Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Namat “Minouche” Shafik
Columbia University President steps down
Columbia University President Namat “Minouche” Shafik announced late Wednesday she is stepping down after just one year in the position, making her the third Ivy League president to resign this year in the wake of Gaza-related protests.
Shafik has faced months of backlash over her handling of campus divisions during the protests last spring. Her testimony before a Congressional panel on campus antisemitism angered many faculty and students, as did her decision to call the police onto campus twice to clear the protests. Meanwhile, others in the Columbia community, including some major donors, accused her of abetting antisemitism.
Unlike the other Ivy League presidents who resigned over the protests, Shafik seems to have stepped down voluntarily, as Columbia’s board has repeatedly said they stand behind her. Shafik, an Egyptian-born British baroness and former vice president of the World Bank, said she is returning to the UK to chair a review of the government’s international development programs.
Hours prior to her resignation, a federal judge ruled that the University of California in Los Angeles cannot allow pro-Palestinian protesters to block Jewish students from campus or school activities. The decision could be a blueprint for Jewish students to bring similar lawsuits against other universities if pro-Palestine protests erupt again this fall.
Infographic of fake and real accounts that interacted with a post from Israel's prime minister.
Bots battle Bibi
X has become a critical means for politicians and the public to broadcast their views on current events, often triggering controversy, trolling, and bitter battles in the new political arena: the comments section. Trouble is, it’s not just people posting. Social media bots — programs that automate interactions and post content on social media in ways that mimic human behavior — are also flooding the comments section, which means you may be responding to fake accounts, not humans.
We partnered with Cyabra, an Israel-based data firm that investigates fake actors on the internet, and found that bots flocked to Bibi’s post in droves. They made up over 43% of all replies, and of the bots spreading negative sentiment about the post, 19% used keywords like “genocide,” “kids,” and “children.”
The investigation also found that while real accounts outnumbered fake ones, the bots were far more active, with many commenting multiple times. Across the board, they found that up to 31% of comments responding to posts from key political figures are fueled by fake accounts.
Gaza protests highlight the need to build cooperation vs. confrontation, says Eboo Patel
It’s time for college students to rethink how they protest, says Eboo Patel, founder of Interfaith America, a nonprofit that works with hundreds of campuses to foster healthier dialogue. In a wide-ranging interview with Ian Bremmer for the latest episode of GZERO World, Patel criticizes the confrontational culture on campuses, urging a shift from romanticizing conflict to embracing cooperation. He challenges the dichotomy of oppressors and oppressed, advocating for a more nuanced approach to diversity that resembles a potluck of ideas.
“We absolutely need to change the default setting on campuses from confrontation is romanticized to cooperation is the norm."
College campuses are actually the perfect venues for this kind of dialogue, Patel says, and professors and administrators can leverage their intellectual backgrounds to foster the kinds of productive dialogue that students need more than ever. Everything else, like demanding the disbanding of campus police, Patel says, is nothing more than a distraction.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
- US inching away from Israel on Gaza war ›
- Israel-Hamas war: Who is responsible for Gaza's enormous civilian death toll? ›
- Chaos erupts overnight on US campuses. What’s next for student protesters? ›
- How campus protests could influence the US presidential election ›
- Campus protests spill over into US political sphere ›
Covering Columbia's campus protests as a student and GZERO reporter
The past few weeks of student protests, counter-protests, and police activity at Columbia have been the tensest moments the University has seen in over 50 years. What’s it like to be a student and graduating senior during this historic moment?
When GZERO writer Riley Callanan began her senior year at Barnard, the women’s college within Columbia, she never expected it would end this way: thousands of student protesters, an encampment and takeover of an administrative building, the attention of the national news media, armed police officers swarming campus, and, ultimately, a canceled graduation ceremony. Now, as she tells colleague Alex Kliment on GZERO World, instead of senior galas and grad parties, Columbia students are having intense debates over the Israel-Palestine conflict, antisemitism, and free speech.
Callanan has been documenting it all—from the early protests on the academic quad to Speaker of the House Mike Johnson delivering on her library steps. GZERO correspondent Alex Kliment sat down with Callahan to hear more about what it’s like to be a college senior in 2024, what she saw during the protests, and what happens after graduation.“We absolutely need to change the default setting on campuses from confrontation is romanticized to cooperation is the norm."
