Reigniting Politics

In a world where conflict seems to be the order of the day, it was something remarkable to see leaders from every corner, often bitter rivals, standing side by side, even if only briefly.

After a moving service, Francis was buried in the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore, one of the oldest churches dedicated to the Virgin Mary. True to form, even in death, Francis chose not the grandeur of St Peter’s but the church he often visited privately, seeking the Virgin’s protection before and after every trip he made abroad.²

Naturally, it wouldn’t be a global spectacle without a dose of chaos: Donald Trump managed to steal headlines by arriving in a bright blue suit, standing out like a sore thumb in a sea of black. But drama aside, there was a surprisingly significant moment: Trump and Zelensky reportedly engaged in serious conversation about the war in Ukraine — with discussions rumoured to touch on the possibility of a ceasefire. Whether anything comes of it remains to be seen, but in the shadow of Francis’s message of peace, the symbolism was hard to ignore.³

Who Was Pope Francis?

Jorge Mario Bergoglio, born in Buenos Aires, Argentina, was never meant to be “just another pope.” From the moment he stepped onto the balcony of St Peter’s Basilica in 2013 and chose the name Francis — after St Francis of Assisi — it was clear he wanted something different.

• First South American pope
• First Jesuit pope
• First to take the name Francis

Raised by Italian immigrants who fled fascist Italy, Bergoglio grew up working-class. He worked as a nightclub bouncer and a floor sweeper before becoming a chemist — only later following his religious calling and joining the Jesuits.

Francis’s papacy was defined by a call for humility over grandeur. He lived in a guesthouse rather than the Apostolic Palace. He washed the feet of prisoners, immigrants, and Muslims. He constantly pushed the Church to speak up for the poor, the marginalised, and the environment.

Politically, he was seen as a bridge-builder. He brokered dialogue between the US and Cuba, championed refugee rights during the Syrian crisis, and called out the dangers of nationalism and rising Islamophobia.

But Francis was also, at his core, a traditionalist. He opposed abortion, refused to support women’s ordination, and remained conservative on sexuality and contraception — something that sometimes frustrated more progressive Catholics who hoped for sweeping change.⁴

Who Will Be the Next Pope?

The conclave that follows will be crucial, and the field is wide open. Here are the names buzzing around the Vatican right now:⁵

Cardinal Luis Antonio Tagle (Philippines)
Known for his charisma, humility, and focus on the poor, Tagle is often described as a globalist voice with Francis-like compassion. His selection would signal continuity and embrace the Church’s growing strength outside Europe.

Cardinal Matteo Zuppi (Italy)
A moderate progressive, Zuppi has experience in peace negotiations (especially in Mozambique) and is seen as someone who could keep Francis’s social agenda alive while healing internal Church divisions.

Cardinal Peter Turkson (Ghana)
Outspoken on climate change and economic inequality, Turkson would be the first African pope in over 1,500 years. He’s seen as socially conscious but leans more conservative on issues of sexuality and family.

Cardinal Christoph Schönborn (Austria)
A brilliant theologian and key figure behind the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Schönborn is respected across factions. He has shown pastoral sensitivity towards LGBTQ+ Catholics but stays rooted in traditional doctrine.

Cardinal Robert Sarah (Guinea)
A sharp conservative voice. Sarah is deeply critical of what he sees as the Church’s drift under Francis. His election would signal a hardline return to tradition, likely pushing back on many of Francis’s reforms.

There are, of course, wildcards. Some whisper about a Latin American successor to continue Francis’s “southern tilt.” Others wonder if the Church, beset by internal tensions, might choose an unknown compromise figure.

The long-standing conflict between India and Pakistan over the disputed region of Kashmir flared up once again this week, in what is quickly becoming one of the most dangerous escalations in recent years.

On April 22, a brutal terrorist attack struck the popular Pahalgam tourist area in Indian-administered Kashmir, killing 26 people, 25 Indian nationals and one Nepalese citizen. The attack, which targeted civilians, was claimed by a group calling itself “Kashmir Resistance,” allegedly backed by Pakistan-based organisations.

