. Public Health Ethics: Key Concepts and Issues in Policy and Practice. Cambridge University Press, 2011. [9] Savulescu, Julian. "Good Reasons to Vaccinate: Mandatory or Payment for Risk?." Journal of Medical Ethics 47, no. 2 (2021): 78-85. [10] Dawson, Angus, ed. Public Health Ethics: Key Concepts and Issues in Policy and Practice. Cambridge University Press, 2011. [11] Dawson, Angus. "Resetting the Parameters." Public Health Ethics (2011): 1-19. [12] Savulescu, Julian, Ingmar Persson, and Dominic Wilkinson. "Utilitarianism and the Pandemic." Bioethics 34, no. 6 (2020): 620-632. [13] Savulescu, Julian, Ingmar Persson, and Dominic Wilkinson. "Utilitarianism and the Pandemic." Bioethics 34, no. 6 (2020): 620-632. [14] Savulescu, Julian, Ingmar Persson, and Dominic Wilkinson. "Utilitarianism and the Pandemic." Bioethics 34, no. 6 (2020): 620-632. [15] Savulescu, Julian, Ingmar Persson, and Dominic Wilkinson. "Utilitarianism and the Pandemic." Bioethics 34, no. 6 (2020): 620-632. [16] Luyten, Jeroen, and Yvonne Denier. "Explicit Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds in Health Care: A Kaleidoscope." Social Justice Research 32, no. 2 (2019): 155-171. [17] Savulescu, Julian, Ingmar Persson, and Dominic Wilkinson. "Utilitarianism and the Pandemic." Bioethics 34, no. 6 (2020): 620-632. [18] Luyten, Jeroen, Huseyin Naci, and Martin Knapp. "Economic Evaluation of Mental Health Interventions: An Introduction to Cost-Utility Analysis." Evidence-Based Mental Health 19, no. 2 (2016): 49-53. [19] Luyten, Jeroen, and Yvonne Denier. "Explicit Cost-Effectiveness Thresholds in Health Care: A Kaleidoscope." Social Justice Research 32, no. 2 (2019): 155-171. [20] (Luyten and Denier, 2019, p.10) [21] Luyten, Jeroen, Huseyin Naci, and Martin Knapp. "Economic Evaluation of Mental Health Interventions: An Introduction to Cost-Utility Analysis." Evidence-Based Mental Health 19, no. 2 (2016): 49-53. [22] Savulescu, Julian, Ingmar Persson, and Dominic Wilkinson. "Utilitarianism and the Pandemic." Bioethics 34, no. 6 (2020): 620-632. [23] Savulescu, et al. [24] Mill, John Stuart. "Utilitarianism, ed. George Sher." (2001). [25] Scanlon, Thomas M. "Précis of" What We Owe to Each Other"." (2003): 159-161. [26] Scanlon 2003 p.159) [27] Verweij, Marcel. "Obligatory precautions against infection." Bioethics 19, no. 4 (2005): 323-335. [28] Scanlon, Thomas M. "Précis of" What We Owe to Each Other"." (2003): 159-161. [29] Verweij, Marcel. "Obligatory precautions against infection." Bioethics 19, no. 4 (2005): 323-335. [30] Verweij, Marcel. "Obligatory precautions against infection." Bioethics 19, no. 4 (2005): 323-335. [31] Verweij, Marcel. "Obligatory precautions against infection." Bioethics 19, no. 4 (2005): 323-335. [32] Financial Times, 2021, “Covid is the Enemy, Not the Government” Sunil Jain April 26 Accessed 14 May 2021 https://www.financialexpress.com/opinion/covid-is-the-enemy-not-the-government/2240340/ [33] Dawson, Angus, ed. Public Health Ethics: Key Concepts and Issues in Policy and Practice. Cambridge University Press, 2011. [34] Verweij, Marcel. "Obligatory Precautions Against Infection." Bioethics 19, no. 4 (2005): 323-335. [35] Verweij, Marcel. "Obligatory Precautions Against Infection." Bioethics 19, no. 4 (2005): 323-335. [36] Verweij, Marcel. "Obligatory Precautions Against Infection." Bioethics 19, no. 4 (2005): 323-335. [37] Solomon, Mildred Z. "Realizing Bioethics' Goals in Practice: Ten Ways “Is” Can Help “Ought”." Hastings Center Report 35, no. 4 (2005): 40-47. [38] Healey, Patsy. "Re-enchanting Democracy as a Mode of Governance." In Connections, pp. 61-78. Routledge, 2017. [39] Dawson, Angus. "Building an Ethics Framework for COVID-19 Resource Allocation: The How and the Why." Journal of Bioethical Inquiry 17, no. 4 (2020): 757-760. [40] Schmidt, Harald, Lawrence O. Gostin, and Michelle A. Williams. "Is it Lawful and Ethical to Prioritize Racial Minorities for COVID-19 Vaccines?." Jama 324, no. 20 (2020): 2023-2024.