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
- With summer looming, where will student protesters turn next? ›
- From the inside out: Is Columbia’s campus crisis calming down? ›
- Chaos on Campus: Speaker Johnson's visit fans the flames at Columbia as protests go global ›
- Columbia & Yale protests: What campus protesters want ›
- Campus protests spill over into US political sphere ›
Campus protests over Gaza: Now what?
Something is happening here—on college campuses, that is. But what do we make of protests that turn violent, like what we saw at UCLA or even some of the Columbia conflicts? In a wide-ranging interview with Ian Bremmer on GZERO World, Eboo Patel, founder of the nonprofit Interfaith America, talks about his work on hundreds of college campuses to find common ground. His core message is simple: "Cooperation is better than division."
Patel advocates for a shift in focus from confrontation to cooperation on campuses, suggesting that universities should foster environments of civil discourse. He proposes initiatives like teach-ins and dialogues to explore constructive solutions to complex issues. "I think the problem here, the thing that universities could control, which I think that they have gotten wrong in many cases over the course of the past five years, is the default mode has been set to confrontation, not cooperation."
It's true that finding common ground can be easier said than done when tensions are high. But as Patel points out, the majority of college campuses have been able to debate the Israel-Gaza war without the kind of chaos or violence we've seen on certain campuses. "The media, for good reasons, covers planes that crash and not planes that land," Patel explains.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
- From the inside out: Is Columbia’s campus crisis calming down? ›
- Crisis at Columbia: Protests and arrests bring chaos to campus ›
- Chaos erupts overnight on US campuses. What’s next for student protesters? ›
- How campus protests could influence the US presidential election ›
- Campus protests spill over into US political sphere ›
Why campus protests worsen divisions, and how to mediate: Advice from Eboo Patel
Listen: On this episode of the GZERO World Podcast with Ian Bremmer, Eboo Patel, founder of Interfaith America, advocates for cooperation over division on college campuses in response to protests, highlighting the need for civil discourse and pointing out that despite some instances of violence, most campuses engage in constructive dialogue.
Whether you are for or against the protests happening across the country, one thing is clear: They've caught the world's attention. Some have escalated into violence, as seen at UCLA, Texas, and Columbia University. On the podcast, Patel discusses his efforts on over 600 college campuses to foster unity. His central message: "Cooperation is better than division."
Patel emphasizes the need for universities to shift their focus from confrontation to cooperation, advocating for environments that promote civil discourse. He suggests initiatives such as teach-ins and dialogues to explore constructive solutions to complex issues. Patel criticizes the default mode of many universities. "I think the problem here, the thing that universities could control, which I think that they have gotten wrong in many cases over the course of the past five years, is the default mode has been set to confrontation, not cooperation."
While it may be challenging to find common ground, Patel highlights that the majority of college campuses have managed to engage in debates about the Israel-Gaza conflict without resorting to chaos or violence. He explains, "The media, for good reasons, covers planes that crash and not planes that land." This suggests that the instances of violence and chaos are outliers and that civil discourse is still prevalent on many campuses.
Subscribe to the GZERO World Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published.
- How campus protests could influence the US presidential election ›
- Columbia & Yale protests: What campus protesters want ›
- Campus protests spill over into US political sphere ›
- Chaos erupts overnight on US campuses. What’s next for student protesters? ›
- Crisis at Columbia: Protests and arrests bring chaos to campus ›
Ian Explains: Will the Gaza campus protests work?
Have the student protests worked? College campuses nationwide have become protest hubs, echoing past movements demanding change. From Columbia to UCLA, students are pitching tents, occupying buildings, and clashing with police over Israel's actions in Gaza. The core demand: divestment from Israel. Whether it's cutting ties with Israeli donors or businesses, students are risking penalties to be heard, Ian Bremmer explains on GZERO World.
This activism mirrors the 1968 protests at Columbia, which targeted US involvement in Vietnam. Then, as now, divestment was a central demand, albeit from different sources. Some progress has been made; Brown and Northwestern students have reached agreements with administrators. Worldwide, youth are voicing discontent over Gaza.
