Another Episode of “Global Canvas” from JOI On the last days of August 2025 , as monsoon clouds hung low over Jakarta , the city seemed to thrum with an unease that had quietly grown for months. Outside the imposing compound of the Indonesian parliament, students and young citizens stood shoulder to shoulder, sweat running down their brows while freshly painted placards shook in the humid air. Women moved to the front with brooms raised high, sweeping the air as if symbolically cleansing a system long weighted by privilege. Heat shimmered off the pavement but the crowd only swelled. What began as irritation over rising allowances and perks for lawmakers suddenly hardened into something far greater. By August 30, 2025, Jakarta witnessed the spark of a generational tide that would soon cross seas and mountains, drawing youth in the Philippines and Nepal into a shared wave of dissent. It was not merely protest; it was the moment a new political generation found its voice. Context and Background Indonesia’s protests did not emerge overnight. For weeks before the streets burst open, reports from Jakarta, Surabaya, and Yogyakarta exposed a widening chasm between ordinary citizens and political elites. While inflation rose and jobs remained scarce, lawmakers continued to access privilege, allowances and opaque expenditures that seemed insulated from public hardship. Students, historically the conscience of Indonesian democracy, felt this gap most sharply. Many saw privilege not just as unfair resource allocation but as a system rewarding insiders while the youth fought daily for limited opportunities. The frustration deepened as evidence spread online and through student networks, and on August 30 , ordinary murmurs turned into a roar. As protests intensified into early September, violence erupted, leaving casualties and forcing President Prabowo Subianto to replace five ministers on September 9 in an attempt to restore calm. Yet heavy crackdowns, arbitrary detentions and excessive use of force only amplified anger on the streets. Human Rights Watch and the United Nations urged restraint, but to young Indonesians, state reaction reflected fear more than order. This unresolved tension soon leapt across borders. In the Philippines , the environment was already volatile. Between 2023 and 2025, billions of pesos meant for flooding relief and infrastructure simply disappeared into corruption chains. Floods had continued to devastate communities and livelihoods, and public patience eroded each season. When Indonesian protests filled global headlines, young Filipinos recognised themselves in the struggle. On September 4, 2025 , Manila’s first waves of youth-led protests began. Within days, thousands filled the streets with satire-laced posters depicting political dynasties as puppeteers tugging at taxpayers like marionettes. At these gatherings, a striking symbol began to appear: the One Piece  pirate flag , adopted from anime culture and reimagined as an emblem of resistance. Memes, edited videos, and pop references spread rapidly online, connecting Indonesian and Filipino outrage into a shared narrative of corruption and generational defiance. By November 30, over 20,000 protesters marched toward Manila’s core, many demanding President Ferdinand Marcos Jr’s resignation. Towering effigies labelled with the word graft hung over the crowd, visually indicting the powerful and calling for prosecution, accountability and recovery of stolen public funds. Only four days after Manila’s protests gained momentum, Nepal’s government imposed a sweeping ban on twenty six social media platforms including Facebook, Instagram and YouTube, citing national security. For millions of digitally connected Nepali youth, the ban felt like suffocation. Nepal had long struggled with unemployment and shrinking opportunities, while allegations of nepotism and corruption enveloped political networks. The ban became the final spark. Mass protests spread from Kathmandu to smaller districts, quickly evolving into the largest youth mobilisation in Nepal’s democratic history. Violence was brutal. Seventy two people were killed and thousands injured as curfews and crackdowns widened. Yet censorship and repression only strengthened public resolve. Former Chief Justice Sushila Karki emerged as a symbol of integrity, often invoked by young demonstrators demanding merit-based leadership. In late November, clashes escalated across Bara district and Dhangadhi where party cadres on motorbikes rammed into youth protesters, deepening national resentment and highlighting impunity. Nepal was no longer protesting digital restrictions alone; it was fighting for political legitimacy, justice and generational inclusion. By the end of 2025, analysts observed that despite diverse triggers corruption in the Philippines, privilege in Indonesia and censorship in Nepal the underlying structure of discontent was the same. Youth across the region faced exclusion, weak accountability, stagnant economies and elite privilege. Digital culture transcended geography, forming what some called a transnational political consciousness powered by memes, livestreams, symbolism and shared anger. The protests were not isolated anomalies. They marked a global youth awakening also visible in Morocco , Madagascar and beyond. Governments from Jakarta to Manila to Kathmandu now faced a generation unwilling to stay silent. Key Players and Stakeholders Youth and Student Communities.  They were the engine of mobilisation. In Indonesia, they formed the first human chains outside parliament. In Manila, student groups led rallies, created protest art and turned pop culture into political messaging. In Nepal, youth spearheaded demonstrations nationwide even under digital blackouts. This demographic did not simply express dissatisfaction, they redefined dissent. Their tools were smartphones, flags, satire and solidarity. Their demand was straightforward: fairness, representation and a future that belonged to them. National Governments (Indonesia, Philippines, Nepal).  Political leadership became the primary target of agitation. In Indonesia, privilege linked to lawmakers triggered outrage and ministerial reshuffling. In the Philippines, corruption scandals linked to missing flood funds intensified anger at the Marcos administration. In Nepal, the sweeping social media ban symbolised shrinking civic space. In all three cases, state response relied on force, curfews and arrests to regain control. Governments claimed security. Youth saw fear of accountability. Security Forces and State Machinery.  Police and armed units acted as the visible arm of power, enforcing crackdowns, dispersing crowds, imposing curfews and conducting arrests. In Indonesia and Nepal, allegations of arbitrary detention and excessive force were frequent. Their role deepened mistrust in institutions and reinforced narratives of state impunity. Political Elites, Dynasties and Patronage Networks.  These groups represented entrenched power. In the Philippines, dynastic politics were portrayed in effigies and puppeteer posters. In Nepal, protesters demanded the removal of personnel linked to nepotism including calls to sack the Prime Minister’s chief personal secretary. Indonesia’s lawmakers remained symbols of privilege at public expense. Protests challenged not only policies but the structure maintaining elite dominance. Civil Society, Universities and Digital Collectives.  Universities became organisational hubs for marches, discussions and planning. Activist collectives used digital spaces to document events, circulate evidence and create momentum. NGOs amplified international scrutiny and called for restraint. Their involvement made mobilisation structured, strategic and harder to suppress. Media and Transnational Digital Communities:  Local and international media carried the protests beyond borders. Livestreams, memes, anime flags, and satirical videos became political currency, enabling solidarity across nations. Social media was both amplifier and battleground. Where it was restricted, such as in Nepal, underground circulation grew stronger. The digital sphere turned dissent into a shared regional narrative. Major Concerns and Consequences Across Indonesia , the Philippines and Nepal , the protests were anchored in shared anxieties about governance, accountability and the widening disconnect between young citizens and their ruling elite. In Indonesia, the outrage stemmed from parliamentary privileges and financial perks at a time when unemployment and living costs strained ordinary households. The privilege of the few became a reminder of systemic exclusion. In the Philippines, allegations of billions siphoned from disaster and flood-control funds deepened mistrust in political dynasties. Corruption was not merely a scandal, it was lived reality impacting infrastructure, safety and public welfare. Nepal’s sweeping social media ban triggered questions about civil liberties, surveillance and state control over speech, exposing a fragile democratic contract between the rulers and the ruled. The consequences unfolded rapidly and intensely. In Indonesia, the crisis eroded institutional trust, cast doubts on President Prabowo’s leadership and forced cabinet reshuffles aimed at damage control rather than reform. The crackdown on protesters strengthened calls for human rights safeguards and accountability. The Philippines confronted economic uncertainty, governance paralysis and a legitimacy challenge to the Marcos administration as tens of thousands demanded justice and structural reform. Economic losses accumulated as protests stalled mobility, while political discourse hardened into a question of resignation versus reform. Nepal arguably paid the steepest human cost. Seventy two lives were lost, thousands injured and digital blackouts disrupted not only dissent but also commerce, communication and education. Curfews, clashes and impunity inflamed resentment further, suggesting that coercion could delay but not dissolve discontent. Beyond immediate unrest, long term consequences took shape. Investors grew cautious, tourism took a hit in Nepal, and public institutions in all three nations were forced under scrutiny. Regional observers warned of a potential trust deficit between youth and government that could shape future elections and leadership transitions. Yet within the disruption lay possibility. These upheavals energised civic participation, amplified calls for merit-based leadership and inspired transnational solidarity where memes, flags and slogans travelled faster than diplomacy. The movements demonstrated how digital generation consciousness can redefine political engagement. What began as protest became a formative moment in Southeast and South Asia’s democratic evolution, signalling that governance models built on opacity and privilege no longer match a generation raised on transparency and voice. Political Perspectives and Understanding Political theory  helps unpack the deeper logic of these movements. Through the  realist lens, states acted to preserve order using coercive capability when challenged. Curfews, social media bans, arrests and ministerial reshuffling were attempts to maintain authority against unpredictable street mobilisation. Liberal theory  highlights systemic fault lines, especially weak accountability mechanisms that allowed corruption networks and privilege to persist. Indonesia’s parliamentary perks, the Philippines’ flood fund scandal and Nepal’s entrenched patronage systems demonstrate how institutional design shapes public trust. Constructivism  foregrounds identity and narrative. Gen Z used digital culture, memes, pirate flags and humour as political tools, forging a cross-border identity rooted not in nationalism but generational solidarity. Political aspirations travelled through symbols rather than treaties. Critical theory  goes further, exposing inequity. It points to how exclusion, nepotism and privilege were not aberrations but structures protecting elite interests. The protests reveal how power, when insulated from scrutiny, invites rebellion. Yet theory alone cannot contain what happened on the streets. Young citizens did not march only because theories predicted failure. They marched because they felt the future slipping from their grasp. They marched to reclaim dignity, to question inherited power and to insist that democracy cannot function as generational theatre where youth are only the audience and never actors. In that defiance, a new political consciousness was born. A consciousness that is empowered, impatient, unafraid and deeply aware of its numbers. Takeaways 2025 marked a turning point in the political story of Southeast and South Asia. A demographic often dismissed as disengaged proved capable of rewriting national discourses. Digital culture enabled rapid mobilisation. Pop symbols became political language. Youth no longer accepted corruption, privilege or censorship as immutable reality. Governments could manage dissent through force, but long-term stability required partnership, transparency and inclusion. Whether leaders evolve fast enough remains uncertain. What is clear is that the political map has shifted. The question is not whether Gen Z has found its voice. Jakarta, Manila and Kathmandu already answered that. The real question is whether institutions are ready to hear them. Compiled by Commodore (Dr) Johnson Odakkal (with support from Ms. Supriya Mishra and Ms. Kashmira Juwatkar )  Stay Tuned for More! The youth-led wave across Indonesia, the Philippines and Nepal reminds us that democracy is not merely a system—it is a living conversation between power and people. The streets of Jakarta, Manila and Kathmandu were not just scenes of unrest, but classrooms where a new generation taught the world what accountability looks like. Their protests did not end when the crowds dispersed; they reshaped regional discourse, challenged authority and opened space for new political possibilities. This edition of Global Canvas  captures just one chapter in an unfolding story of how Asia's youngest citizens are rewriting the rules of governance. More case studies, more voices and more regions await. What movement or global trend should we map next? Share your thoughts, reflections and questions in the comments. Stay connected with us through   www.johnsonodakkal.com   or email us at ceo@johnsonodakkal.com Exciting news related to the Global Canvas series coming soon! Watch out for updates! References and Sources Adhikari, P. (2025, October 3). Nepal’s leaderless Gen-Z revolution has changed the rules of power. Al Jazeera . https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2025/10/3/nepals-leaderless-gen-z-revolution-has-changed-the-rules-of-power    Ap. (2025, September 21). Thousands protest in Philippines over massive corruption scandal . The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/thousands-protest-in-philippines-over-massive-corruption-scandal/article70076528.ece   Beltran, M. (2025, November 30). Thousands march in Philippines, demanding Marcos resign over fraud scandal. Al Jazeera . https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/11/30/thousands-rally-in-philippines-demanding-marcos-resign-over-graft-scandal   Butler, J. G. &. G. (2025, September 3). Indonesia: Hundreds of women with brooms join protests as Prabowo flies to China . https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c7vlv2gpvvzo   Cherian, J. S. (2025, September 10). Why was Indonesia rocked by protests? | Explained . The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/why-was-indonesia-rocked-by-protests-explained/article70031118.ece   Choudhury, S. D., Dawar, T., & Dawar, T. (2025, September 11). Nepal’s Gen Z protests expose deeper frustrations, raise regional stakes . Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada. https://www.asiapacific.ca/publication/nepals-gen-z-protests-expose-deeper-frustrations-and-regional-stakes   Corruption fuels unrest in Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia . (n.d.). Asia Media Centre | Helping New Zealand Media Cover Asia. https://www.asiamediacentre.org.nz/otr-indonesia-philippines-and-malaysia-citizens-rise-against-corruption   ‘Culture of corruption’ protests: What’s ahead for Philippines?  (n.d.). https://www.aa.com.tr/en/asia-pacific/-culture-of-corruption-protests-what-s-ahead-for-philippines/3698664   Desk, E. (2025, September 26). Corruption, ‘nepo babies’: How the Philippines’ protests echo Nepal agitation, where they diverge. The Indian Express . https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-global/corruption-nepo-babies-philippines-youth-protest-10272365/   Ewe, K. (2025, October 14). Indonesian MPs get extra allowance weeks after angry protests over perks . https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly4gwr20wzo   Greene, C. (2025, October 2). What to know about the ‘Gen Z’ Protests roiling countries across the globe. TIME . https://time.com/7322834/gen-z-protests-government-corruption/   Indonesia: End crackdown on protesters, arbitrary detention. (2025, October 21). Human Rights Watch . https://www.hrw.org/news/2025/09/03/indonesia-end-crackdown-on-protesters-arbitrary-detention   Jazeera, A. (2025a, September 9). Indonesian President Prabowo replaces five ministers after deadly protests. Al Jazeera . https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/9/9/indonesian-president-prabowo-replaces-five-ministers-after-deadly-protests   Jazeera, A. (2025b, September 21). Clashes, arrests as tens of thousands protest corruption in Philippines. Al Jazeera . https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/9/21/thousands-rally-in-philippines-at-anticorruption-protests-in-manila   Lamb, K. (2025, August 27). Protests erupt in Indonesia over privileges for parliament members and ‘corrupt elites.’ The Guardian . https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/aug/26/indonesia-protests-austerity-parliament-member-privileges   Livingstone, H. (2025, September 2). Indonesia protests explained: why did they start and how has the government responded? The Guardian . https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/02/indonesia-protests-explained-start-how-has-the-government-responded   Nepal Gen Z Front demands sacking of PM’s chief personal secretary over nepotism. (2025, November 24). Kathmandu Post . https://kathmandupost.com/national/2025/11/24/nepal-gen-z-front-demands-sacking-of-pm-s-chief-personal-secretary-over-nepotism   Pokharel, G., & Ellis-Petersen, H. (2025, October 31). Unease at slow pace of change in Nepal one month on from gen Z protests. The Guardian . https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/oct/11/nepal-gen-z-protests-one-month-on-slow-change   Pti. (2025, November 27). Nepal’s Gen Z youths clash with ousted PM Sharma Oli’s party cadres . The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/nepals-gen-z-youths-clash-with-ousted-pm-sharma-olis-party-cadres/article70328978.ece   Ratcliffe, R. (2025, September 22). Protesters flood streets of Philippines over state corruption. The Guardian . https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/21/protests-philippines-corruption-state-flood   Singh, R. (2025, October 12). After Nepal and the Philippines, why have youth-led protests rocked Morocco and Madagascar? The Indian Express . https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-global/nepal-philippines-youth-protests-morocco-madagascar-10300879/   UNHR. (2025, September 1). Indonesia protests: call for restraint and dialogue  [Press release]. https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2025/09/indonesia-protests-call-restraint-and-dialogue   Wong, T. (2025, September 24). Gen Z uprising in Asia shows social media is a double-edged sword . https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn4ljv39em7o   Janjira Sombatpoonsiri. (2025, September 30). The promises and pitfalls of the social Media–Fueled Gen-Z protests across Asia . Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2025/09/social-media-gen-z-protests-nepal-indonesia-promises-pitfalls?lang=en