The chapter assesses the Argentine foreign policy concerning the dispute over the Falklands/Malvinas Islands’ sovereignty since 1983 to the present. It distinguishes the different strategies carried out in each of its administrations, contrasting with the corresponding political and academic debates. It traces back the missteps of the involved parts, stressing the Argentina’s continuous aspiration to overcome the issue, or, at least, to reset it to the pre-war state of negotiations.

This section discusses the origins of the Eurozone crisis in European Monetary Union before discussing various dimensions of how the Eurozone coped, its impact on integration, and the crisis’ implications for the future of the EU. While the authors all show that the EU’s response to the financial crisis reflected the scenario ‘muddling through,’ they have different perspectives on the future of integration post crisis. Rosen and Olsen point out that the austerity policies implemented after crisis resulted in collective protest movements across Europe. Tranoy and Stenstad highlight the failure of financial sector reforms to reset the social role of finance in a more equitable way. Caporaso analyses the unintended consequences of differentiated integration during crisis by exploring the impact of the Eurozone crisis on Brexit and the migration crisis.

The rise of China was closely associated with the strategic opportunity offered by a wave of globalization dating from the 1970s. As China grew, western growth was not restored. Soon after the arrival of the unipolar moment with the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world confronted a succession of crises that western countries struggled to handle and will lead to a shift in the centre of economic gravity to Asia and a multipolar world. In this world in which China's continuing rise was already perceived as a strategic challenge, the COVID-19 pandemic saw further examples of liberal capitalist governance failure. Notwithstanding attempts to preserve western hegemony and a western liberal world order, the COVID-19 pandemic will accelerate and intensify the trends towards a global reset, the arrival of a multipolar world and new global development paths., Highlights • Analysis of the reasons for the conflict between the United States and China, examining productivity growth, productive investment and technology, financialization, international trade and de-dollarization • Analysis of the relative success of liberal and meritocratic governance systems in handing the impacts of COVID-19 and responding to economic crisis • Identifying forces leading to a transformation from a unipolar to a polycentric or multipolar global order. • Identification of the need for international co-operation

The militarised approach to drugs supply continues to predominate, despite a new emphasis on drugs, peace and development. This viewpoint argues that the drugs road which often begins in peripheral, war torn or recovering, supply, processing and transport borderlands is part of a social, national and global system of inequality. States in such contexts, often reproduce and disperse violences and development policy fails to take account of community adaptations to survival livelihoods. To reset the conversation towards violence reduction and new livelihoods, it must involve the borderlanders themselves, protecting and enabling them to build a new road to peace.

In this brief reflection, I explore three key lessons learned from conducting a policy research placement during the COVID-19 pandemic. I explore how the placement changed my perspective on my PhD research, working life, and suggest how academics may better engage with policymakers in the future.

Key points The scholarly publishing industry must be prepared to step back, consider our value, reset our relationships, and be prepared to accept and embrace real change.Three areas of focus during these times should be (1) the importance of community; (2) racism, bias, and structural inequities; and (3) openness, transparency, and trust.We need to recognize the importance of the humanities and social sciences, as well as of science, technology, and medicine in addressing the impacts of the pandemic.

