The Editor’s Note
Welcome back to Outside OX1!
It’s Trinity term, collections are done, and with the sun shining, summer feels like it’s come early. But more exciting than that—we’re back to bring you all the recent updates from across the world! So what’s been going on?
In our last Outside OX1, we covered the arrival of Mark Carney to the forefront of Canadian politics. Two months later, and he’s got some good news again. Now not just Prime Minister in name, but with the backing of the Canadian people and 168 seats behind him, we’ll take a look at why Carney called a snap election, and how he has magnificently turned the tables for the Liberal Party.
Meanwhile, the hot potato of Kashmir has been boiling over again. An attack last week on Indian civilians has caused the region to become yet again an intense contention point between Pakistan and India. Deescalation attempts are under way, including from China, Iran and Saudi Arabia. But with both sides laying claim to Kashmir, there’s a sense that a deep-rooted issue is beginning to surface.
The Kashmir conflict is not in isolation though. The number of global conflicts has spiked since 2022, and with it the safety of humanitarian workers has become a growing concern. Debated in Westminster on Wednesday, we’ll discuss why this is such an important development, how humanitarian workers can be kept safer, and what it reveals about the increasingly volatile political world we live in.
Finally, France has seen police raids after recent attacks on prisons. The government claims it is part of a wider scheme to crackdown on drug trafficking from organised crime groups. For Macron, the move has been important to appease voters from the far-right; there have been suggestions that if action is not taken soon, drug trafficking could soon snowball out of control. There’s a chance it could be a winning point in the next election.
So crime control in France is one issue, and border disputes in Kashmir another. The rise of the far-right is putting pressure on politicians to project strength and not back down when push comes to shove. Perhaps a key reason for Carney’s victory lies within this context too. Yet not backing down means heads (sometimes big ones) are clashing. Aid workers are now even under fire, as 2025 looks to follow 2024 as the most violent year since WWII.
It’s not a pretty picture; the solution is not a simple one. To be able to walk the tight line of politics, leaders will need to find the balance between compromise and firmness. The stories we cover highlight the impact isolationism is having. But in a world of de-globalisation, what new methods will politicians need to navigate these issues?
Canadian Liberal Party Takes Unexpected Win
Elana Roberts
Canada’s Liberal Party, led by Mark Carney, has won the 28 April federal election with 168 seats. Between Carney and his main opponent, Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre, this election was the first in nearly 70 years that the two main parties took over 80% of the vote between them. Other parties like the Bloc Québécois and the New Democratic Party (NDP) were reduced to a diminished share.
Earlier this year, Justin Trudeau resigned as Canada’s Prime Minister. After a landslide victory in the leadership race on 9 March, Carney became the leader of the Liberal Party and Prime Minister of Canada. Just weeks after winning the role, he called a snap federal election to take place on 28 April.
This was a risky decision given that only months earlier the Liberal Party was considered to be weak contenders in a potential election. Poilievre and the Conservative Party looked poised to speak on issues such as the rise in dissent over the cost of living crisis and Trudeau’s non-confrontational approach to Trump. To many, Poilievre seemed to be a clear shoe-in for the next election, whenever it would be.
However, following Trudeau’s replacement with Carney and Trump’s election into office, the Canadian public’s faith in the Liberal Party appears to have been revived.
Carney, 60, had no political experience up until 9 March. Prior to this, he was the governor of the Bank of Canada, successfully managing the central bank through the 2008 recession. He was also the first non-British governor of the Bank of England, known for strongly criticising Brexit. Nevertheless, once the referendum result was finalised, he helped manage the country’s transition.
Many surveys from polling firms have indicated that Carney’s extensive experience handling financial crises has made him a more appealing candidate than Poilievre. After all, following Trump’s tariff threats on 2 April, Canada’s next Prime Minister will need to lead them through a trade war with the US.
In his victory speech on Tuesday morning, Carney vowed “Trump will never break us.” He was referring to the ultimatums Trump has issued against the Canadian economy and its sovereignty. These were made both through tariffs and by threatening that Canada could become the 51st US state.