The Nobility of Silence From deckplates to think tanks, I have seen power in motion. At sea, it moves with the steel of hulls and the rhythm of deployments. In classrooms and strategy rooms, it moves with ideas, models, and narratives. Both are real, both shape our world, and both demand a steady hand on the compass. In 2025, that compass seems to be spinning wildly. Alliances fracture, blocs consolidate, technologies redefine sovereignty, and entire regions are rewriting their place on the global chart. For a world conditioned by familiar coordinates of power, the sudden tilts of this multipolar order feel disorienting. How then does one navigate? The answer lies in bringing together lived experience, historical memory, and critical thinking — in calibrating a compass that can hold steady even as the gyro spins. Lessons on Power in Motion My first education in geopolitics was not in lecture halls or policy papers but on the deckplates of naval ships. There, in the humid winds of the Indian Ocean and the sharp chill of northern seas, I learned that global politics is not an abstraction. It is convoy escorts, maritime patrols, and port visits that signal presence, deterrence, or solidarity. Maritime chokepoints taught me this viscerally. The Strait of Hormuz, where a narrow passage carries a fifth of the world’s oil. The Malacca Strait, lifeline of Asian trade. Bab el-Mandeb, gateway to the Red Sea. Each chokepoint is a reminder that sovereignty and security are not theoretical - they are exercised by hulls in the water, radar on watch, and sailors at their stations. From the deckplates, one sees power in motion. A fleet maneuver is not just tactical; it is a message in steel. A port call is not just logistics; it is diplomacy with flags and uniforms. A naval exercise is not just practice; it is assurance to partners and warning to rivals. These early lessons have never left me. They taught me that strategy is experienced before it is theorized. The Horizon of 2025: New Fleet Formations Looking across today’s horizon, I see familiar patterns, fleets forming, converging, colliding, but in very different seas. China’s flagship sails high. At the Shanghai Cooperation Organization summit in Tianjin this year, Beijing pushed for a yuan-denominated energy corridor, an SCO development bank, and greater technological integration through the BeiDou satellite system. Alongside Russia, Iran, and North Korea — the so-called CRINKs — China is building a bloc that challenges the dominance of Western-led institutions. The imagery is striking Xi, Putin, and Kim sharing a stage at Beijing’s military parade. A choreographed reminder that authoritarian powers are no longer shy of being seen together. The U.S. and India collide in contested waters. Despite being called natural allies, 2025 has seen frictions: Washington’s steep tariffs on Indian imports, India’s strategic autonomy in energy sourcing, and the balancing act of being in Quad exercises while engaging with BRICS expansion. Like ships maneuvering too close in narrow seas, these collisions do not mean hostility, but they underscore the difficulty of coordination when priorities diverge. Europe arms itself into a new battle group. After decades of relying on transatlantic guarantees, the European Union has turbocharged its defense posture with an €800 billion plan. The message is that Europe is no longer content to be a dependent convoy; it seeks to steam ahead as an independent task force. Technology fleets dominate the new sea lanes. AI systems, digital sovereignty, and energy technologies are the new carriers and destroyers. Control over data flows and algorithmic governance is fast becoming as decisive as naval dominance once was in the Indian Ocean. Technology giants increasingly resemble digital sovereigns — not just tools of states but actors shaping public discourse and strategic choices. These new “fleet formations” reveal the reality of 2025: multipolarity is not theoretical anymore. The world’s task forces are assembled, but their rules of navigation are not yet agreed. On to Seminar Rooms: Thinking About Power If the deckplates taught me what power looks like in motion, the seminar rooms and think tanks taught me what power looks like on paper. War games, strategy models, policy briefs — all attempt to capture the motion of power in diagrams, projections, and scenarios. Yet here, an epistemic perspective is useful: Who decides what counts as authoritative knowledge in geopolitics? ● For decades, knowledge was hierarchical. States, militaries, and their think tanks defined the narratives. ● Today, new knowers enter the room: AI systems producing simulations, grassroots movements reshaping agendas, regional blocs like BRICS or the Alliance of Sahel States asserting alternative discourses. ● Expertise itself is contested. Is a naval officer with lived deployments more credible than a policy analyst with datasets? Is an AI forecast a knowledge claim or a statistical guess? TOK reminds us that knowledge is not only what is said but who says it, and who accepts it. The risk is that think tanks become echo chambers, reinforcing their own assumptions, while AI systems produce outputs without human judgment. The challenge is not to abandon theory, but to ensure that experience, history, and epistemic humility guide how we interpret models. India’s Bearings in a Multipolar Sea In this turbulent ocean, India finds itself both a ship in the fleet and a potential provider of bearings. Historically, India has been a maritime civilization, with the Indian Ocean as its crossroads of trade and encounter. Culturally, it has navigated pluralism, balancing multiple faiths and traditions. Strategically, it has guarded its autonomy, resisting being a camp follower in global blocs. In 2025, India faces difficult waters. U.S. pressure on trade and energy, Chinese assertiveness along borders and seas, and Russian ties that are both legacy and liability. Yet India’s civilizational ethos, of dialogue, diversity, and knowledge, offers more than just another ship in the lineup. It offers a compass. India does not need to merely balance blocs. It can articulate a perspective that sees power not only as coercion or currency but as responsibility, responsibility for stability, for freedom of navigation, for inclusive development, and for critical thinking. If the world is spinning, India can be an anchor, not because it is flawless, but because it knows what it means to navigate contradictions. Mentorship as Compass Calibration As I turn sixty, I am mindful of the responsibility not just to read the compass but to hand it down calibrated. The greatest danger in a spinning world is not disorientation but the absence of guides who can steady younger hands. Every classroom I teach in, whether Global Politics or Theory of Knowledge, is a miniature think tank. There, I see students wrestling with concepts of power, justice, sovereignty, and human rights. There, I see the temptation of quick answers and the allure of simplistic narratives. And there, I see the opportunity to equip them with intellectual compasses that will help them navigate beyond exams into life. Mentorship is not about dictating routes. It is about teaching how to read bearings, how to question assumptions, how to balance reason with empathy. Just as a naval navigator must constantly correct for drift and current, so must young scholars learn to adjust their course without losing their destination. The compass we hand down must be ethical imagination — the capacity to see not only where power lies, but where responsibility lies. Holding a Compass in a Spinning World In 2025, the gyrocompass spins wildly. The CRINKs bloc parades its defiance, Western alliance’s strain, AI redraws sovereignty, and the Global South asserts new alignments. For many, the world seems unmoored, without fixed bearings. Yet clarity is possible. History shows us patterns, lived experience shows us consequences, and critical thinking shows us questions worth asking. From deckplates to think tanks, I have seen power in motion. But motion without bearings is drift. The greater task before us is not to predict every wave but to hold the compass steady. To teach, to mentor, to guide — so that in the spinning world, a generation of navigators will emerge who can chart courses responsibly, with wisdom and courage. The seas are uncertain. The compass may spin. But the responsibility to navigate remains ours. This article was published in FINS e-Bulletin, Volume 6, Issue 5, 1st October 2025.

A few days ago, a colleague on the National Syllabus, Textbook and Learning Committee , Diya Chatterjee, shared the words of a private school teacher from Bhopal that pierced through layers of rhetoric: “I’m forgetting the joy I once felt in teaching, the very reason I became a teacher.” On the eve of Teacher’s Day , these words should weigh heavily on our collective conscience. For if the joy of teaching is extinguished, the very soul of education is endangered. The Nobility of Silence Teaching has always been a noble calling, and perhaps its most precious honour lies in the opportunity to learn without boundaries and to witness the spark of discovery in young minds. Yet today, the spark of that learning is weighed down by multiple expectations. Teachers are asked to be an inspirational voice in the classroom, counselors for students, managers of parental concerns, masters of ever-changing technologies, and contributors to institutional demands, all at once. Amidst this whirlwind, one vital question is often left unasked: How are teachers themselves coping? Too often, the answer comes in silence. Silence from fatigue. Silence from unacknowledged stress. Silence that risks turning a vocation of passion into a profession of transaction. In earlier reflections, I described this as the “ murder of pedagogy by hierarchy .” The danger lies not only in government apathy or commercialization, but sometimes within the very ecosystem of schools themselves. When leadership reduces mentoring to mere monitoring, when administration overshadows inspiration, and when senior colleagues lean more on authority than responsibility, the true spirit of teaching is diminished. This is not simply about efficiency. It is about fidelity to the calling of education. Teaching is not meant to be policed, it is meant to be nurtured. It flourishes best when cultivated with trust, empathy, and joy. Leadership, Responsibility, and Misplaced Hierarchy Educational leadership is not about control. It is about creating safe spaces for growth , both for learners and for teachers. But too often, school leadership teams focus on compliance, instead of curiosity. Structures of accountability, while necessary, too frequently devolve into rigid systems that stifle rather than support . More painful still is when senior teachers, who should be the torchbearers of mentorship, lapse into perpetuating pseudo-hierarchies.  Instead of nurturing younger colleagues, they can sometimes fall into patterns of critique, control, or exclusion. In doing so, they inadvertently turn classrooms into battlegrounds of authority rather than sanctuaries of learning. Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan, whose birthday we mark as Teacher’s Day in India, once said: “The end-product of education should be a free creative man, who can battle against historical circumstances and adversities of nature.” If this is the vision, then how tragic it is when teachers themselves are shackled by the very hierarchies that should liberate them. What Frameworks Demand To be fair, frameworks and policies have tried to address this. The National Education Policy 2020  and the National Curriculum Framework 2023  explicitly state the importance of “enabling and empowering teachers.” But this must move beyond slogans. Professional development cannot be reduced to one-time workshops and PowerPoints. International frameworks, too, echo this. The IB Learner Profile  emphasises that both students and teachers must embody attributes such as “inquirers” and “reflective.” Similarly, Cambridge’s ethos highlights “education for a better world,” which requires teachers who themselves feel inspired and empowered. Yet policy without culture remains sterile. If schools treat teachers as replaceable rather than invaluable, if capacity building is a checkbox rather than a commitment, then empowerment remains rhetoric. Why Teaching Matters Teaching is the quiet force that shapes futures long before they are visible. At its heart, it is not the transmission of information but the cultivation of clarity, confidence, and curiosity in another human being. A teacher does not merely instruct; they ignite imagination, awaken conscience, and nurture resilience. What distinguishes teaching from many other professions is its ripple effect. A single encouraging word in the classroom can travel across years, influencing careers, shaping character, and even redirecting the course of communities. This is why education systems must never reduce teaching to a checklist of duties or metrics of efficiency. Teaching is nation-building in its most intimate form, transforming individual lives that, together, determine the trajectory of a society. Today, when pressures of hierarchy, bureaucracy, and commercialization threaten to stifle that essence, we must remind ourselves that teaching is a covenant of trust. It is where influence flows not from command but from compassion, not from hierarchy but from humility. To protect that covenant is to protect the possibility of a brighter, freer, more humane future. The Way Forward to Joyous Pedagogy What then is required? Three essentials stand out: Safe Spaces for Teachers:  Just as students thrive in classrooms that encourage questioning, teachers thrive in schools that allow vulnerability, reflection, and experimentation without fear of reprimand. Mentorship over Hierarchy:  Senior teachers and leadership teams must embrace mentoring as their primary role. Authority without empathy undermines pedagogy. Guidance with care, however, multiplies influence. Reclaiming Joy:  Professional learning communities, collaborative innovation, and acknowledgment of teachers as learners themselves are crucial. As the IB rightly suggests, “education is a journey of inquiry.” Teachers, too, deserve to rediscover inquiry and joy. Mirror to Society The state of teaching is never just a matter of classrooms; it is a mirror of society itself. If schools become places where hierarchy overwhelms accountability, society too risks inheriting rigidity and division. But if schools nurture joy, empowerment, and the freedom to learn, then the society of tomorrow will inherit resilience, creativity, and compassion. This is why protecting the delight of learning is not only an educational concern, but a national one. For every teacher who is empowered, inspired, and valued, a classroom lights up—and with it, the minds and lives of countless students. I count it a privilege that my own journey as a teacher began early: first, in middle school, guiding a younger peer, and later, at just 16, serving as a class teacher and maths teacher for three months. Those moments, however small, revealed the profound gift of teaching—to shape, to encourage, and to witness cognitive construction in young minds. To this day, I carry that same gratitude. For teaching is not merely a task; it is a trust. And when honoured, it builds not just classrooms, but the very fabric of our society. Teacher’s Day and the Call Ahead Teacher’s Day should not become a ritual of garlands and speeches while ignoring the struggles within faculty rooms. Instead, it should be a moment of resolve. To borrow the words of the teacher from Bhopal: “I am forgetting the joy I once felt in teaching.”  Let us ensure this is never the refrain of an entire generation of teachers. As someone who has led at sea and now learns with students in classrooms, I know storms can be weathered only when the crew rows together. So too in education: when teachers, senior colleagues, leadership teams, and policymakers row in unison, pedagogy thrives. On this Teacher’s Day, may we reclaim the joy of teaching , dismantle suffocating hierarchies, and ensure that classrooms remain what they were always meant to be: places of freedom, discovery, and light. “When teachers thrive, society sails forward.”

