In a new analysis for World Politics Review, Olajumoke Ayandele argues that Rwanda’s 10-year deal to host Formula 1’s African Grand Prix, the sport’s first race on the continent since 1993, is a genuine economic and soft-power opening whose payoff is far from assured. 

Amnesty International has called it sportswashing, and allegations of rights restrictions at home and of abuses involving Rwandan forces and the M23 militia they support in eastern Congo have raised questions about the partnership. She notes, though, that Formula 1 controls access and sets the commercial terms, so Rwanda is joining a system it does not run, while the sport gains a foothold in an underserved market of an estimated 100 million fans. Hosting also departs from Rwanda’s earlier strategy of sponsoring European soccer clubs, because it brings tourism and business into the country itself. 

Precedents cut both ways. Las Vegas and Singapore drew large economic activity, but South Korea, India and Malaysia lost their races to losses, disputes and costs. With the Bugesera circuit unbuilt and the financial terms undisclosed, the analysis says much depends on whether African firms, rather than established international ones, win the contracts and skills the race creates.

Every time I see discussion around nuclear weaponry it's almost guaranteed that America, Russia and China will be name dropped 100%

India, Pakistan and Israel have a good chance of showing up in the conversation too

But Britain and France I have never seen be brought up in such discussions

Am I just looking in the wrong place's?

does anyone have any ideas to why Russia would invade Ukraine when it could have kept it as a pupet, simple reason of Ukraines trajectory being more towards EU doesn’t feel right enough.

I'm doing Erasmus next year and I need recommendations on the best universities to go, as an International Relations student.

Germany’s rearmament is often discussed in terms of spending, but the bigger question is whether that spending can actually translate into military capability, readiness, and stronger European coordination.

This article looks at what Germany’s changing defense role could mean for Europe and NATO, especially as questions grow around long-term reliance on the United States.

Do you think Europe can build greater defense autonomy without weakening the alliance structure it still depends on?

hi, please bare with me as i explain my dilemma lol,

im a second year IR major with an emphasis in peace and security and have been toggling with the idea of my minors for a bit and need to make a decision soon as class registration for next quarter starts in a few weeks and i'm also getting ready to sign up for study abroad next fall. i'm already taking chn 1-6 for the IR language req and plan on doing a summer language program through Peking Uni in Beijing to work on my fluency next summer. by the time i graduate, i want to be fluent in chinese so keep that in mind.

i was planning on doing the IR major and then a minor in both chinese and human rights studies BUT i don't think its possible for me to get both, study abroad, AND graduate 2 quarters early. even if it was, it'd be a lot of academic strain with me having to take 19 or more units per quarter until dec 2028... graduating early, per the request of my parents footing the bill (rightfully so) is the number one priority so i'm willing to drop one minor in pursuit of the other if one benefits me more!

basically, as someone who knows for certain they want to go to law school and maybe (hopefully) farther down the line go into international human rights law (very tough field IK but a girl can dream) i'm not sure if i should minor in Chinese or human rights studies? my dad thinks the language is the most beneficial and i should keep that minor and just take an HMR class but if i want to possibly go into that field of law shouldn't i minor in it or is the IR major enough???

also--im aware things change and life happens so maybe not getting the HMR minor is okay if theres not a definite chance i could end up in the field anyway? it'd just be cool because im very interested in the topic but as you can see, going back and forth on putting a definitive label on it lol!

my main questions are:

which one looks better or will benefit me most in the future?

thank you in advance!

Current events show that it is not just military might. Research finds that distance, deployment, and aims all matter.

This is part of a series of living lit reviews on foreign policy topics. What is it missing?