AMERICAN PHOENIX: an Apologetic

It is taught that we should not shame people if we want them to change. I don’t know if I can always agree with that. I am myself ashamed and know there are millions of people in this nation-state who need, and I mean deeply need, to be ashamed. Shame can be harrowing, but shame can also be righteous. Admitting to oneself and before others to being wrong, facing up to the truth of reality, admitting to the cause and apologetically being sorry and courageous before it—making amends for the consequences of gross misjudgments and criminal offenses.

Like it or like it not, America First is an illusion and a pretense and posturing in hubris. We are not the summit, not the pinnacle or crown of creation. Life, including human existence, is a circle, like the earth is round, a sphere of interconnective dependencies, and not a hierarchy of enforced domination. We are participants with all others, a species-joined by genetics and evolution, and at best, when we are at our best, we are cooperative working partners.

Like it or like it not, we live in a context of shared reality. And the disconnect from reality is endemic in the American identity-syndrome and configures the shamefulness of America’s withdrawal from discomforting challenges into narcissistic delusions. While yet to look steadfastly, honestly, critically and courageous at America’s role in global realities should sting the conscience of American people, uncovering the cause of a shame that shows itself vindictively as a national mood of gloom and despair, we are advised to visit a therapist while continuing to shop. Therapy is a  coping component of materialistic civilization and consumerism is capitalism’s addiction of addictions.

Right now in the United States of America, we are not a good nation of good people. And if we want to be good people of a good nation, we will have to become better than we ever were in the past (because we have fallen with eyes open into more internal depredation and danger than ever before). Being better means better in our virtues and our integrity, our promises and our deeds, then the shamefulness that has taken hold of us.  The  ashes of our national repentance must be equal to the phoenix of renewed democracy. Henceforth—for recovery and trust in the world--the phoenix of human betterment and not now repeating the bloody cataclysms of the eagle of war would better serve as a national symbol.

In the crisis of democracy upon us, the corruption of conduct and of governance must be swept from the land and cleansed from the air. Only then will we collectively plant new crops for a shameless harvest. Only then will we again know what it is to breathe the good health of freedom. Then life will become lighter without the weight of betrayal, without the shadow enfolding coils of venomous tyranny.

If the United States has a sovereign Constitution, if the United States has a viable democracy, then the American people united have the power to peacefully and lawfully remove the fundamental cause of current (and yet ongoing) national shame, of harmful misconduct and abhorrent behavior. Indeed, to do so is a common sense assertion of democratic instinct.

Honesty is the first step to recovery. Not only indispensable personal honesty throughout the citizenry but indispensable honesty in political service and public discourse. Seekers of office who lack honesty in the questioning concerns of critical dialogue should never be elected to office. We are far from being of that stainless, trustworthy status today, but this is a goal—a national antidote directly before us.  In this too, the quality of a people and the vitality of democracy are on the line.

Approaching the two hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the USA, let’s take a moment together to ask ourselves in our purblind self-absorption, our stress, our anxiety, our hurry-worry scurrying financial lives, are we turning back and heading home, or rushing terminally into the ICU of failed politicians and calamitous policies?

Each of us makes choices, large and small, not only when voting. Choices have consequences. They delineate parameters and point in a direction.

---

David Sparenberg is a humanitarian and eco poet, an international essayist and storyteller. He published four eBooks with OVI Books (Sweden) and the Word Press in 2025, the fourth of which was TROUBADOUR & the Earth on Fire. David will have a fifth new OVI eBook, MANIFESTO: Ecology, Spirituality & Politics in a Higher Octave, published in April 2026. David Sparenberg lives in Seattle, WA in the Pacific Northwest of the United States but identifies as an Ecotopian Citizen of Creation.

---

Don’t miss David Sparenberg‘s latest eBook Troubadour and the Earth on fire ,
Download for free, HERE!

Dnieper River #Poem #Painting by Nikos Laios

 

The rain is falling
Hard now and my boots
Are stuck in the mud,
We have a respite
Until the next attack
And I think of you,
Do you think of me?

I think of our picnics
On the banks of the
Dnieper River during
Spring and the chiming
Of Saint Sophia church
Bells on Sundays,
And everybody wearing
Their Sunday best;
But that seems so long
Ago now when
We had peace.

 *******************************
With a digital painting from Nikos Laios

 *******************************
Check Nikos Laios' eBOOK, HERE!

#eBook The eighth wonder by Ovi Art eBooks

Its wagons roll into the town square, or its tents rise on the outskirts, bearing wonders that defy the reasonable world: a woman who flies, a man who bends like water, a clown whose painted sadness speaks more truth than any unadorned face.

For a few coins, we enter a realm where gravity is negotiable, where the body becomes something other than itself, machine, animal, pure line, pure absence. And then, just as suddenly, it is gone, leaving only sawdust and the memory of impossibility.
Climate change and national security in the 21st century

For the circus, like modern art, asks us to believe in transformations. The ordinary person becomes the flyer, the stable ground becomes the wire, the white paint on a face becomes the zero of form. Step inside the tent. The show is about to begin.