On this 78th anniversary of its modern, independent, and sovereign journey, India’s strategic autonomy is once again at the forefront of its international relations. This principle, a cornerstone of its foreign policy since independence, reflects a deep-seated commitment to charting its own course amidst a complex global landscape. From the earliest days of decolonization and its leadership in the Bandung Declaration of 1955, India has steadfastly refused to align with any single power bloc, prioritizing its national interests and its role as a voice for the developing world. This approach, which allows it to maintain relationships across geopolitical divides, is a testament to its enduring diplomatic philosophy. It is a philosophy that has shaped its policies from its nuclear pursuits to its current energy needs. The relationship between India and the U.S. has been a journey of peaks and valleys. For much of the Cold War, the U.S. viewed India with suspicion due to its non-aligned stance and close ties with the Soviet Union, with friction over trade and U.S. support for Pakistan. The turn of the century, however, saw a significant shift, culminating in the landmark U.S.-India Civil Nuclear Agreement in 2008, which ended India's nuclear isolation and marked a high point in strategic partnership. The relationship deepened further through initiatives like the Quad, aimed at countering Chinese influence. Yet, with President Trump's re-election, a new period of tension has emerged, fueled by a 25% reciprocal tariff on Indian goods and unspecified penalties on Russia-related purchases. This transactional approach, which prioritizes trade deficit reduction, risks straining a partnership critical to both nations' long-term interests and stability against shared challenges. As a response, the Indian Ministry of External Affairs pushed back such demands, making it clear that Washington’s latest trade salvos would not dictate New Delhi’s choices. In a sharply worded statement, the MEA noted that “the United States has in recent days targeted India’s oil imports from Russia. We have already made clear our position on these issues, including the fact that our imports are based on market factors and done with the overall objective of ensuring the energy security of 1.4 billion people of India” (MEA, 2025). In other words, India is unwilling to bow to demands that undermine its right to source discounted Russian oil, a policy the U.S. itself encouraged in 2022, in the early months of the Ukraine war, to stabilize global prices. By labeling the American measures “unfair, unjustified, and unreasonable,” (MEA, 2025) New Delhi is not only defending a trade choice but reasserting the principle that its economic policy will be shaped in New Delhi, not in Washington. This Op-Ed traces the trajectory of this trade standoff, examines its sector-specific impacts, and assesses India’s enduring strategic importance to the U.S. amidst its rise as an Asian power of global significance. The Trajectory of Trade Tensions The current trade gridlock builds on a history of friction that began (2017-2020), during Donald Trump's first term. Back then, he took a jibe at India, labelling New Delhi as the “tariff king”, due to the latter's high tariffs and non-tariff barriers. He revoked India’s Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) status in 2019 citing the same reasons. As a response, India imposed tariffs on U.S. goods like almonds and apples. Though the tensions eased under the Biden administration, with the WTO disputes getting resolved by 2023, Trump's second term has seen intensified developments with regards to this tariff issue. On 1st February, 2025, Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), declaring trade deficits a national emergency and imposing a 10% baseline tariff on all countries, with higher “reciprocal tariffs” targeting nations like India with significant trade surpluses. Further, the 1st April “Liberation Day” saw a 26% tariff on Indian goods, which was later reduced to 25%, suspended for a period of 90 days. As of August 2025, these two countries have engaged in 5 rounds of talks, catalyzed by Prime Minister Modi's February visit to Washington. However, no deal has been finalized yet, which has led to commencing a 6th talk in New Delhi, later this month. Though initiatives like “U.S.-India COMPACT”, launched during Prime Minister Modi's visit aimed towards doubling bilateral trade to $500 billion, specific sectors like agriculture and dairy, have stalled progress.  Sticking Points and Strategic Autonomy India’s trade policy, rooted in strategic autonomy, prioritizes protecting its domestic industries and 700 million rural livelihoods, particularly in agriculture and dairy. The US, on the other hand, seeks greater market access for its farm products, including genetically modified corn and soybeans, viewing India’s $45.7 billion trade surplus in 2024 as a leverage point.  This policy is not a new reaction but is "rooted in a historical commitment to food security and farmer protection.  India's high tariff and non tariff barriers, such as Quality Control Orders and data localization rules, are seen as “obnoxious” by Trump, who demands near-complete market opening. However, New Delhi's refusal to liberalize agriculture and dairy reflects its historical commitment to food security and farmer protections, reinforced by the 2020 farm law protests. India’s strategic autonomy is also demonstrated through its energy and defense relations with Russia, with the former importing 1.75 million barrels of oil per day from the latter, from January to June this year, prompting Trump’s additional penalty. The additional 25% tariff imposed on India as a response to its oil purchases from the Kremlin aligns with U.S. efforts to isolate Russia over Ukraine. It is an example of India's diplomacy inspired by Arthashastra, which is about "maximizing flexibility while avoiding over-dependence". New Delhi’s BRICS membership and neutral stance enhances its global influence, complicating further alignment with the U.S. goals.  Though India has offered concessions, including tariff reductions on 60% of U.S. imports and preferential access for 90%, alongside lowering tariffs on bourbon and motorcycles, it falls short on Trump's expectations and his aggressive deadlines. New Delhi’s cautious approach, prioritizing long-term benefits over a “hotchpotch deal,” reflects its strategic calculus to maintain policy independence while engaging Washington.  Sector-Specific Impacts Amidst this trade standoff, labour-intensive sectors like textiles and electronics face steep cost increases, eroding India’s edge over lower-tariff competitors such as Vietnam and Indonesia. Gems and jewellery risk market share losses, while auto parts and metals could see supply chain disruptions. Pharmaceuticals are partially shielded due to U.S. reliance on Indian generics, and services exports remain largely unaffected for now, though vulnerable to visa changes. Despite these headwinds, India’s competitive positioning of export diversification and free trade agreements with partners like the UAE and UK, offers a degree of resilience.  India’s Rising Global Influence and Strategic Importance Far from the “dead economy” comment made by Trump, India is projected to grow at 6.5% through 2026, retaining its position as the world’s fastest-growing major economy (Taxtmi, 2025). Its robust rebuttal to U.S. pressure, coupled with its ability to balance BRICS partnerships and Quad security commitments, underscores its emergence as a bridge between the Global South and Western powers. The MEA’s public critique of Western “double standards” on Russia is less a defensive reaction and more a declaration that India will not trade away strategic autonomy for short-term concessions.  From a geopolitical perspective, India’s leadership in the Quad, naval modernization in the Indian Ocean, and strong foothold on key chokepoints like the Malacca Strait, aligns with U.S. goals to counter Chinese influence. India’s maritime dominance is critical for securing trade routes, reinforced by joint exercises like Malabar. Despite tensions over Russia, India’s exclusion from Trump’s July tariff letters and ongoing talks signal U.S. recognition of its strategic value. However, Trump’s transactional approach, i.e., prioritizing trade deficit reduction over long-term alignment, risks straining this partnership. Additionally, India’s refusal to fully align with U.S. sanctions on Russia reflects its Arthashastra inspired diplomacy, i.e., maximizing flexibility while avoiding over-dependence.  The Path Forward: A Call for Nuance The India-U.S. trade standoff reflects a clash between Trump’s aggressive protectionism and India’s strategic autonomy, with significant implications for bilateral ties. The upcoming 6th round of talks in New Delhi offers a glimmer of hope for a “mini-deal,” potentially focusing on labor-intensive sectors like textiles and gems while leaving more contentious issues like agriculture and dairy for future negotiations. India's resilience, reinforced by export diversification and competitive positioning, will help mitigate the impact of tariffs, although sustained tariffs could reduce its GDP growth by 0.5-1%. For the U.S., maintaining India as a strategic partner is critical for securing supply chains and strengthening the Quad to counter Chinese influence. A nuanced U.S. approach is essential, recognizing that tariffs alone cannot dictate the trajectory of this indispensable partnership. India's rise as an Asian power demands that both nations prioritize long-term strategic alignment over short-term economic wins. India’s journey of strategic autonomy has prepared it to navigate such challenges, demonstrating its maturity as a global power unwilling to compromise its core principles for short-term concessions. References: Business Today. (2025, August 12). US imposed 25% reciprocal tariffs on Indian exports; no addl tariffs on pharma, electronics: MoS Commerce.  https://www.businesstoday.in/india/story/us-imposed-25-reciprocal-tariffs-on-indian-exports-no-addl-tariffs-on-pharma-electronics-mos-commerce-489039-2025-08-12 Nath, S. (2025, August 5). US Wanted India To Buy Russian Oil When Ukraine War Started. What Changed. NDTV https://www.ndtv.com/world-news/us-wanted-india-to-buy-russian-oil-when-ukraine-war-started-what-changed-9022516   Prusty, N. (2025, August 11). India pushes ahead with US trade talks despite tariff hike to 50%. Reuters  https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-pushes-ahead-with-us-trade-talks-despite-tariff-hike-50-2025-08-11/ Ministry of External Affairs. (2025, August 6). Statement by Official Spokesperson. Government of India.  https://www.mea.gov.in/Speeches-Statements.htm?dtl/39945/Statement_by_Official_Spokesperson Ministry of External Affairs. (2025, August 4). Statement by Official Spokesperson. Government of India  https://www.mea.gov.in/Speeches-Statements.htm?dtl/39936 Leonova, O. Khatri, J. (2023, July). Strategic Partnership between India and the United States: Examining Driving and Restraining Forces. MGIMO Review of International Relations 16(3):180-198. DOI:10.24833/2071-8160-2023-3-90-180-198  https://www.researchgate.net/publication/372089672_Strategic_Partnership_between_India_and_the_United_States_Examining_Driving_and_Restraining_Forces#:~:text=The%20history%20of%20Indo%2DAmerican%20relations%20has%20transformed,cooperation%20agreement%20in%202008%20(Oksana%2C%202023)%20 . PTI. (2025, August 07). From calling 'Tariff King' to imposing high import duties How US toughened trade terms with India.  https://www.theweek.in/wire-updates/business/2025/08/07/dcm11-biz-trump-tariffs-india-explainer.html The White House. (2025, April 2). Fact Sheet: President Donald J. Trump Declares National Emergency to Increase our Competitive Edge, Protect our Sovereignty, and Strengthen our National and Economic Security.  https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/04/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-declares-national-emergency-to-increase-our-competitive-edge-protect-our-sovereignty-and-strengthen-our-national-and-economic-security/ Rao, A. (2025, May 30). US Appeals Court Reinstates Trump Tariffs: Key Updates for India.  India Briefing. https://www.india-briefing.com/news/us-imposes-26-tariff-on-india-36763.html/ FP Explainers. (2025, July 4). Can India and the US strike a trade deal without clashing over agriculture? https://www.firstpost.com/explainers/india-us-trade-deal-agriculture-farmers-sticking-point-why-13903084.html#:~:text=The%20industry%20is%20largely%20unorganised,that%20include%20animal%20by%2Dproducts.&text=This%20latter%20point%20is%20a,by%20Indian%20distillers%20and%20agribusinesses . PTI. (2025, June 30). Import duty cut on US farm goods under trade pact could undermine India’s food security: GTRI. The Economic Times.   https://m.economictimes.com/news/economy/foreign-trade/import-duty-cut-on-us-farm-goods-under-trade-pact-could-undermine-indias-food-security-gtri/articleshow/122166146.cms Ohri, N. (2025, July 31). Factbox-Key US complaints about India's 'obnoxious' non-monetary trade barriers. Hindustan Times. https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/us-news/factboxkey-us-complaints-about-india-s-obnoxious-non-monetary-trade-barriers-101753959849740-amp.html Kashyap, G. (2021, November 20). The Farmers’ Protests and the Court: A Recap. Supreme Court Observer. https://www.scobserver.in/journal/the-farmers-protests-and-the-court-a-recap/ Patel, S., Shah, C. (2025, August 2). India to maintain Russian oil imports despite Trump threats, government sources say. Reuters.  https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/india-maintain-russian-oil-imports-despite-trump-threats-government-sources-say-2025-08-02/ Batra, S., Acharya, S., Dugal, I. (2025, May 9). Exclusive: India offers to slash tariff gap by two-thirds in dash to seal trade pact with Trump. Reuters.  https://www.reuters.com/world/india/india-offers-slash-tariff-gap-by-two-thirds-dash-seal-trade-pact-with-trump-2025-05-09/ PIB. (2025, April 1). How Make in India is Shaping the Future of Textiles and Apparel Industry. Ministry of Commerce & Industry. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2117470#:~:text=Overview%20of%20India's%20Textile%20Industry,MSME

Another Episode of “Global Canvas” by JOI In June 2025 , a SpaceX Starship test rocket exploded over South Texas, scattering debris into Mexico and damaging protected areas in Tamaulipas. In response, President Andrés Manuel López Obrador publicly threatened to sue Elon Musk’s company for environmental damage caused by falling debris. This incident is not isolated. Space activity, once celebrated as the frontier of human progress, is now colliding with politics and sovereignty disputes. What was once seen as a limitless realm for exploration is today entangled in the geopolitics of the global commons. The skies above us are no longer neutral; they are contested, commercialized, and dangerously unregulated. As powerful countries and private corporations crowd Earth’s orbit with satellites and rocket launches, the rest of the world bears the risks. This week on Global Canvas , we examine the growing threat of space debris through the lens of global commons governance and ask: Who really owns the sky, and who pays the price when it falls? Context and Background Space debris refers to defunct satellites, spent rocket stages, fragments from explosions or collisions, and other man-made objects left in orbit. Primarily caused by human activities in orbit, including satellite launches, rocket deployments, and military tests, debris can form when a satellite or rocket explodes, breaks apart due to collision, or reaches the end of its operational life and is not safely deorbited. Anti-satellite missile tests and accidental crashes between spacecraft also generated large clouds of debris.  