However, not all support these protests. Some lament another disrupted commencement, while Jewish students feel marginalized and threatened. Can these efforts change US policy? President Biden's recent remarks suggest otherwise, as does Congress' recent passing of $15 billion in military aid for Israel. But Biden needs Gen Z's support for reelection. They have leverage, and they know it.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week on US public television (check local listings) and online.
A demonstrator stands in front of a row of National Guard soldiers, across the street from the Hilton Hotel in Grant Park, site of the Democratic National Convention in Chicago, Illinois, on Aug. 26, 1968.
This is not 1968
Last week, my friend Alex Kliment wisely urged us to “Stop with the 1930s stuff,” current historical comparisons between what President Joe Biden has called a“ferocious surge” of antisemitism in response to the war in Gaza and the murderous anti-Jewish hatreds of the 1930s that led to the Holocaust.
Let’s pump the brakes on another distortion of history — that of today’s US political environment with the upheavals of 1968. (Seehere,here, andhere for recent public examples.)
Here’s the argument some are making …
As in 1968, the Democratic Party, burdened with a weak incumbent, is fighting to keep the White House as a deeply unpopular war ignites angry student protests, provoking confrontations between students and police. The Democrats, preparing to nominate their candidate (in Chicago!) will face ugly demonstrations there that provoke yet more activist confrontations with police, adding to a sense that the nation is out of control and prompting centrist voters to favor a restoration of order.
Conclusion: The Dems lost in 1968, and Biden now faces defeat for the same reasons.
Not so fast. First, today’s student protesters are furious over the war in Gaza, the heavy civilian death toll among Palestinians with nowhere to go, and the seeming refusal of the US government and US institutions, including their schools, to make it stop.
But the students of 1968, angry over segregation in America and the war in Vietnam, faced the reality they might be drafted and sent to kill or be killed in Southeast Asia. The furies that fueled those students were far more personal.
Second, if today’s political environment feels chaotic, consider this … As of May 2024, hundreds of students have been arrested, and graduation ceremonies have been canceled. President Biden is unpopular.
By May 1968, a much larger number of protesters had been arrested, state troopers had killed three students and wounded 50 more at South Carolina State University, President Lyndon Johnson had announced he would not seek reelection, Martin Luther King Jr. had been assassinated, and Robert F. Kennedy would soon follow.
Third, this year’s election dynamic is very different. Polls say Biden is a weak leader for Democrats, but he is the incumbent. The advantages this confers on his reelection bid exceed anything 1968’s ill-fated Dem nominee, Vice President Hubert Humphrey, had on hand.
Biden has another advantage: Party convention organizers are already prepping for the worst in Chicago. In 1968, the Dems and Chicago PD weren’t ready for demonstrations of that scale, intensity, and sophistication of organization.
Further, in 1968, for voters who wanted a leader who could calm the raging passions of that moment, Richard Nixon could offer himself as an experienced statesman, a Cold War-era safe pair of hands — a man without the personal baggage that would permanently stain his legacy a few years later.
Donald Trump is a different political character. Love him or hate him, he will not be the choice of voters who crave a return to “normalcy.” Trump presents himself, and many of his devoted fans see him, as a political revolutionary, a Molotov cocktail to throw at the nation’s political elite.
In addition, while Nixon could win over persuadable voters as the “law-and-order candidate,” Trump now faces 91 felony charges in four separate criminal cases and is currently making headlines for defying a judge’s orders.
Finally, from the “tragedy-repeated-as-farce” department, 1968’s Robert F. Kennedy was a murdered martyr for social justice. His son, Robert Kennedy Jr., is aconspiracy theoristwho says a doctor once told him that “a worm got into my brain and ate a portion of it and then died.” Nor is the younger Kennedy likely to win five states that had voted Democrat for decades, as third-party segregationist George Wallace did in 1968.
Biden faced an uphill reelection fight before the war and related protests erupted, and Trump might well beat him in November. If so, when seeking explanations, look to the problems Biden faced before Hamas attacked Israel.