The eighth wonder

Read it online or download HERE!
Read it online & downloading it as PDF or EPUB HERE!
Or enjoy reading it online & downloading it as PDF HERE!
All downloads are FREE!

---

For more eBooks check Ovi eBookshelves HERE!

Screws & Chips #123 #Cartoon by Thanos Kalamidas

 

In a galaxy far, far away, intelligence demonstrated by screws and chips,
boldly gone where no robot has gone before!

For more Screws & Chips, HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!

---

Easter of the Resurrection #Thoughts by Dr. Emanuel Paparella

Another Easter is upon us. Time to rejoice. Time to reflect. Time to ask the question that Chesterton also asked before his conversion. Why are we still talking about a guy who lived some 2000 years ago? How relevant is he really? Those are good questions. As it has become my custom at Ovi magazine I take Christmas and Easter as an opportunity to revisit some of the thoughts of G. K. Chesterton on the subject. He is inimitable. Here below are some selections from his The Everlasting Man.

“If Christ was simply a human character, he really was a highly complex and contradictory human character. For he combined exactly the two things that lie at the two extremes of human variation. He was exactly what the man with a delusion never is; he was wise; he was a good judge. What he said was always unexpected; but it was always unexpectedly magnanimous and often unexpectedly moderate.

Take a thing like the point of the parable of the tares and the wheat. It has the quality that united sanity and subtlety. It has not the simplicity of a madman. It has not even the simplicity of a fanatic. It might be uttered by a philosopher a hundred years old, at the end of a century of Utopias. Nothing could be less like this quality of seeing beyond and all round obvious things, than the condition of an egomaniac with the one sensitive spot in his brain. I really do not see how these two characters could be convincingly combined, except in the astonishing way in which the creed combines them….

The Jesus of the New Testament seems to me to have in great many ways the note of something superhuman; that is of something human and more than human. But there is another quality running through all his teachings which seems to me neglected in most modern talk about them as teachings; and that is the persistent suggestion that he has not really come to teach.

If there is one incident in the record which affects me personally as grandly and gloriously human, it is the incident of giving wine for the wedding-feast.That is really human in the sense in which a whole crowd of prigs, having the appearance of human beings, can hardly be described as human.

It rises superior to all superior persons. It is as human as Herrick and as democratic as Dickens. But even in that story there is something else that has the note of things not fully explained; and in a way there very relevant. I mean the first hesitation, not on any ground touching the nature of the miracle, but on that of the propriety of working any miracles at all, at least at that stage; ‘my time is not yet come.’

What did that mean? At least it certainly meant a general plan or purpose in the mind, with which certain things did or did not fit in. And if we leave out that solitary strategic plan, we not only leave out the point of the story, but the story. The more one studies the Bible, the more obvious it becomes that Christ was unlike any man who walked the earth up until that time — and that He maintains that distinction to this very day.

I care not if the skeptic says it is a tall story; I cannot see how so toppling a tower could stand so long without foundation. Still less can I see how it could become, as it has become, the home of man.

Had it merely appeared and disappeared, it might possibly have been remembered or explained as the last leap of the rage of illusion, the ultimate myth of the ultimate mood, in which the mind struck the sky and broke. But the mind did not break. It is the one mind that remains unbroken in the break-up of the world.

If it were an error, it seems as if the error could hardly have lasted a day. If it were a mere ecstasy, it would seem that such an ecstasy could not endure for an hour. It has endured for nearly two thousand years; and the world within it has been more lucid, more level-headed, more reasonable in its hopes, more healthy in its instincts, more humorous and cheerful in the face of fate and death, than all the world outside.”

Happy Easter, everyone, whether you are a believer or a non-believer!

On the Writing of Power and Professional Development by Mohammad Momin Khawaja

Writing has been used by many ancient and modern cultures to preserve historical records of human activity. This is an important human social activity in that people find relevance in expressing themselves in various social contexts. A record of this would preserve how we perceive and navigate the challenges of our life activities. Cultural values and traditions are often the strongest moral and emotional concepts to people. As such, narrating and keeping records of one’s traditions and values would remind us of what we value the most and preserve what we revere, trust, and find as a source of life guidance.

There are many ethical, socially meaningful, and professional applications to writing. Writing is being used in various studies and professions to help preserve the self by narrating or keeping a record of cultural values and traditions. The idea central to reflective writing is that written stories are stimuli to and the subject matter for individual or group discussion and contemplation (Bourdreau et al., 2012). Participants write about events or ideas in their personal and professional lives that are either troubling or difficult to resolve. Then, they share the stories behind such complexities with peers in a support group setting. Just as is the medical profession, in the humanities this narrative context takes shape in diverse forms and functions (Bourdreau et al., 2012).