The devastating impact of COVID-19 has changed our day-to-day reality in a remarkably short timescale. As we move into the NHS recovery and reset mode, the Royal College of Physicians’ (RCP's) Patient and Carer Network (PCN) has started the process of considering the detailed implications for patient-centred care within a digital healthcare system. Our focus will be to ensure that the emphasis is upon benefits for patients and carers, and that appropriate safeguards are built in to avoid pitfalls, especially for those who are vulnerable or disadvantaged. Digital healthcare represents a cultural change as much as a technical change. Many …

Southern-Led Development Finance examines some of the innovative new south-south financial arrangements and institutions that have emerged in recent years, as countries from the Global South seek to transform their economies and to shield themselves from global economic turbulence Even before the Covid-19 crisis, it was clear to many that the global economy needed a reset and a massive increase in public investment In the last decade southern-owned development banks, infrastructure funds, foreign exchange reserve funds and Sovereign Wealth Funds have doubled the amount of long-term finance available to developing countries Now, as the world considers what a post-Covid-19 future will look like, it is clear that Southern-led institutions will do much of the heavy lifting This book brings together insights from theory and practice, incorporating the voices of bankers, policymakers and practitioners alongside international academics It covers the most significant new initiatives stemming from Asia, tried and tested examples in Latin America and in Africa, and the contribution of advanced economies Whilst the book highlights the potential for Southern-led initiatives to change the global financial landscape profoundly, it also shows their varied impacts and concludes that more is needed for development than just the technical availability of funds As governments and businesses become frustrated by the traditional North-dominated mechanisms and international financial system, this book argues that southern-led development finance will play an important role in the search for more inclusive, equitable and sustainable patterns of investment, trade and growth in the post-Covid landscape It will be of interest to practitioners, policy makers, researchers and students working on development and finance everywhere © 2021 selection and editorial matter, Diana Barrowclough, Kevin P Gallagher and Richard Kozul-Wright;individual chapters, the contributors

The research aimed to monitor the origin and development of the regions as the first level in the Saudi local administration system, study its current division, and ensure the effectiveness of its councils competencies and the extent of democracy in its formation method. This study based on the descriptive-analytical approach, to analyze the past and present of the regions and their councils, and describe the problems of their law, to determine the reforms that must be introduced to develop and improve this system. Results: The Saudi legislator did not grant the regions and their councils' legal personality, the current zoning - size and population - is not consistent with efficiency administrative, and the selection of all members of the region's council by appointment weakened popular participation. Recommendations: Grant the regions and their councils' legal personality, give them financial independence, reset zoning, select a part of the members of the council of regions by-election and activate the region's councils' jurisdictions.

The agency-type organs have a history of several decades in the European Union. In the last few years there were two different tendencies leading towards the establishment of regulatory (or decentralised) agencies with strong powers, especially in the field of financial supervision. The first of these tendencies was the fall of the neoliberal dogma of the self-regulating market – as a consequence of the 2008 financial-economic crisis – which led to the priorities of the decision-makers being reset in favour of a stricter regulation than that of the New Public Management era. The other tendency was that the debate about a European administrative law started to live. The European Supervisory Authorities of the financial sector, which were established after the crisis, are regulatory agencies with strong powers. However, some of their competences are so strong, that it poses questions regarding the legal protection of the participants of the market. Moreover, the case-law related to their function seems to overwrite the accepted norms of delegation of competences within the institutional framework of the European Union.

In the years preceding the independence referendum held in the KRG in September 2017, the relationship between Ankara and Erbil had blossomed, based on commerce, energy exports, a shared antipathy ...

The contemporary scientific literature dedicated to cross-border movements of the population prefers to describe these processes using the terms mobility and movers instead of the traditional migration and migrants. The reset of the conceptual framework and language used to characterize movements of people reflects real transformations in the space of human flows. Noting the extremely small and practically not growing share of the world population involved in classical (long-term) migrations and the decreasing attractiveness of resettlement in other countries for permanent residence, some scholars see in these processes the impending end of “the age of migration.” However, the dynamic development of short-term and multiple movements of human masses may testify to the growing expansion of the phenomenon of “permanent mobility.”

This article examines the evolving rivalry between Eritrea and Ethiopia in light of military clashes between the two countries that occurred in June 2016. Drawing on rationalist understandings of international politics, it illustrates the calculus that sustained the rivalry for nearly 16 years. These forces, while sufficient to have maintained the situation of “no war, no peace” for a considerable period of time, gave way to a new set of dynamics that significantly eroded the fragile status quo. In that context, a slow, but perceptible shift in the regional balance power seemed to have increased the risk of another round of military conflict between Eritrea and Ethiopia. While Ethiopia’s recent selection of a new prime minister has created real possibility of a reset of Eritrea-Ethiopia relations, the underlying structural dynamics between the two countries remain volatile. For better or worse, Africa’s most intractable interstate rivalry sits at a critical juncture.