Carney has called for unity and solidarity in the face of such divisive forces. He has reaffirmed his desire to “do [his] best to represent everyone who calls Canada home”, further acknowledging the millions who did not vote for him and making a commitment to representing their interests nonetheless.
Whether the Liberal Party’s renewed popularity will endure depends largely on how successfully Carney is able to negotiate with the US and the impact on the Canadian economy. Enormous pressure now rests on Canada’s new Prime Minister.
Water, War, and Borders: The Kashmir Conflict Reignites
Isolde Sellin
On 22 April in the long contested Kashmir region, an attack left 26 members of an Indian tourist group dead. Since then, tensions between India and Pakistan have been rising once again.
Kashmir has been a flashpoint of conflict since 1947, when British colonial rule in the Indian subcontinent ended with India’s independence. As their final act as colonial rulers, the British oversaw the partition of the region into two new nations, India and Pakistan. Since then, both countries have claimed authority over Kashmir—India controls roughly two-thirds of the region, while Pakistan administers the remaining third. Neither side has relinquished its claim to the entire area.
Kashmir is among the most heavily militarized regions in the world. Three wars have been fought over it, and although the last occurred in 1999, outbreaks of violence have continued. The most recent major crisis was in 2019, when a suicide bombing killed 40 people.
Last week’s attack has once again brought the Kashmir conflict into the global spotlight. The Indian government accuses Pakistan of being behind the attack, which took place in the Indian-controlled area of Kashmir—a charge Pakistan denies.
Meanwhile, a group calling itself the Resistance Front claimed responsibility for the shooting on social media. Indian officials privately contend that the group is a proxy for Lashkar-e-Taiba, a terrorist organization based in Pakistan.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has announced a series of punitive measures in response to the attack. This has included revoking visas issued to Pakistani nationals, expelling military advisers, closing a border crossing, and suspending the crucial Indus Water Treaty.
This suspension could trigger a serious crisis in Pakistan, where nearly 80% of agriculture and hydropower depend on water supplied under the treaty. Pakistan called the suspension “an act of war.” In response, the country suspended all trade with India and denied Indian aircraft access to its airspace.
China urged India and Pakistan to “exercise restraint.” China’s history is also intertwined with the conflict, as it controls a region of Kashmir that India considers illegal. However, the current conflict primarily takes place between Pakistan and India.
Beyond China, there is growing international concern that the escalating tensions between these two nuclear-armed nations could spiral into a broader conflict. Governments in Iran and Saudi Arabia have reached out to both sides in an attempt to de-escalate the situation. United Nations spokesperson Stéphane Dujarric condemned the attack but also called on both sides to exercise “restraint to ensure the situation does not deteriorate further.”
At the start of this week, Pakistan’s Information Minister Attaullah Tarar claimed to have “credible intelligence” that India is planning a military strike within the next 24-36 hours and warns that any aggression will be met with a decisive response. Amidst ongoing cross-border skirmishes and cyber threats, civilians near the Line of Control are fortifying bunkers, and authorities have shuttered most tourist sites in the region, bracing for possible escalation.
When Helping Hurts: The Increasing Risk of Conflict to Humanitarian Workers
Daniel Burns
The number of global conflict events has doubled over the past five years, from 100,000 to over 200,000. This is the highest amount since World War II. With it have come serious concerns over global security, changes to international alliances and the loss of innocent lives.
Yet beyond these developments lie some less obvious but equally harmful impacts. One such case was debated in Westminster on Wednesday 30 April—the safety of humanitarian workers.
Since 2022, the number of humanitarian workers affected by major attacks has seen a sharp increase. Tom Morrison, MP for Cheadle and leader of the debate on Wednesday, recognised that “2024 was the deadliest year on record for humanitarian workers”.
This includes the killing of at least 325 aid workers, a number which Joyce Msuya, the UN’s Assistant Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs, called “brutal” and “unprecedented”.
Yet this does not even begin to cover the amount of workers injured, kidnapped, attacked and unlawfully detained.