India was quick to respond, accusing Pakistan of harbouring and supporting terrorist groups across the border. The rhetoric was sharp, but so was the action: India suspended the Indus Waters Treaty, a major water-sharing agreement between the two countries, and closed its airspace to all Pakistani flights. Within hours, Pakistan retaliated by suspending the Simla Agreement, expelling Indian diplomats, and shutting its airspace to Indian aircraft.

The Line of Control (LoC) is the de facto border that divides the disputed region of Kashmir between India and Pakistan. Established after the 1971 war and formalised in the 1972 Simla Agreement, it isn’t an internationally recognised boundary but functions as a military control line. India administers the territory to the south and east of the LoC, while Pakistan controls the land to the north and west. It’s one of the most heavily militarised borders in the world, frequently seeing crossfire, skirmishes, and shelling — often putting civilian lives at risk on both sides.

Tensions further spilled over into the military sphere, with deadly skirmishes breaking out along the Line of Control (LoC). India reported one soldier killed and two injured in the clashes, while Pakistan confirmed the death of an army captain and another injured soldier. Both sides have since deployed additional troops along the border, sparking fears of a broader conflict.

While border skirmishes are sadly not uncommon in the region, what’s alarming this time is the scale and swiftness of diplomatic retaliation. The mutual suspension of two landmark agreements, the Indus Waters Treaty and the Simla Agreement, signals a breakdown in communication at the highest level. These agreements have historically acted as stabilising mechanisms during tense periods; without them, there is little left to act as a buffer.

The international response has been one of concern, but also caution. The United States issued a statement urging both sides to show “maximum restraint” and engage diplomatically to avoid further escalation. China, which shares a border with both India and Pakistan, has also called for calm. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia has stepped forward as a potential mediator, offering to host direct talks between the two nations.

This latest flare-up is a reminder of how volatile the Kashmir issue remains. Despite decades of conflict, ceasefires, and peace talks, the region is still mired in violence, mistrust, and political instability. The human cost is often borne by ordinary civilians, the families of the victims in Pahalgam are just the latest to suffer in a decades-long tragedy.

As tensions continue to simmer, eyes are now on whether global pressure can bring the two nations back from the brink, or whether another tragedy will spark something even worse.⁶

Tragedy at Lapu-Lapu Festival in Vancouver

What should’ve been a joyful celebration of Filipino culture turned tragic this week when a driver ploughed into a crowd at Vancouver’s Lapu-Lapu Day Festival. On April 26, a black Audi SUV sped into a busy street that had been transformed into a pedestrian zone lined with food stalls. Eleven people were killed, including a five-year-old girl, and more than 30 others were injured.

The suspect, 30-year-old Kai-Ji Adam Lo, was tackled and detained by bystanders before being arrested. Police say the attack is not being treated as terrorism, but confirmed that Lo has a documented history of mental health issues. He has been charged with eight counts of second-degree murder so far, with more charges likely.

The festival, which honours Filipino resistance hero Lapu-Lapu, had drawn a large crowd from Vancouver’s vibrant Filipino community. In the aftermath, vigils were held, fundraisers launched (though authorities have warned of scams), and officials from Prime Minister Candidate Mark Carney to Vancouver’s mayor offered condolences.

As the city mourns, questions are being raised about public event safety, but for now, Vancouver’s focus is on grief, support, and remembering those lost in a senseless act of violence.⁷

Harvard Sues Trump Administration Over $2.2 Billion Funding Freeze

Last week, Harvard University escalated its confrontation with the Trump administration by filing a federal lawsuit to halt a $2.2 billion freeze on research funding. The freeze was imposed after Harvard refused to comply with demands to eliminate diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programs, ban masks at campus protests, and overhaul admissions policies.

The administration’s actions are part of a broader campaign against elite universities, citing concerns over antisemitism and campus activism. However, Harvard contends that these demands infringe upon academic freedom and constitutional rights. In its lawsuit, the university argues that the funding freeze is “arbitrary and capricious,” violating the First Amendment and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.

University President Alan Garber emphasized that the frozen funds support critical research in areas like cancer and heart disease, asserting that the government’s actions jeopardize not only academic independence but also national interests in innovation and public health.

This legal battle underscores the intensifying tensions between higher education institutions and the federal government, as universities navigate challenges to their autonomy and core values.⁸