Most debris is concentrated in Low Earth Orbit (LEO) , between 200 and 2,000 kilometres above Earth, where many satellites operate. Another significant cluster exists in geostationary orbit, about 36,000 kilometres up, used for communication satellites. But the threat doesn't stop in orbit. Space junk re-enters Earth’s atmosphere  regularly, and while most of it burns up, some larger pieces survive and hit the ground. This growing cloud of debris raises urgent questions about the governance of outer space. Originally envisioned as a ‘ global commons ’, space was defined as the "province of all mankind", prohibiting national appropriation of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies and envisioned as a domain to be used peacefully and equally by all. Today, the vision is under threat. Space is now increasingly dominated by a few powerful states and private actors. The lack of enforceable rules on debris mitigation and responsibility has made shared access more precarious. As low orbits fill up, the risks are borne by all, but especially by less powerful nations that lack the resources to influence space policy or respond to its fallout. Major Incidents Kosmos 954 (1978) : A Soviet satellite powered by a nuclear reactor re-entered the atmosphere and scattered radioactive material across the eastern part of Canada's Northwest Territories, the western part of what's now Nunavut and into northern Alberta and Saskatchewan. The Dené people, living near the eastern side of Great Slave Lake, were among the hardest hit and they continue to face long-term effects, including contamination of traditional territory and increased cancer rates. Chinese Anti-Satellite Test (2007) : China destroyed its weather satellite FY-1C using a kinetic kill vehicle launched on a modified ballistic missile. The impact, at an altitude of 865 kilometres, created over 3,000 pieces of trackable debris, making it the largest-ever space debris field. Nearly two decades later, in 2025, the International Space Station had to fire thrusters to avoid its remnants from that same event, underscoring its long-lasting impact on space safety. Iridium–Kosmos Collision (2009) : A defunct Russian military satellite , Kosmos 2251, collided with the active U.S. commercial satellite Iridium 33 at an altitude of about 790 kilometres. The crash was the first-ever accidental satellite collision in orbit, and the event highlighted the growing risk of uncontrolled objects in space and remains one of the largest space debris incidents to date. Russian Anti-Satellite Test (2021) : Russia conducted an anti-satellite test by destroying one of its satellites, Cosmos 1408, using a direct-ascent missile. The test created over 1,500 pieces of trackable debris in LEO, posing a significant threat to operational satellites and the International Space Station. The debris cloud forced ISS crew members to take emergency shelter, drawing international criticism for the irresponsible use of ASAT weapons and their long-term risk to space safety. Long March 5B (November 2022) : A Chinese Long March 5B rocket made an uncontrolled re-entry into Earth's atmosphere, prompting France, Spain, and Monaco to temporarily close sections of their airspace as a precaution. Though China’s space agency later confirmed the rocket fell over the Sulu Sea in the Pacific, the precautionary airspace closures delayed 645 flights and caused air traffic congestion in neighbouring countries. Falcon 9 debris in Poland (February 2025) : A piece of debris from a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket’s second stage survived re-entry and crashed into a warehouse in Komorniki, Poland. The impact caused structural damage but no injuries. This rare ground strike reignited discussions around uncontrolled re-entries, risk management in commercial space operations, and the need for better international tracking and debris mitigation systems. Kosmos 482 (May 2025) : A Soviet-era Venus probe launched in 1972 re-entered Earth’s atmosphere uncontrollably and reportedly crashed into the Indian Ocean. The spacecraft had remained in orbit for over 50 years, and its re-entry raised concerns about the risks of aging, defunct satellites left in space. These incidents are just the visible edge of a much larger orbital problem. They highlight the growing unpredictability of space debris. While most fragments burn up during re-entry, larger components such as satellite parts and rocket stages can survive the descent and pose risks both in space and on the ground. Key Players and Stakeholders 1) National Space Agencies. National space agencies play a critical role in shaping the direction of space activity, not just through exploration and satellite deployment, but also in setting standards for responsible conduct in orbit. These agencies manage satellite constellations, space stations, and scientific missions, which place them at the centre of both debris creation and mitigation. Agencies like NASA (United States), ESA (Europe), ISRO (India), CNSA (China), and Roscosmos (Russia) are among the most active in both operational and policy efforts related to space debris. NASA operates the world’s most advanced orbital debris tracking system through its Orbital Debris Program Office, providing critical data for collision avoidance and risk assessment. ESA, on the other hand, has introduced the “Zero Debris Charter” , aimed at ensuring future missions leave no waste in orbit by 2030 . 2) Private Companies. Private space companies have become major players in the modern space landscape, with firms like SpaceX, Blue Origin, OneWeb, and Virgin Galactic launching thousands of satellites into orbit. Their growing presence brings innovation, lower launch costs, and expanded access to space, but also new challenges in managing space traffic and debris. SpaceX, for example, operates the world’s largest satellite constellation through Starlink and has faced scrutiny over potential collision risks and re-entry debris. While some companies follow voluntary guidelines, enforcement remains weak, and not all private actors prioritise long-term sustainability. However, some firms are contributing positively. Companies such as ClearSpace and Astroscale are developing active debris removal technologies, while others invest in propulsion systems that enable controlled deorbiting.  Private companies are key to the future of space, but must take on shared responsibility. Their participation in global forums, adherence to debris mitigation standards, and investment in safer satellite design will determine how sustainable space remains. 3) Emerging and Non-Spacefaring Nations. Smaller or emerging spacefaring nations such as Japan , the UAE, South Korea, and Brazil are becoming increasingly significant players in shaping global space governance. These countries often rely on international cooperation and shared infrastructure, making the stability and safety of orbital space critical to their development agendas. Japan, for instance, has invested in space debris mitigation through JAXA’s active debris removal technologies, while the UAE has positioned itself as a responsible actor, advocating for peaceful and sustainable space use through forums like the UN COPUOS. At the same time, non-spacefaring states, particularly small island nations in the Pacific or developing countries in Africa and Asia, may not launch satellites but are heavily dependent on space-based services for climate monitoring, disaster response, navigation, and communications. These states are stakeholders by consequence. As space debris grows and global commons erode, their ability to access orbital resources safely and affordably is increasingly threatened. Despite limited representation in decision-making, their interests underscore the urgent need for more inclusive, equitable global space governance. Major Concerns and Consequences Uncontrolled space activity and the accumulation of debris are turning outer space from once a symbol of shared progress into a contested and hazardous domain. The overcrowding of key orbits, paired with weak global regulations, undermines the idea of space as a global commons . Today, a few powerful states and corporations dominate access, sidelining emerging spacefaring nations and non-spacefaring countries that rely on satellites for vital services like communication and disaster response. As debris increases, the goal of equitable participation in space use is slipping out of reach. In orbit, the threat of collisions even from small fragments forces costly evasive manoeuvres. On Earth, re-entering debris can damage property, harm ecosystems, or in rare cases, release hazardous materials. These risks are pushing insurers to rethink space coverage, while proposed cleanup missions remain experimental and expensive. Incidents like the SpaceX–Mexico fallout show how debris can escalate into diplomatic disputes, raising urgent questions around accountability and legal responsibility. A globally coordinated, responsible approach to space governance is more critical than ever. Theoretically Speaking : Strategic Alignments and Power Shifts Realism views space as an extension of geopolitical rivalry, where states and corporations act to protect national interests and strategic advantage. Debris-generating actions such as anti-satellite (ASAT) tests by China and Russia are seen as deliberate demonstrations of power and deterrence, even if they endanger orbital sustainability. From this lens, space debris is a trade-off in the pursuit of dominance. However, realism fails to account for the need for global cooperation to manage shared risks, and it sidelines the interests of less powerful nations and non-state actors affected by the fallout. Constructivism interprets space not just as physical territory but as a socially constructed domain shaped by dominant norms and narratives. Whether space is governed as a commons or exploited as a military or commercial asset depends on who defines the rules. As leading powers and private firms shape expectations around space activity, collective responsibility often gets sidelined. While this perspective explains how global norms evolve, it may overestimate the role of shared values in a landscape increasingly driven by competition and profit. Takeaways Space was once seen as infinite, a place where human activity could have no lasting consequence. That illusion is gone. Today, the skies above us are cluttered, contested, and dangerously fragile. It’s a real and growing threat. If we don’t act collectively and decisively, space debris will not only choke our orbital pathways but also rain chaos onto our planet. The space race must not become a race to pollute it. Compiled by Commodore (Dr) Johnson Odakkal (with support from Ms Vivaksha Vats)  Stay Tuned for More! The growing crisis of space debris is more than a technological challenge it’s a political test of how we govern our global commons. From cross-border lawsuits to contested orbits, the fallout is forcing states, corporations, and citizens to confront urgent questions of accountability, equity, and sustainability. In the end, the future of space won’t just be shaped by engineering breakthroughs, but by the collective will to act responsibly before the sky falls. In our next episode of Global Canvas , we explore another arena where global challenges collide with political complexity. Until then, we’d love to hear your reflections . What global shifts are keeping you up at night? Share your views in the comments or connect with us at www.johnsonodakkal.com   or email   ceo@johnsonodakkal.com   to stay engaged. References and Sources NASA. (2023, November 3). Space Debris . NASA. https://www.nasa.gov/headquarters/library/find/bibliographies/space-debris/ European Space Agency. (2023). About space debris . www.esa.int . https://www.esa.int/Space_Safety/Space_Debris/About_space_debris Reuters. (2025, June 26). SpaceX says debris recovery attempts hindered after Starship explosion. Reuters . https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/spacex-says-debris-recovery-attempts-hindered-after-starship-explosion-2025-06-26/ O’Callaghan, J. (2019). What is Space Junk and why is it a problem?  Natural History Museum. https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/what-is-space-junk-and-why-is-it-a-problem.html Shamim, S. (2025, June 27). Why is Mexico threatening to sue Elon Musk over SpaceX debris?  Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/27/why-is-mexico-threatening-to-sue-elon-musk-over-spacex-debris Guardian staff reporter. (2025, June 25). Mexico’s president threatens to sue over SpaceX debris from rocket explosions. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/jun/25/mexico-president-lawsuit-spacex-debris-rocket-explosions Tingley, B. (2025, June 27). Mexico threatens lawsuit against SpaceX over Starship explosion “contamination.” Space. https://www.space.com/space-exploration/private-spaceflight/mexico-threatens-lawsuit-against-spacex-over-starship-explosion-debris Pardini, C., & Anselmo, L. (2025). Orbital re-entries of human-made space objects: Drawbacks for the upper atmosphere and the safety of people. Journal of Space Safety Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsse.2025.04.009 David, L. (2024, June 5). Uncontrolled reentry of space debris poses a real and growing threat. SpaceNews. https://spacenews.com/uncontrolled-reentry-of-space-debris-poses-a-real-and-growing-threat/ Parsonson, A. (2025, March 11). Polish Space Agency President Sacked Over Falcon 9 Debris Controversy. European Spaceflight. https://europeanspaceflight.com/polish-space-agency-president-sacked-over-falcon-9-debris-controversy/ Kluger, J. (2025, May 7). What to Know About The Soviet-Era Venus Spacecraft Plunging Back to Earth. Time. https://time.com/7283460/soviet-spacecraft-plunging-back-to-earth-what-to-know/ Wattles, J. (2025, February 21). Debris from Blue Origin and SpaceX rockets found in Bahamas and Europe. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2025/02/21/science/blue-origin-spacex-debris-bahamas-europe Hill, S. (2025, March 6). The growing odds of space junk hitting a plane. Astronomy Magazine. https://www.astronomy.com/space-exploration/rocket-debris-poses-risks-to-aircraft-operations/ Zander, F. (2022, September 26). What’s the Risk of Being Hit by Falling Space debris?.BBC. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20220912-what-happens-to-space-debris-when-it-returns-to-earth Dart, C. (2022, November 14). In 1978, a Soviet satellite exploded over traditional Dené land. Its effects are still felt today. CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/arts/operation-morning-light-podcast-soviet-satellite-exploded-traditional-dene-land-1.6650994 Hadley, G. (2023, January 13). Saltzman: China’s ASAT Test Was “Pivot Point” in Space Operations. Air & Space Forces Magazine. https://www.airandspaceforces.com/saltzman-chinas-asat-test-was-pivot-point-in-space-operations/ Ali, I., & Gorman, S. (2021, November 16). Russian anti-satellite missile test endangers space station crew - NASA. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/us-military-reports-debris-generating-event-outer-space-2021-11-15/ Long March 5B: Debris from Chinese rocket falls back to Earth. (2022, July 29). BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-62333546 Brown, T. (2025, June 28). Satellites keep breaking up in space. Insurance won’t cover them. Space. https://www.space.com/space-exploration/satellites/satellites-keep-breaking-up-in-space-insurance-wont-cover-them Henry, C. (2020, January 7). SpaceX becomes operator of world’s largest commercial satellite constellation with Starlink launch. SpaceNews. https://spacenews.com/spacex-becomes-operator-of-worlds-largest-commercial-satellite-constellation-with-starlink-launch/ European Space Agency. (2023). About space debris. www.esa.int. https://www.esa.int/Space_Safety/Space_Debris/About_space_debris

Another Episode of “Global Canvas” by JOI South Korea’s democracy was not born overnight, it was forged through war, authoritarianism , and a relentless struggle for freedom. From the ashes of the Korean War to decades of military rule under strongmen like Park Chung-hee and Chun Doo-hwan , it took the massive June Democratic Uprising of 1987 to force a constitutional turning point and usher in a new era of civilian rule. Since then, South Korea has built strong democratic institutions, an independent judiciary, and a vibrant civil society. Yet, beneath this progress, the legacy of authoritarianism lingers. In recent years, Seoul’s electoral arena has become one of Asia’s most closely watched democratic theatres. From the recent razor-thin election of President Yoon Suk-yeol to the shocking imposition of martial law and the public’s swift, defiant response, the country has faced a profound test. At its heart, the crisis from 2022 to 2025 isn’t just about leadership, it’s about whether democratic institutions can withstand the weight of political ambition, or whether their survival still depends on citizens willing to rise in their defense. Context and Background South Korea transitioned from military dictatorship to democracy in 1987 . Since then, it has held competitive elections, developed robust institutions, and maintained political stability albeit under the shadow of a powerful military, a volatile North, and a polarized electorate. In 2022 , Yoon Suk-yeol, a conservative former prosecutor with no political experience, narrowly defeated DPK’s Lee Jae-myung by just 0.7% to become president. Running on a platform of anti-corruption and tougher North Korea policies, Yoon aligned closely with Washington and Tokyo, distancing Seoul from Beijing. Domestically, his investigations into Moon Jae-in’s administration sparked accusations of political retaliation. In the April 2024 legislative elections , Yoon’s People Power Party (PPP) suffered a major defeat, losing legislative control to the DPK and progressives. Facing mass protests, plummeting approval ratings, and an oppositional parliament, Yoon’s administration hinted at “ extraordinary measures .” Leaked documents revealed discussions of emergency powers or martial law in the event of civil unrest or North Korean threats. On December 3, 2024 , Yoon declared nationwide martial law  in a late-night broadcast, citing threats from “pro-North Korean forces.” Troops were deployed to the National Assembly, and restrictions on speech, assembly, and political activity were imposed. But within hours, citizens took to the streets. Lawmakers defied the crackdown, voting 190–0 to revoke the decree. Martial law was lifted by dawn. The backlash was swift: cabinet resignations followed, investigations began, and on December 14 , a successful impeachment motion  suspended Yoon’s powers, elevating Prime Minister Han Duck-Soo as acting president. A snap presidential election  was held on June 3, 2025 . Lee Jae-myung (DPK), Han Dong-hoon (PPP), and Sim Sang-jung (Justice Party) contested the race. Lee’s decisive victory marked a liberal comeback and a renewed push for democratic reform. Key Players and Stakeholders People Power Party (PPP). The People Power Party is South Korea’s leading conservative force, closely aligned with President Yoon Suk-yeol since his election in 2022. The party is known for its tough stance on North Korea, firm pro-U.S. foreign policy, and a strong emphasis on law and order. Throughout Yoon’s presidency, the PPP supported his initiatives and agenda. However, the declaration of martial law in December 2024 exposed significant internal fractures. Eighteen lawmakers broke with the party line to back Yoon’s impeachment, and party leader Han Dong-hoon resigned in the wake of mounting public and political pressure. Democratic Party of Korea (DPK). The Democratic Party of Korea is South Korea’s main liberal party and was previously in power under President Moon Jae-in . After narrowly losing the 2022 election, the DPK regained momentum following the martial law crisis. The party framed itself as a