Perhaps the most notable incident took place on 23 March in Rafah. 15 emergency workers were killed by the Israeli military, with their bodies found a week later in shallow graves—supposedly to protect them from wild animals. Despite a previous claim that the attack was justified, the Israeli military has now stated that the attack was the result of an “operational misunderstanding”.
The importance of these instances cannot be understated. The loss of life to those who are fighting for the lives of others is tragic enough in itself. But in addition to this, it also means less and less aid agencies are willing to help.
For example, in Sudan, “many aid agencies are now pausing or suspending their operations” due to the volatility of the situation. Yet while there are less humanitarian workers available, they are needed more than ever.
Healthcare is often poor in areas of conflict. Malnutrition is not uncommon, with over 500,000 people from five conflict countries living in extreme food insecurity situations.
Children are perhaps worst affected. UNICEF has stated 2024 was “one of the worst years in history for children in conflict”. 473 million children are currently either displaced or living in areas of conflict—the highest number recorded in history.
A key reason behind these developments is the nature of present-day politics.
More than a third of countries with elections in 2024 experienced electoral violence, 25% more than the previous year. Notably, countries with elections had an increase of 63% national political violence, compared to 21% in those without.
Therefore, it seems there is a link between increasingly volatile politics and a less stable, more dangerous world. So what is the solution?
Msuya said there is “no shortage of robust international frameworks” to protect humanitarian workers. Instead, “what is lacking is the political will to comply”. The government recognised this on Wednesday, saying it was “actively involved in diplomatic efforts”.
However, while diplomacy may put a plaster over the issue, it is hard to see how a longer-term solution can be put in place. After all, humanitarian work is only necessary because of conflict, something which politics is currently fuelling. Therefore, if long-term progress is to be made, it will be found in political change.
Inside France’s War on Drugs
Tom Barrett
On Monday 28 April, the French police force conducted a series of police raids to arrest 25 people thought to be connected with recent attacks on French prisons.
On 13 April, a prison close to the southern city of Toulon came under scattered automatic gunfire. In Agen, southwestern France, several cars in a prison staff training centre care park were set on fire. The anti-terror prosecutor’s office also discovered 15 other incidents between 13 April and 21 April they believe to be connected.
The graffiti tag ‘DDPF’ was found on the site in Agen. DDPF, standing for ‘Droits des Prisonniers Français’, (Rights for French Prisoners), appears to be drawing attention to the violation of prison rights by the state.
However, the government claims the attacks are actually a retaliation by organised crime groups for policies to crack down on drug trafficking.
On Tuesday 29 April, the French parliament passed sweeping measures to crack down on drug consumption and kingpins, as well as set up a new narcotics prosecution office. This bill is based on a senate report compiled last September by centre-left politician Jérôme Durain and conservative Étienne Blanc. Its implementation marks a ramping up of the government’s war on drugs, and a further movement away from the harm-reduction strategies employed by France’s European peers.
Over recent years, drugs—especially cocaine and cannabis—have become increasingly present in French everyday life.
In 2023, cocaine consumption nearly doubled, though France still remains only seventh in terms of consumption of the drug in Europe. Nonetheless, the rise has been linked to growing organised crime groups. Meanwhile, violence has spread, with the drugs from outside the deprived areas of France’s cities and into the towns and villages across the French countryside.
Interior Minister, Bruno Retailleau, has been outspoken about the dangers of this trend, stating that ‘smoking joints’, or ‘taking a rail of coke’ have the ‘taste of tears and, above all, blood’.
Retailleau has further claimed that France is on the verge of ‘Mexicanisation’, where the state would no longer be able to keep these gangs in check. While this seems to be slightly distant to current realities in France, it is nonetheless reflective of the tone in which the government seems to be wanting to take on this ‘war’.
This issue has to be taken, with the backdrop of a looming post-Macron presidential election. If the government fails to be seen to deal with this issue adequately, it could be a rallying point for the far-right; as despite the recent ban on far right politician Marine Le Pen running in 2027, her seeming successor Jordan Bardella has remained stubbornly high in opinion polls. If Macron’s government can’t get a handle on the drug problem, then they will find it hard to keep the spectre of the far right out of office.