stewartprest.ca
Recalcitrant Canadian. Political scientist at UBC in Vancouver. I research, teach and talk international relations, BCpoli, comparative democratic institutions, and contentious politics. stewartprest.ca | https://stewartprest.substack.com
1,275 posts
3,889 followers
1,277 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Justice Sotomayor, on the import of what the Supreme Court did today:
"The [Trump administration] thus openly flouted two court orders. ... [E]ach time this Court rewards noncompliance with discretionary relief, it further erodes respect for the courts and for the rule of law."
comment in response to
post
It's definitely more British! Is British still European though?
comment in response to
post
Soon: Canada asserts sovereignty over the name of fries with cheese curds and gravy. It's only poutine if it's from Poutineville.
comment in response to
post
Vance, blowing up the Irony Klaxon again:
“I empathize with Americans who are exhausted after 25 years of foreign entanglements in the Middle East. I understand the concern, but the difference is that back then we had dumb presidents.”
comment in response to
post
Getting a bit spicy up in here.
comment in response to
post
As it should be! *ducks*
comment in response to
post
Seems relevant! bsky.app/profile/simo...
comment in response to
post
FWIW barring some major change, I don't think the Greens will matter. They're looking like a spent force at every level of politics save for a few legacy seats. In part, it's because they've failed to articulate any consistent position on key issues at each level—incl. housing at the municipal.
comment in response to
post
The worst case scenario from a generic left perspective is probably one in which progressive parties conclude they're so divided on housing that they cannot work together, and don't bother to coordinate, and run a replay of the 2022 debacle.
comment in response to
post
Relatedly, if they do manage to coordinate, could help deal with any divide among voters. Offers something for everyone—pro density progressive party for urbanists, and a developer-skeptic party for conservationists. More progressives are urbanists though, so plays to OneCity's adv overall IMO.
comment in response to
post
First, curious to see if OneCity and COPE continue to find ways to work together. They stand a better chance of winning if they coordinate slates (by avoiding overfishing), but Safeway vote suggests will be hard to coordinate campaign messaging and actual votes on council.
comment in response to
post
It's a good question. I don't think it'll matter much on the right as long as ABC holds together (not a guarantee, though!). On the left, could matter in a couple ways—some positive, some possibly v bad for the left.
comment in response to
post
Sounds bad!
comment in response to
post
Embarrassing for the US to be represented by a leader whose attention span needs to be catered to by allies, and for the allies willing to engage in such placation.
comment in response to
post
Don't get me wrong, war would be catastrophic for all concerned and I'll take indecision over another generational mistake, but the failure to take a stand is remarkable.
comment in response to
post
Simply put, the only path to sustainable peace is one that enables everyone in the region to meaningfully govern and defend themselves, through institutions that can enforce sovereignty and cooperate internationally. That's true for Israel; it's also true for Palestine and Iran.
comment in response to
post
None of this is to say that Iran's regime is worthy of defending. We have seen the risks Iranians, particularly young women, have been willing to run to resist its rule. Difficult as it is, finding ways to empower that opposition ought to be the focus.
comment in response to
post
It is very much on a par with Russian security commitments to Serbia on the brink of WWI. Like Serbia then, Israel is emboldened now, and seems willing to start any war it likes, confident of American support.
Simply put, any situation reminiscent of both WWI and Iraq will end badly.
comment in response to
post
The US is at real risk of Israel wagging the dog here, pulling America into a major new conflict in no way in US interests, in a region it just extricated itself from following a conflict that claimed hundreds of thousands of lives and cost trillions. www.militarytimes.com/news/your-mi...
comment in response to
post
The Iraq war made no one safer, and ruined countless lives. Sustained conflict with Iran promises to be a bigger badder version of that, without even the pretence of a goal of democratization or state building. Just breaking things and managing the fallout, real and metaphorical.
comment in response to
post
There are obvious problems with that approach, both humanitarian and security. As Ted Cruz could now tell you, Iran has 92 million people. That's bigger than Syria and Iraq combined. An uncontrolled regime collapse would create both motive and opportunity for widespread new violence in the region.