defender of democratic values, civil liberties, and balanced diplomacy. Its leader, Lee Jae-myung , emerged as a central figure in the opposition movement, organizing mass protests and steering the impeachment campaign. The DPK’s return to leadership in the 2025 re-election marks a public shift toward restoring democratic accountability. Civil Society and Youth Movements. South Korea’s civil society, especially its youth, played a vital role in opposing the authoritarian turn during Yoon’s presidency. Immediately after the martial law declaration, citizens organized candlelight vigils, light-stick demonstrations, and public rallies across the country. Protestors often blended cultural expression with political resistance. Young people, particularly women and Gen-Z activists , used social media and creative protest strategies to challenge the government and support institutional checks. Their activism was instrumental in influencing legislators and the Constitutional Court, ultimately playing a key role in defending South Korea’s democracy. Major Concerns and Consequences South Korea’s recent political crisis has exposed troubling cracks in its democratic foundations. The sudden imposition of martial law marked a sharp deviation from constitutional norms and reignited fears of authoritarian regression. For a country often celebrated as a model democracy in Asia, this moment highlighted how vulnerable institutions can become when executive power overreaches. The move shook public trust and raised urgent questions about the strength of legal safeguards in times of crisis. The consequences extended beyond domestic politics. As a key player in the Indo-Pacific , instability in Seoul threatens regional security dynamics. It complicates coordination with allies like the United States and Japan , weakens deterrence against North Korea , and risks diminishing South Korea’s credibility as a strategic partner. In a tense geopolitical environment, internal unrest undermines Seoul’s global standing. Socially, the crisis has deepened divisions. Political polarization between conservatives and progressives has sharpened, while generational and regional gaps continue to widen. Youth and older voters appear to inhabit separate political realities, straining national unity. Rebuilding trust in institutions and restoring civic cohesion will be essential for South Korea’s democratic future. Theoretically Speaking : Strategic Alignments and Power Shifts Liberal Institutionalism emphasizes the central role of democratic institutions, legal norms, and international cooperation in maintaining both domestic stability and global order. In the case of South Korea, actions that undermine the rule of law or bypass constitutional procedures for political gain risk weakening the foundations of democratic governance. This not only destabilizes internal politics but also damages South Korea’s credibility and reliability as a partner within international frameworks, particularly with allies like the United States and Japan. Constructivism focuses on how national identity, shared norms, and collective perceptions shape international behavior. South Korea has spent decades building a democratic identity rooted in civilian rule, human rights, and peaceful protest. This identity has been key to its soft power and legitimacy on the global stage. However, authoritarian tendencies and the use of emergency powers challenge these deeply held norms and could alter how South Korea is perceived both by its own citizens and by the international community. Takeaways South Korea’s crisis underscores that elections are not just about parties, they define how a nation wields power, upholds dissent, and positions itself globally. The case challenges assumptions about democracy’s durability in developed nations and reminds us that institutions, while essential, ultimately depend on the will of the people to defend them. Compiled by Commodore (Dr) Johnson Odakkal (with support from Ms Vivaksha Vats)  Stay Tuned for More! South Korea’s recent political upheaval is more than a domestic drama, it’s a critical case study in how democracies respond under pressure. From razor-thin elections to a shock martial law declaration, the nation's institutions were tested, but ultimately, its citizens rose to the occasion. The message is clear: democracy endures not just through constitutions, but through collective civic will. In our next episode of Global Canvas , we’ll explore another region where politics and pressure collide. Until then, we’d love to hear from you. What global shifts are keeping you up at night? Share your views in the comments or connect with us at www.johnsonodakkal.com   or email   ceo@johnsonodakkal.com   to stay engaged. References and Sources Atlantic Council Experts. (2025, June 3). Experts react: What does South Korean President Lee Jae-myung mean for Indo-Pacific security?. Atlantic Council. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/experts-react/what-does-president-lee-jae-myung-mean-for-south-koreas-future/   Cha, V., & Lim, A. (2025, June 3). South Korea’s New President: Frying Pan to Fire. Center for Strategic and International Studies. https://www.csis.org/analysis/south-koreas-new-president-frying-pan-fire   Atlantic Council Experts. (2024, December 17). The global ripple effects of South Korea’s political turmoil. Atlantic Council. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/new-atlanticist/the-global-ripple-effects-of-south-koreas-political-turmoil/   AP. (2025, June 4). South Korea has endured 6 months of political turmoil. What can we expect in Lee’s presidency?. The Times of India. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/south-korea-has-endured-6-months-of-political-turmoil-what-can-we-expect-in-lees-presidency/articleshow/121619913.cms   How polarization undermines democracy in South Korea. (n.d.). Council of Councils. https://www.cfr.org/councilofcouncils/global-memos/how-polarization-undermines-democracy-south-korea   Gong, S. E. (2025, June 3). South Korea elects liberal Lee Jae-myung after months of political turmoil. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2025/06/02/g-s1-70029/south-korea-presidential-elections   South Korea election results 2025: Who won, who lost, what’s next? Al Jazeera. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/3/south-korea-election-results-2025-who-won-who-lost-whats-next   Lee, J., & Park, J. (2025, June 3). Liberal Lee Jae-myung projected to win South Korea presidency in martial law “judgement day.” Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/south-koreans-vote-president-after-months-turmoil-triggered-by-martial-law-2025-06-02/   Yeung, J., Seo, Y., Bae, G., Valerio, M., & Kent, L. (2025, June 3). South Korea’s opposition leader Lee wins election as voters punish conservatives after martial law chaos. CNN. https://edition.cnn.com/2025/06/03/asia/south-korea-presidential-election-results-intl-hnk   AP. (2025, June 4). South Koreans vote for new President in wake of Yoon’s ouster over martial law. The Hindu. https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/south-korea-election-on-tuesday-june-3-2025-after-outster-of-yoon-suk-yeol-after-martial-law/article69651130.ece   Langel Tunchinmang. (2024, 24 December). From martial law to impeachment: Outcome and implications for South Korea. Indian Council of World Affairs (Government of India). https://www.icwa.in/show_content.php?lang=1&level=3&ls_id=12173&lid=7419   Lim, A., Ji, S., & Cha, V. (2024, December 3). Yoon Declares Martial Law in South Korea. Csis.org . https://www.csis.org/analysis/yoon-declares-martial-law-south-korea   Da-gyum, J. (2024, December 3). Full text of South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol’s emergency martial law declaration. The Korea Herald. https://www.koreaherald.com/article/10012293   Tong-Hyung, K. (2025, January 15). A look at the events that led up to the arrest of South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol. AP News. https://apnews.com/article/south-korea-president-yoon-detention-timeline-214ff8dc95ceb3365f60baaf9961b349   Kakoti, A,R. (2024, December 27). Martial law in South Korea: A critical analysis of its political and cultural impact. Hindustan Times. https://www.hindustantimes.com/ht-insight/international-affairs/martial-law-in-south-korea-a-critical-analysis-of-its-political-and-cultural-impact-101735303806326.html   Davies, C., & Jung-a, S. (2025, April 6). “In for a rough ride”: removal of South Korea’s president leaves deep divides. Financial Times. https://www.ft.com/content/546c9b86-c18c-4cf2-9ef6-906f1b9caa1e   ‌Roy, T. (2024, December 7). In South Korea, a brief return to martial law and the spirit of protest that reversed it. The Indian Express. https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/south-korea-martial-law-protest-spirit-9711502/

Life at sea, far from home, and surrounded by endless blue horizons, can quietly weigh on one’s mental well-being, often leading to what many call the “mental blues.” Whether on a commercial ship or a military one, working offshore is both rewarding and challenging. On the positive side, you get to experience the thrilling life at sea. However, on the flip side, this life may not be as exciting as it is often marketed to be.  Commodore (Dr) Johnson Odakkal , a navy veteran with 39 years  of naval and merchant experience, recounts his first brush with the sea’s fury. Just months into his sailing career as a deck cadet, in 1983 , aboard a general-purpose cargo vessel sailing from Houston through the Bermuda Triangle toward Europe, the ship encountered a violent storm off the coast of Florida. He recalls, "We realized six of our shipmates had fallen badly injured. Broken bones, severe trauma. Every time we moved someone, another wave threatened to undo our efforts. Eventually, the US Coast Guard from Miami air-dropped paramedics. That moment never left me. It taught me how delicate and frail we are compared to the sea.”  Seafaring is a demanding profession that affects both the mind and body. Prolonged isolation, demanding work hours, unpredictable weather, and limited access to support systems can have a significant impact on their overall well-being. Without a supportive and respectful work environment, the psychological burden on seafarers can deepen, leading to burnout, anxiety, and decreased performance.  In 2006 , while being the Executive Officer aboard INS Jyoti, during an Eastern Fleet operation, Commodore (Dr) Johnson Odakkal recalls how the news of a catastrophic earthquake in Yogyakarta, Indonesia, changed their mission overnight. INS Jyoti became the logistical hub for relief materials, coordinating alongside other naval ships. He highlights how seafarers are often the first responders to crises beyond borders. It is therefore essential that the maritime industry adopts a holistic approach to seafarer welfare by cultivating inclusive shipboard cultures and upholding dignity and fairness in every aspect of life at sea. According to IMO , 50% of female seafarers and significant numbers of their male counterparts face harassment and bullying at sea. Many incidents go unreported due to fear of retaliation and the absence of trustworthy reporting mechanisms. This highlights the growing need to place emphasis on inclusive mental and physical well-being at sea, ensuring that every seafarer feels safe, heard, and supported.  Addressing these issues requires more than individual resilience; it demands systemic change across the maritime sector, including stronger policies, awareness campaigns, and a cultural shift toward respect and accountability. That is why this year’s theme by the IMO, “My Harassment-Free Ship,”  focuses on creating safer, more inclusive shipboard environments by promoting zero tolerance for harassment and bullying, encouraging open reporting, and ensuring that every seafarer feels protected and valued while at sea. However, before exploring this year’s IMO theme for the Day of the Seafarer, it is just as important to understand the background of this significant day.  The Day of the Seafarer was established in a resolution adopted by the 2010 Diplomatic Conference in Manila to adopt the revised ‘The International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers’. Since then, every year on June 25, the world observes the International Day of Seafarer  to recognize and honour the vital role that seafarers play in global trade, maritime safety, and world economy. The day acknowledges the dedication, resilience, and sacrifices of millions of men and women who work at sea. They are responsible for transporting over 80 percent of the world’s goods, yet their contributions often go unnoticed. From navigating dangerous waters to enduring long months away from home, seafarers remain the backbone of international logistics and commerce. By highlighting their experiences and ensuring their voices are heard, the International Day of Seafarer  encourages governments, shipping companies, and the wider public to take concrete actions to support and protect those who make global connectivity possible. This year, the International Day of Seafarer focuses on the campaign “ My Harassment-Free Ship ,” a bold initiative aimed at fostering a culture of respect and zero tolerance for bullying, harassment, and discrimination at sea. Harassment at sea remains a serious concern, affecting both male and female seafarers and often leading to emotional distress, isolation, and career stagnation.  According to Dr. Johnson Odakkal , modern ships today are cultural microcosms. He calls them “ diversified demography under flags of convenience ”. A single ship may host a Norwegian captain, Bangladeshi engineers, Indian officers, and Filipino crew, yet not a single person may be from the nation under which the ship is flagged. This diversity, while enriching, can also be challenging,  especially when cultural misunderstandings, unconscious bias, or power asymmetries go unaddressed. In light of this, the IMO has urged the global shipping community to take meaningful action toward transforming maritime culture. Through this day, IMO calls for a shift in maritime culture to ensure that every seafarer, regardless of gender, rank, or background, feels safe, valued, and protected while on board. Through this campaign, the maritime community is being urged to raise awareness, implement strong zero-tolerance policies, improve reporting systems, and provide support and resources for those affected.  JOI and its maritime heritage Dr. Johnson Odakkal , a navy veteran and founder of Johnson Odakkal Initiatives (JOI) , . has long been an advocate for restoring seafarers to their rightful place in our national consciousness. “Seafarers power global trade, yet remain history’s outcasts—vital to nations, but still adrift in national memory,” he observes. This belief has shaped much of his work, both during his tenure as Director of the Maritime History Society and now through JOI. During his tenure as Director of the Maritime History Society, he led numerous efforts to promote maritime awareness and preserve India's rich seafaring heritage.  Through JOI , he now champions the concept of "Life Navigation," a concept Dr. Odakkal developed by drawing on the values and disciplines of life at sea to guide personal and professional journeys on land. “Seafaring is the ultimate human endeavor,” he says, “where nature, knowledge, courage, and discipline converge in service to the world.” It is this deep respect for the maritime profession that drives his commitment to mentoring young professionals and students, encouraging them to explore the challenges and possibilities of life at sea. Way forward  As we reflect on the significance of the International Day of the Seafarer and the urgent call for harassment-free ships, it becomes clear that the maritime sector stands at a pivotal moment. The future of seafaring depends not only on technological advancement or global trade dynamics, but on how we treat the people who keep the system afloat. Creating inclusive, respectful, and mentally supportive shipboard environments must move from rhetoric to reality. This calls for sustained collaboration among maritime institutions, governments, ship owners, and training bodies to implement robust policies, invest in mental health infrastructure, and build a culture of empathy and accountability at sea. By anchoring maritime progress in dignity, safety, and shared responsibility, we can ensure that seafaring remains not only a noble profession, but a sustainable and fulfilling one for all.  In support of this, the IMO has launched a digital Seafarer Support Map  to identify grievance centers around the world, supporting seafarers facing issues such as harassment, detention, or abandonment. As of June 2025, the map currently features three designated locations: one in the United States, one in London, and one in Norway. However, critical, yet dangerous maritime regions including the Bab al-Mandab Strait, the Red Sea, the Strait of Hormuz, the Gulf of Guinea, the Gulf of Aden, the Malacca Strait, where seafarers encounter significant risks like piracy and detention, lack visible support centers on this map. While the IMO and its partners, such as the International Transport Workers’ Federation, provide additional global assistance channels, the map’s limited coverage may hinder accessibility for those in high-risk areas. Enhancing the map with broader regional representation could better align it with the needs of the global seafaring community. If the tool aims to support a truly global workforce, then it must offer a global reach, not just a global branding.  Inspired by the stories from the sea? Want to navigate your own course with courage and clarity?   Let’s chart your journey together — with purpose, not just ambition. Reach out via DM or drop us a line at ceo@johnsonodakkal.com   Explore more at our newly updated website:   www.johnsonodakkal.com Let’s anchor change — not just in words, but in action. Happy Day of the Seafarer 2025!   References  Vessels, G. O. (2024, June 24). Celebrate Day of the Seafarer 2024 and #SafetyTipsAtSeA with Guice Offshore and the International Maritime Organization . Guice Offshore. https://www.guiceoffshore.com/celebrate-day-of-the-seafarer-2024-safetytipsatsea-with-guice-offshore-and-international-maritime-organization/ Day of the seafarer . (2023, June 25). Times of India Blog. https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/readersblog/mohammad-nayem/day-of-the-seafarer-55620/ Bharat, E. (2024, June 24). International Day of Seafarer - Recognising the contribution of seafarers. ETV Bharat News . https://www.etvbharat.com/en/!international/international-day-of-seafarer-recognising-the-contribution-of-seafarers-enn24062404407 Day of the Seafarer 2025 . (n.d.). https://www.imo.org/en/About/Events/Pages/Day-of-the-Seafarer-2025.aspx Map . (n.d.). https://wwwmedia.imo.org/$web/SeaFarerSupportMap-v1.0.html Medenilla, V. (2025, June 24). Onboarding respect: Championing safer, harassment-free ships. The Manila Times . https://www.manilatimes.net/2025/06/25/supplements/special-features/onboarding-respect-championing-safer-harassment-free-ships/213845 Johnson Odakkal Initiatives. (2022, June 29). A Seafarers Voyage : ISD 2022 . YouTube.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmK-kggbkKw

Another Episode of “Global Canvas” by JOI Greenland’s March 11, 2025 , election delivered a shocking upset as the center-right, pro-independence Demokraatit surged to victory, unseating the left-wing Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA). Pledging gradual independence and economic self-sufficiency, the new government is set to reshape Greenland’s future—just as global powers, including the U.S. and China , compete for influence in the Arctic. With Donald Trump once again expressing interest in Greenland, the island has become a geopolitical hotspot. This week on Global Canvas , we look into the growing geopolitical importance of Greenland. Context and Background Greenland , the world’s largest island , spans over 2 million square kilometres yet is home to just over 56,000 people. While its population is small, its strategic Arctic location makes it a geopolitical hotspot .  On March 11, 2025, Greenlanders went to the polls, and by March 12 , the results revealed a major political shift. The center-right, pro-business Demokraatit (The Democrats), led by Jens-Frederik Nielsen, pulled off a stunning victory, securing 29.9% of the vote. The party campaigned on economic development, improving housing and education, and delaying independence until Greenland is self-sufficient. This marked a dramatic turnaround from the 9.1% of the vote it received in the previous election, when it finished in fourth place. Despite its win, Demokraatit did not secure an outright majority in Greenland’s 31-seat parliament , Inatsisartut, prompting coalition talks. It is expected to form a government with Naleraq , a center-populist, aggressively pro-independence party that finished second with 24.5% of the vote. The left-wing Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA) , which led the last government, suffered a major setback, dropping to 21.4% . Another traditional power player, the social democratic Siumut , collapsed to 14.7% , a stunning decline for a party that once dominated Greenlandic politics. Greenland is a semi-autonomous territory of Denmark , governing most domestic affairs but lacking control over foreign policy, security, and defense, which remain under Danish jurisdiction. The issue of full independence has long been debated, with Greenlandic parties divided over how fast sovereignty should be pursued. Demokraatit supports eventual independence but argues that Greenland must first build a stronger economy, infrastructure, and education system before breaking from Denmark. Naleraq, on the other hand, wants a rapid move toward independence, pushing for an immediate referendum. IA and Siumut also support independence but advocate for a cautious, long-term approach, emphasizing social policies and sustainability.  The 2025 Greenland election was seen as a pivotal moment amid growing U.S. interest in the Arctic, driven by the island’s strategic location, vast mineral reserves, and Donald Trump’s past push to acquire it. While its geopolitical significance loomed large, the campaign itself focused primarily on domestic issues like healthcare, housing shortages, and education, reflecting the immediate concerns of Greenlandic voters over external power struggles. Key Players and Stakeholders Demokraatit , led by Jens-Frederik Nielsen, is a center-right , pro-business party that secured a surprise victory with 29.9% of the vote in Greenland’s 2025 elections. The party advocates for economic growth through foreign investment, diversification of the economy, and expansion of the mining sector, which is seen as crucial for reducing Greenland’s dependence on Danish subsidies. While Demokraatit supports eventual independence , it favors a gradual approach, emphasizing the need to strengthen Greenland’s economy first. The party has also been highly critical of Donald Trump’s rhetoric about acquiring Greenland, with Nielsen calling Trump “a threat to our political independence.”   Naleraq , led by Pele Broberg, is a center-right, nationalist party that finished second with 24.5% of the vote. Unlike Demokraatit, Naleraq advocates for a rapid move toward full sovereignty, pushing for an immediate referendum on independence . The party has historically been more receptive to U.S. interest in Greenland, seeing it as an opportunity to diversify economic partnerships beyond Denmark. Naleraq’s strong electoral performance has positioned it as a key force in the new government, with coalition negotiations likely to determine how aggressively independence will be pursued. Inuit Ataqatigiit (IA) , led by Múte Bourup  Egede, is a left-wing socialist party that suffered a major setback in the election, dropping to 21.4% of the vote and falling to third place. IA supports Greenlandic independence but takes a cautious, long-term approach, prioritizing social welfare, environmental protection, and sustainable development over immediate sovereignty. While the party previously led the government, its declining support suggests a shift in voter priorities toward economic concerns and a stronger push for self-sufficiency before independence. Siumut , historically Greenland’s dominant party, is a center-left, social democratic party led by Erik Jensen. Once the primary political force in Greenland, Siumut continued its decline, securing just 14.9% of the vote. The party supports eventual independence but has long emphasized economic development and maintaining strong ties with Denmark as a necessary step before sovereignty. Its electoral losses reflect growing dissatisfaction with the party’s leadership and policies, as Greenlanders increasingly seek new political directions for managing the island’s future. Major Concerns and Consequences The Arctic is emerging as a key battleground for global influence, with Greenland at its centre. Three major factors make Greenland an international focal point: Denmark’s balancing act, US strategic military importance, and new found natural resources. Denmark remains cautious about Greenland’s push for independence, as losing Greenland would mean losing control over its Arctic interests. Denmark has invested heavily in Greenland’s infrastructure and security, especially as China and Russia increase their presence in the Arctic. A fully independent Greenland would force Denmark to rethink its geopolitical strategy and could weaken its position in NATO and the Arctic Council . The Pituffik Space Base (formerly Thule Air Base) is the northernmost American military base and the only non-Danish military presence in Greenland. As a critical hub for missile defense and space surveillance, it allows the U.S. to detect missile launches, track trajectories, and activate defense systems in real time. Amid Trump’s renewed push to annex Greenland , which has become a major talking point, a high-level American delegation is visiting the island led by Usha Vance , wife of Vice President JD Vance , and includes White House National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and Energy Secretary Chris Wright. The visit has sparked backlash in Greenland, with Greenland's outgoing Prime Minister Mute Egede calling it a breach of democratic principles and a sign of disrespect for the island’s right to self-determination. Greenland is believed to hold vast reserves of rare earth minerals, oil, and gas , drawing interest from the U.S., China, & the European Union . As Arctic ice melts , new military and shipping routes are opening, increasing the region’s importance. The U.S. wants access to Greenland’s rare earth elements to reduce its dependence on China, which currently dominates global production of these critical materials used in technology, renewable energy, and defense industries. However, mining in Greenland faces significant challenges, including harsh weather conditions, limited infrastructure, and opposition from local communities concerned about environmental damage. Theoretically Speaking : Strategic Alignments and Power Shifts From a realist perspective , the U.S., China, and Russia view Greenland as a strategic asset due to its military value, rare earth minerals, and emerging trade routes. The U.S. seeks to strengthen its military presence through Pituffik Space Base, while Denmark aims to maintain control over Greenland’s security. Meanwhile, China’s interest in Greenland’s mining sector and Russia’s Arctic militarization highlights growing competition for influence in the region. Realism explains why global superpowers are invested in Greenland’s future-because whoever controls Greenland holds a key position in the Arctic power balance. From a constructivist perspective , the 2025 Greenland election reflects a shift in national identity and evolving perceptions of sovereignty rather than just economic or strategic calculations. Constructivism argues that political decisions are shaped by ideas, cultural identity, and historical narratives, rather than purely material interests like resources or military power. Greenland’s pro-business but cautious independence government, led by Demokraatit, signals that while the desire for sovereignty is growing, many Greenlanders recognize the need for economic stability before full independence. This election outcome suggests that Greenlanders are redefining their national identity—not just as a Danish dependency, but as a nation-in-the-making. Takeaways Greenland’s 2025 elections have set the stage for a new era of political and economic strategy. The outcome will shape Arctic security, international alliances, and Greenland’s path toward independence. As global powers compete for influence in the Arctic, Greenland’s future remains a key geopolitical question. Compiled by Commodore (Dr) Johnson Odakkal (with support from Ms Vivaksha Vats)  Stay Tuned for More! Greenland’s 2025 elections have sent ripples through its political and geopolitical landscape, redefining the island’s future amid shifting alliances and climate-driven challenges. As new leadership takes the helm, questions loom over autonomy, economic strategy, and international influence. Beyond the ballot, the real test begins now—navigating governance in an evolving Arctic. In the next episode of Global Canvas , we continue to dissect the aftershocks of global elections and power shifts . What global issues concern you most? Share your thoughts in the comments or reach out at www.johnsonodakkal.com   or email ceo@johnsonodakkal.com    to stay tuned. References and Sources What Greenland's elections mean for the island — and the U.S. Greenland: Election results and energy outlook amid Trump’s ambitions - energynews Greenland election: Democrat party wins surprise victory amid spectre of Trump Greenland Election: Demokraatit Emerges as the Island’s Largest Political Party Greenland’s election winners push back against Trump’s wish to take control of the island - The Hindu Centre-right opposition wins Greenland election dominated by Trump pledge | Elections News | Al Jazeera Greenland's independence gradualists win election amid Trump control pledge | Reuters Greenland elects new government as Trump coaxes, threatens Greenland's opposition wins election dominated by independence and Trump What to Know About the Only US Military Base in Greenland - The New York Times Trump pushes US claims to Greenland as territory's leaders lambast US delegation trip | Reuters There’s a global tug-of-war for Greenland’s resources — but the new government has its own plans

Another Episode of “Global Canvas” by JOI Global Canvas is back!  After a brief hiatus and with a fresh new look on our redeveloped website , we’re diving straight into the stories shaping our world. This week, we turn our lens to Ecuador, once a quiet Andean nation, now caught in the grip of cartels and cocaine. This is more than a domestic problem; it’s a global wake-up call. Let’s unpack it. On 14th March 2025 , a major drug bust backed by Europol took down an Ecuadorian trafficking cell flooding Europe with cocaine. Once a quiet Andean nation squeezed between Colombia and Peru , Ecuador is now making global headlines for cartel killings, prison bloodbaths, and a drug war spiralling out of control. The country isn’t just a transit zone anymore,it’s becoming a battlefield. Context and Background Over the last few years, Ecuador has undergone a dramatic and dangerous transformation. Once seen as one of the more stable nations in the Andean region, it is now at the centre of Latin America's drug trafficking storm. In just five years, Ecuador has shifted from being a mere transit point to a major logistical hub for cocaine shipments heading primarily to Europe and the United States. According to Ecuador's Interior Ministry, nearly 300 tonnes of drugs were seized in 2024 alone,a record that underscores just how deeply entrenched the drug trade has become. Several key policy decisions from the past decade have helped set the stage. Under Rafael Correa , the Ecuadorian president from 2007 to 2017, Ecuador pursued reforms aimed at promoting free movement and positioning the country as a global hub. This visa-free travel opened the doors of the nation to organised crime figures. Among them were Albanian nationals, who quickly established a powerful foothold. Today, Albanian criminal groups are key players in Ecuador’s underworld, using legitimate businesses like banana and shrimp exporters as cover for cocaine trafficking into Europe. At the same time, Ecuador signed a trade agreement with the European Union that gradually cut tariffs on major exports like bananas, shrimp, fish, cocoa, and flowers. This booming trade turned the country into one of South America's most important shipping centres, and an attractive target for cartels seeking to piggyback illicit shipments onto commercial exports. Home to five of the nation’s eight shipping terminals, Guayaquil, the richest city of Ecuador, has become the primary centre for cocaine shipments to Europe and the U.S. Criminal dynamics within Ecuador have also been deeply influenced by outside forces. Mexican cartels have expanded their influence, tapping into Ecuador’s Pacific ports to move drugs northward. They have co-opted local actors, including artisanal fishermen along the coast, to facilitate the trafficking operations. Meanwhile, on the European side, tightened port security in Colombia has forced Albanian mafia groups to shift operations south. Organisations like the Azemi and Rexhepi gangs now play a dominant brokerage role in Ecuador’s cocaine trade. They maintain strong ties with local gangs, securing access to shipping networks that move vast quantities of cocaine across the Atlantic. All of this is happening against a backdrop of mounting political instability and economic hardship. With state institutions weakened by corruption and underfunding, criminal organizations have found ample space to operate, and expand. Ecuador is no longer just a stop along the drug trade route. It’s becoming a battleground where local and transnational criminal networks compete for dominance, leaving ordinary Ecuadorians trapped in a rising tide of violence and insecurity. Key Players and Stakeholders Non-State Actors:  At the heart of Ecuador’s crisis are powerful non-state actors, transnational drug cartels and local gangs that now operate with near impunity. Mexican cartels such as Sinaloa and CJNG (Cartel Jalisco Nueva Generación) use Ecuador as a strategic node in their trafficking routes, relying on coastal cities like Guayaquil for maritime exports. Today, both groups are locked in a brutal struggle for control over Ecuador’s strategic territory. They’re competing for access to key drug routes, including Pacific ports, the Panama Canal, cocaine warehouses, and production zones along the Colombia-Ecuador border. Their influence is most visible in Guayaquil, where control of the country’s largest port has become central to their operations. These groups often take help from Ecuadorian gangs like Los Choneros, Los Lobos, and Tiguerones , who fight bloody turf wars over control of prisons, ports, and neighbourhoods. Mexican cartels supply weapons, money, and military-style training, transforming these local gangs into heavily armed non-state actors. These groups now rake in tens of millions annually, not just from drug trafficking but from extortion rackets, forcing thousands of small businesses to pay for “protection” in the areas they control. Adding a global layer to the problem are Albanian mafia networks, which have embedded themselves deeply into Ecuador’s export economy. These groups, such as the Azemi and Rexhepi gangs, act as key intermediaries in the cocaine trade between South America and Europe. Using legal business fronts,especially in banana and shrimp exports,they help move large drug consignments undetected through commercial shipping routes. State:  Years of institutional neglect, corruption, and economic stress have hollowed out law enforcement and public security. Prisons have become de facto command centres for gangs, and political leaders have been unable,or unwilling,to confront the scale of the crisis. The 2023 assassination of presidential candidate Fernando Villavicencio was a stark warning of how deeply organised crime has penetrated the political sphere. The police and military are stretched thin, and many officers are compromised. Efforts at reform have been inconsistent, and without strong, independent institutions, the state struggles to assert control. Instead of being a bulwark against organized crime, parts of the state are now entangled with it. International actors:  International players have shaped both the problem and the response. On one hand, European trade policies have unintentionally enabled criminal exploitation of shipping routes. The EU’s trade agreement with Ecuador lowered tariffs and expanded maritime commerce, providing cover for smuggling operations. Similarly, visa-free travel policies opened the door for foreign criminal networks to establish a base of operations. On the other hand, international agencies like Europol , the DEA , and UNODC play a growing role in Ecuador’s counternarcotics efforts. The Europol-led bust of an Ecuadorian trafficking cell underscores this shift. However, without deeper cooperation on intelligence sharing, port security, and money laundering enforcement, external support remains reactive, not preventive. Major Concerns and Consequences The violence gripping Ecuador is not random,it’s systemic. Murder rates have surged to historic highs, with mass killings, car bombings, and prison massacres becoming part of daily life. The year 2023 saw a murder rate of 44.5% , the highest for the country. In 2024, the rate dropped to 38% , however, 2024 was still the second-most violent year in the country’s history, and homicides in many parts of the country remained at or exceeded 2023 levels. The state’s prison system, once a place of confinement, is now a hub of gang operations, with inmates coordinating extortion, assassinations, and drug shipments from inside. Additionally, Ecuador’s economy is being reshaped by drug money. Cartels and affiliated gangs launder proceeds through legitimate businesses, especially in the banana, shrimp, and real estate sectors. In cities like Guayaquil and Manta, criminal groups extort “protection fees” from local merchants, turning once-thriving business districts into zones of fear. As criminal actors gain more economic power, they increasingly outmatch the state in terms of resources and influence. This narco-capital fuels further corruption, distorts local markets, and entrenches inequality. The longer this shadow economy grows, the harder it becomes to untangle criminal power from legitimate enterprise. Ecuador’s political system is buckling under the pressure of organised crime. Corruption scandals involving law enforcement, customs officials, and local politicians have exposed how deeply criminal networks have infiltrated the state. Successive governments have failed to deliver lasting reforms, and emergency measures, military crackdowns, have done little to address the structural problems. Meanwhile, law enforcement agencies are overwhelmed, underfunded, and often infiltrated. Efforts to regain territorial control have fallen short, especially in port cities and border regions, where heavily armed gangs operate with near impunity. The result: ordinary Ecuadorians live in fear.   Theoretically Speaking : Strategic Alignments and Power Shifts From a realist perspective , Ecuador’s drug crisis highlights the failure of the state to maintain its core function: ensuring security. Realism views states as the primary actors in international relations, tasked with safeguarding their sovereignty and territorial integrity. As violence escalates and territorial control fragments, Ecuador’s weakened security apparatus exposes it to greater external manipulation further weakening the state.  Constructivism , on the other hand, shifts the focus to how non-state actors,like cartels, local gangs, and transnational criminal networks,reshape power dynamics. In Ecuador, non-state actors are no longer just peripheral threats; they have constructed new systems of governance, economy, and even social order within the territories they control. Gangs are not just criminal groups; in some communities, they act as de facto authorities, providing “protection,” resolving disputes, and controlling economic flows. This shows how non-state actors, through new social realities and power structures, are increasingly challenging the traditional dominance of the state. Takeaways Ecuador’s drug crisis is deeply rooted and accelerating. While the drug trade spans continents, Ecuador is bearing the brunt of the violence and instability. Without urgent reforms and real international support, the country risks falling permanently into the grip of organised crime. Compiled by Commodore (Dr) Johnson Odakkal (with support from Ms Vivaksha Vats)  Stay Tuned for More! Ecuador is no longer just a waypoint on the cocaine highway, it’s ground zero in a rapidly escalating narco-conflict. As cartels, mafia syndicates, and fractured state institutions battle for dominance, the country reflects a deeper global crisis where crime, commerce, and politics collide. This isn’t just Ecuador’s war, it’s a warning to the world. In this episode of Global Canvas , we trace the contours of Ecuador’s spiralling drug war. What global shifts are keeping you up at night? Share your views in the comments or connect with us at www.johnsonodakkal.com   or email   ceo@johnsonodakkal.com   to stay engaged. References and Sources UNODC. (2023). Global report on Cocaine 2023 – Local dynamics, global challenges. https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/cocaine/Global_cocaine_report_2023.pdf   Culver, Alvarado, Arvanitidis, Platt. (2025, April 21). On Ecuador’s cocaine coast, with a fisherman who turned to smuggling. CNN World . https://edition.cnn.com/2025/04/21/americas/ecuador-cocaine-coast-smuggling-latam/index.html   Wells, I. (2025, April 9). Tracking the world’s major cocaine route to Europe - and w hy it’s growing . BBC. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cn0w4e4e00jo   Voss, G. (2025, April 11). Ecuador’s election sees president accused of drug trade ties . InSight Crime. https://insightcrime.org/news/ecuadors-election-sees-president-accused-drug-trade-ties/   Koha. (2023, April 13). The Albanian mafia has plunged Ecuador into bloodshed, the “Azemi” and “Rexhepi” criminal syndicates dominate . KOHA. https://koha.mk/en/mafia-shqiptare-e-ka-zhytur-ekuadorin-ne-gjakderdhje-dominojne-sindikatat-kriminale-azemi-dhe-rexhepi/   France 24. (2025, April 13). Ecuador chooses its next president as rampant drug violence undercuts the economy. France 24 . https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250412-ecuador-s-presidential-hopefuls-face-toxic-brew-of-crime-unemployment\ Cavalari, M., Manjarrés, J., Newton, C., Cavalari, M., Manjarrés, J., & Newton, C. (2025, April 29). InSight Crime’s 2024 homicide Round-Up . InSight Crime. https://insightcrime.org/news/insight-crime-2024-homicide-round-up/#:~:text=Ecuador%20(%2D12.8%25),at%20or%20exceeded%202023%20levels   Dudley, S. (2025, February 5). How organized crime set the agenda for Ecuador’s presidential elections . InSight Crime. https://insightcrime.org/news/organized-crime-agenda-ecuadors-presidential-elections/   CADTM. (2025, February 6). Capitalism and drug trafficking in Ecuador: Two sides of the same coin. CADTM . https://www.cadtm.org/Capitalism-and-drug-trafficking-in-Ecuador-Two-sides-of-the-same-coin

There are seasons in every leader’s life when progress feels like pushing uphill through fog. Where effort echoes into silence, and your presence — however consistent or sincere — seems to fade into the background. I recently found myself in such a space. The work was still meaningful, but the structures around it became tightening frames. The applause stopped. The path ahead dimmed. Late one evening, I found myself journaling in near darkness — heart stirred, but not shaken. I knew I hadn’t lost my sense of calling. What I was losing was clarity about how to continue within systems that resist vision, or worse, co-opt it without credit. That’s when John C. Maxwell’s latest book, High Road Leadership , found me — not as a prescription, but as a quiet mirror. Two Roads Diverged… In moments of disappointment or disillusionment, we all arrive at a fork in the road. One path is easy to slide into: 🔹 Retrench in resentment  — replay conversations, hold grudges, and let disillusionment harden into bitterness. 🔹 The other is quieter but harder: Rebuild with resolve  — reflect, recalibrate, and return to purpose, even without applause. I chose the second. And not because I felt noble. But because I’ve seen what the first path does to leaders I’ve admired — and I didn’t want that for myself. As I journaled, read, and walked through that season, a framework began taking shape — not for managing others, but for managing myself. I now call it my High Road Strategy Spectrum . The High Road Is Rare — But It Is Real John Maxwell defines leadership roads in three categories: Low Road : Treats others worse than they treat you. Middle Road : Treats others the same. High Road : Treats others better than they treat you. Many live on the middle road  — measured, transactional, tolerating just enough to stay professional. But the high road ? That’s where the legacy lives. That’s where you rise not to be seen, but to see others. To hold the door open for those behind you. To choose grace when grievance would be easier. It’s not about moral superiority. As Maxwell reminds us, it’s about valuing people , doing the right things for the right reasons , and giving more than you take . A Strategy Spectrum: Leading Without Applause The High Road Strategy Spectrum  is not a toolkit. It’s a mindset — forged in reflection, tested in resistance. It asks: Can I anchor my tone  even when I lack the title? Will I protect my values  even when they’re inconvenient? Can I lead with joy  in quiet, unglamorous spaces? It reminds me that leadership is not a spotlight I earn — it’s a lamp I carry. This spectrum helps me show up with integrity even when structure stifles, to steward classrooms with love, to mentor even when it’s unseen, and to write as if my words will someday find someone in their own fog. Stewardship Over Status For me, leadership has become less about vision casting and more about presence keeping . It’s not the grand pronouncements but the quiet consistency. Not the clever strategy, but the soulful stability. And in this season, I’ve found that my greatest strength lies not in how well I argue my case, but in how deeply I embody my calling. Leadership isn’t always about the title you hold. It’s often about the tone you set. I set my tone now with grace, quiet resolve, and faithful stewardship — for every student I mentor, every educator I uplift, and every conversation I enter with heart. An Invitation to Walk the High Road This is not a victory lap. It’s a check-in from the journey. I’m preparing to co-facilitate a High Road Leadership Mastermind  — not from a place of perfection, but from the practice  of walking this road. If you’ve been navigating quiet resistance, unspoken fatigue, or simply need to reset — I’d be honored to journey with you. Want to explore the High Road Strategy Spectrum ?Curious about a Mastermind ?DM me or reach out via email to ceo@johnsonodakkal.com   Let’s rise — not to outshine, but to outserve . Do explore our updated website at www.johnsonodakkal.com

Another Episode of “Global Canvas” by JOI The Arctic and Antarctic are vanishing at an alarming pace. According to the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, what was once a fortress of frozen stability is now shrinking fast, with global sea ice hitting a record low. But this isn’t just about melting ice, it’s about a domino effect that threatens climate systems, wildlife, communities, and even global power dynamics . From disrupted weather patterns to geopolitical tensions over newly exposed resources, the stakes are rising as the ice recedes. This week on Global Canvas , we uncover the sweeping consequences of a world with less sea ice. Context and Background Sea ice , nature’s giant mirror, is crucial in regulating Earth’s climate. Floating atop the Arctic and Southern Oceans, it reflects up to 80% of the Sun’s energy into space, helping to keep global temperatures stable. For decades, sea ice has acted as Earth’s built-in cooling system. By reflecting sunlight, it helps prevent excessive heat absorption by the ocean.  But as climate change accelerates, this frozen shield is shrinking at an alarming rate, with dire consequences for weather patterns, sea levels, marine ecosystems, and even global politics. The latest data from the US National Snow and Ice Data Center paints a troubling picture: in February 2025 , the combined extent of Arctic and Antarctic sea ice dropped to a record low of 15.76 million square kilometers, breaking the previous 5-day record low of 15.93 million square kilometers from January-February 2023.  The Arctic has long been considered the frontline of climate change. Sea ice there is declining at about 12% per decade, and summer months are now seeing vast expanses of open water where ice once dominated. The Arctic is warming nearly four times faster than the global average, a process known as "Arctic amplification." Scientists predict that by at least once before 2050, the Arctic could be essentially ice-free at the end of its summer. This rapid loss of ice is not just a problem for the Arctic itself. The disappearance of sea ice disrupts global weather patterns, making extreme heat waves, storms, and even harsh winter conditions more common in faraway regions. Unlike the Arctic, which is surrounded by land, Antarctic sea ice is more mobile and thin, making it particularly sensitive to wind patterns and ocean currents. While Antarctic sea ice had shown fluctuations in previous decades, recent years have seen a steep and concerning decline. In 2023, Antarctic sea ice dropped 1 million square kilometers below previous minimums, and 2025 has already set new lows. Antarctic ice shelves, which act as barriers, holding back massive glaciers are also experiencing unprecedented surface melting due to rising temperatures. If these ice shelves collapse, they could trigger the release of vast amounts of land ice into the ocean, leading to a significant acceleration in sea-level rise. Since the 1990s, Antarctica's land ice loss has already contributed 7.2mm to global sea levels, and the trend is only worsening. As more sea ice disappears, it exposes darker ocean water, which absorbs rather than reflects sunlight. This means more heat energy is absorbed into the ocean, which in turn melts even more ice, a self-reinforcing cycle known as the ice-albedo effect . The planetary cooling effects of Arctic and Antarctic sea ice during 2016–2023 were about 20% and 12% less, respectively, than they were during 1980–1988. Disappearing sea ice is therefore amplifying climate change by causing the Earth to absorb about 0.3 more watts of solar energy per square meter for every 1°C rise in global temperature. Meanwhile, the rapid loss of sea ice in the Arctic and Antarctic is also reshaping global geopolitics. As ice retreats, previously inaccessible areas are opening up for shipping, military deployment, and resource extraction, particularly oil, gas, and rare earth minerals. In the Arctic, this has intensified competition among major powers like the U.S. , Russia , and China , each seeking strategic and economic advantage. In the Antarctic, although protected by international treaties, the thinning ice is raising concerns about future territorial claims and resource exploitation. The melting poles no longer remain remote frontiers—they’re becoming central arenas of geopolitical rivalry. Key Players and Stakeholders Indigenous Communities  – Arctic Indigenous groups, such as the Inuit in Alaska, Canada, and Greenland , are facing severe disruptions due to the loss of sea ice. These environmental changes threaten not just livelihoods, but also cultural heritage , as Indigenous knowledge and ways of life have been deeply tied to the frozen landscapes for centuries. Flora and Fauna – The loss of sea ice doesn’t just threaten iconic species like polar bears and penguins, it also disrupts entire ecosystems, including marine and coastal plant life. Algae and phytoplankton, which grow on the underside of sea ice, form the foundation of the polar food web, supporting fish, krill, and ultimately larger predators like whales and seals. As ice diminishes, these vital primary producers decline, affecting the entire marine ecosystem. Additionally, coastal tundra ecosystems, which depend on cold, stable conditions, are being altered by rising temperatures and increased erosion, impacting species like Arctic foxes, caribou, and migratory birds. The interconnectedness of these ecosystems means that the loss of sea ice sends ripple effects through both plant and animal life, threatening biodiversity on a global scale. Arctic Nations  – Countries bordering the Arctic are racing to stake claims on newly accessible territories as the ice melts. The opening of Arctic shipping routes, such as the Northern Sea Route along Russia’s coast, could shorten global trade paths but also heighten geopolitical tensions. Additionally, melting ice is revealing vast reserves of oil, gas, and minerals, leading to increased interest from global powers. These developments are turning the polar regions into strategic battlegrounds, where environmental concerns may potentially clash with economic and political interests. Major Concerns and Consequences The loss of sea ice is devastating for Indigenous Arctic communities , whose way of life has depended on the ice for centuries. Groups like the Inuit in Canada, Alaska, and Greenland  rely on stable sea ice for hunting, fishing, and travel. As ice disappears, traditional food sources like seals and fish become scarcer, forcing communities to adapt to rapid environmental and economic changes. Additionally, rising sea levels threaten villages, forcing some to relocate entirely, disrupting their cultural heritage and connection to the land. As sea ice disappears, more heat is absorbed by the ocean, accelerating warming trends. This fuels climate change, disrupts weather patterns , and contributes to rising sea levels . Arctic ice loss disrupts jet streams, leading to unpredictable weather, including harsher winters in North America and Europe . Meanwhile, melting Antarctic ice affects ocean currents, altering climate patterns and making regions like the UK and northwest Europe colder and stormier. The disappearance of sea ice also threatens biodiversity loss , extinction of species that rely on it for survival, and potentially leading to the collapse of entire ecosystems. In the Arctic, polar bears are becoming smaller, weaker, and hungrier as melting summer ice makes it harder for them to hunt seals. Winter sea ice is also crucial for fisheries and seal pups , which depend on stable ice for breeding and protection. In Antarctica, shrinking ice threatens krill populations, the foundation of the Southern Ocean food web, putting species like whales and penguins at risk. Geopolitically, as sea ice retreats, nations are racing to control newly opened shipping routes and untapped fossil fuel reserves, intensifying competition and geopolitical conflicts . For example, Russia has significantly expanded its military presence in the Arctic, staking claims on vast underwater territories and constructing new bases along its northern coast. China, despite having no Arctic territory, has declared itself a “ near-Arctic state ” and is investing heavily in Arctic infrastructure, including shipping and energy projects. Meanwhile, the Arctic nations like Denmark are investing billions of dollars in strengthening its Arctic presence, —to counter rising geopolitical pressure from both eastern and western rivals. This growing competition over resources and strategic waterways may fuel tensions between major powers, raising concerns about future conflicts in the region.  Theoretically Speaking : Strategic Alignments and Power Shifts Traditional security focuses on military threats, but non-traditional security  expands the definition to include climate change, resource scarcity, and environmental crises. The loss of sea ice exacerbates food and water insecurity , displaces Indigenous communities, and contributes to extreme weather events that can destabilize nations. Economies may soon face climate-driven conflicts over resources, as melting ice exposes untapped oil, gas, and fisheries, making the Arctic a potential flashpoint for competition and territorial disputes. From a realist perspective , Arctic geopolitics is shaped by power competition and national self-interest. States act to secure resources, territory, and strategic advantage—often at the expense of others. The U.S. and Russia’s growing military presence, along with China’s infrastructure and investment moves, reflect classic realist dynamics: the Arctic is a zero-sum arena where gains by one power trigger anxiety and countermeasures from rivals. Melting ice unlocks new resources intensifying competition. Takeaways The loss of Arctic and Antarctic sea ice is not merely a polar issue—it constitutes a global crisis. It accelerates climate change, endangers biodiversity, disrupts economies, and transforms the geopolitical landscape. While some may gain in the short term, the long-term implications pose significant risks to humanity. Tackling this challenge demands urgent action: reducing greenhouse gas emissions, safeguarding vulnerable communities and ecosystems, and promoting international cooperation. Compiled by Commodore (Dr) Johnson Odakkal (with support from Ms Vivaksha Vats)  Stay Tuned for More! The Arctic-Antarctic chessboard is no longer just a backdrop of ice and isolation—it’s fast becoming the front line of a 21st-century power play. As climate change accelerates and rival nations stake their claims, the polar regions reveal a deeper narrative of ambition, adaptation, and authority. The Cold War may be over, but its echoes ring loud in the polar winds. In this episode of Global Canvas , we spotlight the unfolding tug-of-war beneath the ice caps. What global issues concern you most? Share your thoughts in the comments or connect with us at www.johnsonodakkal.com   or email ceo@johnsonodakkal.com    to stay tuned. References and Sources https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgeydkz08go https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/2024GL109608 https://www.climate.gov/news-features/understanding-climate/climate-change-arctic-sea-ice-summer-minimum#:~:text=Arctic%20sea%20ice%20declines%20are,affect%20the%20global%20climate%20system https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66724246 https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-66724246 https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5yg344zz1ro https://www.wired.com/story/beneath-greenlands-ice-lies-a-climate-solution-and-a-new-geopolitical-battleground https://www.albany.edu/news-center/news/2022-study-diminishing-arctic-sea-ice-has-lasting-impacts-global-climate https://nsidc.org/learn/parts-cryosphere/sea-ice/why-sea-ice-matters ? https://apnews.com/article/polar-bear-arctic-climate-change-whale-fat-938de0e1662eed4d01a747708b82e539 https://apnews.com/article/arctic-climate-change-sea-ice-loss-melt-a5c45e0d2ee81a7dfc3c816f2ee4dfac https://apnews.com/article/arctic-climate-change-sea-ice-loss-melt-a5c45e0d2ee81a7dfc3c816f2ee4dfac https://nsidc.org/learn/ask-scientist/what-are-impacts-arctic-sea-ice-loss https://www.nature.com/articles/s43247-022-00498-3#:~:text=Abstract,tend%20to%20underestimate%20the%20amplification https://www.orfonline.org/research/china-and-the-arctic-an-overview https://coastalscience.noaa.gov/news/melting-antarctic-sea-ice-threatens-minke-whales-video/   https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2025/02/28/arctic-showdown-global-power-struggles-aseans-stake-in-the-ice/ https://news.mongabay.com/2025/03/polar-sea-ice-continues-steep-decline-but-will-a-troubled-world-notice/

Another Episode of “Global Canvas” by JOI In a historic turn of events, South Africa's 2024 general election marked the end of the African National Congress's (ANC) uninterrupted 30-year majority rule. ANC secured just 40% of the vote, necessitating coalition partnerships with the opposition to form the government.  This week on Global Canvas , we delve into the intricate dynamics of South Africa's 2024 election, exploring the factors that led to the ANC's decline, the emerging new political entities, and the broader implications for the nation's future. The question: Does this electoral outcome represent a democratic renaissance for South Africa, or will it herald a period of political instability? Context and Background South Africa employs a closed-list proportional representation  system for its elections, designed to ensure that political parties gain seats in both the national and provincial parliaments based on the percentage of votes they receive. Voters cast three separate ballots: one for a political party in the National Assembly, one for a party or independent candidate representing their province in the National Assembly, and one for the provincial legislature.  The National Assembly consists of 400 members, with 200 elected from national party lists and the other 200 from provincial party lists. To form a government independently, a party must secure more than 50% of the seats—at least 201 out of 400. This majority is crucial because, after the general election, the National Assembly members are responsible for electing the President.  Since the end of apartheid ( the former official government policy in South Africa of separating people of different races and making them live apart ) in 1994 , the African National Congress (ANC) has been the dominant force in South African politics, consistently securing comfortable majorities that allowed it to govern without forming coalitions. The ANC’s historical significance as the party that led the struggle against apartheid, coupled with its early post-apartheid achievements, solidified its political stronghold for decades. However, the 2024 general election, held on May 29 , marked a dramatic departure from this trend. The ANC secured only 40% of the vote, falling significantly short of the majority needed to govern independently.  This outcome represents a pivotal shift in South Africa’s political landscape, signalling declining public confidence in the party’s ability to address the country’s pressing challenges. Several factors contributed to this erosion of support. Public dissatisfaction with high unemployment has weakened the ANC’s support. Additionally, numerous corruption scandals involving high-ranking ANC officials have tarnished the party’s image, eroding trust among voters. These issues have been compounded by deteriorating public services, including unreliable electricity supply, poor healthcare infrastructure, and inadequate water management. Moreover, younger voters, known as the “born-free” generation— those born after apartheid— are more focused on issues like job creation, education, and social justice, and are increasingly open to supporting new political movements that promise change.The emergence of new political parties, most notably the uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK)   party , has also fragmented the electorate. Founded by former President Jacob Zuma just six months before the election, the MK party resonated with voters, especially in economically marginalized communities.  After the election, the ANC formed a government of national unity  in coalition with the DA , the main opposition party, which had secured 21.63% of the vote and other parties. For the first time in South Africa’s democratic history, the country has formed a national coalition government. The election result underscores the deep-rooted inequalities that persist in South Africa, despite the progress made since the end of apartheid. Economic disparities remain stark, with wealth and opportunities often concentrated in urban areas, while rural communities continue to face poverty and underdevelopment.  Key Players and Stakeholders The African National Congress (ANC) , founded in 1912 , is South Africa’s oldest political party and played a pivotal role in the struggle against apartheid. Originally established as the South African Native National Congress , it aimed to unite African people and advocate for their rights under colonial rule. The party gained global recognition for its leadership in the anti-apartheid movement, with iconic figures like Nelson Mandela  at the forefront.  Since the end of apartheid in 1994 , the ANC has been the dominant force in South African politics, leading the government for nearly three decades. Currently, the party is led by Cyril Ramaphosa , who has served as South Africa’s President since 2018 , focusing on economic reforms, anti-corruption efforts, and social development amid growing internal challenges and declining electoral support. The Democratic Alliance (DA)  is South Africa’s main opposition party, known for its liberal democratic values and emphasis on good governance, economic growth, and anti-corruption. Its origins trace back to the Progressive Party , founded in 1959 , which opposed apartheid policies within the parliamentary system. Over time, through a series of mergers and rebranding, it evolved into the DA in 2000 . The party has traditionally drawn support from urban, middle-class, and minority communities, positioning itself as a champion of non-racialism and market-friendly policies. Currently led by John Steenhuisen , the DA has been gaining ground by focusing on issues like service delivery, government accountability, and economic reforms. The Democratic Alliance (DA) , the main opposition party, secured 21% of the vote, maintaining its position as a significant political force.  The uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK) Party  founded by former President Jacob Zuma , derives its name from the military wing of the African National Congress which fought against apartheid during the country's liberation struggle. MK established just months before the general election, quickly gained significant support, drawing former ANC members disillusioned with the party's current direction. The MK Party's base is primarily composed of economically marginalized, predominantly Zulu  voters (a member of a South African people traditionally living mainly in KwaZulu-Natal province) voters who resonate with Zuma's populist rhetoric and leadership. It made a strong impact in the election, securing around 14%  of the vote, becoming the third-largest party  in South Africa's National Assembly. The party's rise reflects growing frustration with the ANC's failure to address ongoing issues that have plagued the post-apartheid state. Major Concerns and Consequences The ANC loss of majority has ushered South Africa into an era of coalition politics, relatively uncharted territory for the nation. While this development could lead to more inclusive governance, it also raises concerns about political instability and policy paralysis. The necessity for coalition-building may result in fragile alliances, potentially hindering decisive action on critical issues such as economic reform, unemployment, & social inequality . Moreover, the rise of populist parties like the MK introduces uncertainties regarding policy direction and adherence to democratic norms.  Theoretically Speaking Elite theory  suggests that political power is concentrated in the hands of a small ruling elite, which, over time, becomes disconnected from the public. The ANC, once the dominant political force championing liberation and democracy, has faced accusations of corruption, inefficiency, and internal factionalism , eroding public trust. The emergence of MK represents a populist backlash from disenfranchised voters who felt abandoned by the ruling party. Similarly, the DA’s increasing support from middle-class and urban voters reflects frustration with ANC misgovernance. This shift suggests that when ruling elites fail to address societal concerns, political alternatives emerge, leading to electoral fragmentation. Political realignment theory  suggests that when longstanding parties fail to address voter concerns, new political alliances and party loyalties emerge. In the South African context, the ANC’s historical coalition of Black voters, trade unions, and grassroots activists has fractured due to economic discontent, generational shifts, and rising populism. The DA has consolidated support among urban, middle-class voters, while MK has attracted disillusioned ANC supporters, particularly in Zuma’s Zulu heartland. This election signals a major realignment, where traditional party loyalties are breaking down, and South Africa’s political landscape is becoming more competitive and fragmented. Takeaways South Africa's 2024 general election represents a pivotal moment in the nation's democratic journey. The ANC's loss of majority underscores growing public demand for accountability and effective governance. The emergence of new political players and the shift towards coalition politics present both opportunities for more representative governance and challenges related to political stability. As South Africa navigates this new political terrain, the resilience of democratic institutions and the commitment of its leaders to collaborative governance will be crucial determinants of its future trajectory. Note: Cyril Ramaphosa  of the ANC  was re-elected as the President of South Africa with the support of the Democratic Alliance (DA), Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) and several smaller parties, forming a coalition government known as the Government of National Unity . John Steenhuisen , leader of the DA , currently serves as the Minister of Agriculture , while Velenkosini Hlabisa , leader of the IFP , has been appointed as the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs . Compiled by Commodore (Dr) Johnson Odakkal (with support from Ms Vivaksha Vats)  Stay Tuned for More! As the Global Canvas  series continues, we will explore key moments reshaping political landscapes and governance worldwide. South Africa’s 2024 election marks a turning point in the nation’s democratic evolution, raising critical questions about coalition governance, political accountability, and the future of leadership in emerging democracies. What other global events or political issues would you like us to cover next? Drop your suggestions in the comments or reach out! Visit   www.johnsonodakkal.com  or email ceo@johnsonodakkal.com    to stay engaged as we analyze the forces driving change in governance, diplomacy, and international affairs. References and Sources African Elections | South Africa General Elections: All you need to know NPE Results Dashboard 2024 South Africa country profile - BBC News South Africa election results: ANC loses majority for first time : NPR South Africa is forming a unity government. What happens next? - The Hindu The South African coalition government's daunting agenda The South African Electoral System — Helen Suzman Foundation South Africa to form multi-party coalition government in historic ‘new chapter,’ DA party says | CNN Why voters fall out of love with liberation movements