Reflective writing courses have been used successfully in western nation-states for the professional education of general practitioners. Participants write about events or ideas in their personal and professional lives that are either troubling or difficult to. resolve. Then, they share as the stories behind such complexities with peers in a support group setting. Narrative story has become increasingly more in use by healthcare professionals. This phenomenon is referred to ‘narrativist turn' in the humanities and has now coincided in being a trend in medical professional development. This narrative context in medicine has taken shape in diverse forms and functions (Bourdreau et al., 2012). The earliest sources of this in the medical profession is sources to the Balint group method that was grounded in storytelling. The idea behind this method was to support the doctor-patient relationship by focusing on physician emotions arising out of clinical encounters. Their focus was on identifying and determining puzzling and unsettling emotions and situations (Bourdreau et al., 2012). A similar activity, although different in how we understand narrative and stories as a genre, has been termed reflective writing.

Many healthcare professionals recognize reflective writing and the medical narrative as specific methodology in qualitative research. The stories and narratives in the medical profession constitute a type of psychotherapeutic intervention. This medical narrative has now evolved as stream within bioethics (Bourdreau et al., 2012). The extent of the development of reflective writing and the medical narrative is such that a taxonomy was recently constructed and published. This taxonomy in the healthcare profession is known as ‘narrative medicine'. Thus, it is medicine practiced with the narrative competence to recognize, interpret, and be moved to action by the predicaments of others.

Writing is an important human activity that has helped to preserve human ideas, values and traditions, and the history of nations and peoples. This important human activity is found in abundance in nearly all the professions and in education today. Reflective writing is a development in writing used nowadays towards beneficent outcomes. Despite the diverse nature of reflective writing and narrative writing, the practical applications of this practice prove useful in many human complexities found in the world today.

---

References:
Bourdreau, D., Liben, S., Fuks, A., (2012). A faculty development workshop in narrative-based reflective writing. Perspective Medical Education. 1:143-154. DOl: 10.1007/s40037-012-0021-4

---

Mohammad Momin Khawaja is a Graduate Student (Athabasca University) in MAIS Interdisciplinary Program and a freelance Journalist; Member of the Canadian Sociological Association (CSA) and Member of the International Center for Journalism – ICFJ Global Network, Washington, D.C. USA. He shares a scholarly global insight to socio-economic - ancient and cultural affairs and writes on contemporary issues of cultural studies, social justice, criminology, philosophy,history and problems of indigenous social welfare system and human development. He is author of numerous publications including, Women in the Ancient World (Lambert Academic Publication, 2023), Philosophy and Ethics; and A World Community: Diversity in Cultures and Values (2024), and Women in Ancient Cultures (Lulu Press Inc. USA), 2025. He recently published: “North American Colonization of Indigenous People, Cultures and System of Social Welfare.”:https://www.uncommonthought.com/mtblog/archives/2023/05/26/north-american-colonization-of-indigenous-people-cultures-and-system-of-social-welfare.php. “Canada’s System of Social Welfare and We, the People Aspiring for Change and Social Justice.” https://thetimes.com.au/world/23595-canada-s-system-of-social-whttps:“North American Society, AI and the Technological  Imperatives.”https://countercurrents.org/2024/01/north-american-society-ai-and-the-technological-imperatives/

Buried shame by Virginia Robertson

Every year, the world pauses, briefly, politely, on the International Day for Mine Awareness and Assistance in Mine Action. Speeches are made. Statements are issued. Carefully worded posts circulate. And then, almost immediately, the world moves on. The landmines, however, do not.

They wait. Hidden beneath soil that once fed families, along paths where children still dare to walk, under the fragile illusion of “post-conflict recovery.” Landmines are not relics of war; they are its most cowardly extension. They are weapons designed not just to kill, but to linger, to rot the future long after the headlines fade.

Let’s stop pretending this is merely a humanitarian issue. It is a moral failure ongoing, deliberate, and tolerated. Because here’s the uncomfortable truth: landmines exist today not because we lack the technology to remove them, but because we lack the political will to prioritize human life over strategic convenience. Clearing mines is slow, expensive and unglamorous. It doesn’t win elections. It doesn’t boost defence contracts. It doesn’t satisfy the appetites of those who still view war as a game played on maps instead of a curse buried in the earth.

So the mines stay. And with them, the consequences. Farmers who cannot farm. Children who cannot play. Communities that cannot rebuild. Entire regions frozen in a state of quiet terror, where every step carries the weight of uncertainty. This is not collateral damage. This is calculated neglect.

What makes landmines particularly grotesque is their indiscriminate nature. They do not recognize ceasefires. They do not distinguish between soldier and civilian, adult and child, enemy and survivor. They are equal opportunity destroyers, and in that sense, they expose the hypocrisy of modern warfare. We speak endlessly about precision, about minimizing harm, about “smart” weapons, yet we continue to tolerate devices that are the very definition of blind violence.

And then there is the language. “Mine action.” “Risk education.” “Clearance operations.” Sanitized phrases that attempt to wrap brutality in bureaucracy. Let’s call it what it is: a global effort to clean up after the reckless, often cynical decisions of governments and armed groups who knew exactly what they were planting and where.

The defenders of landmines will argue necessity. They always do. They will speak of borders, deterrence and security. But what security is built on the permanent endangerment of civilians? What defence strategy requires the future to bleed?

If a weapon continues to kill decades after a conflict ends, it is not a tool of war, it is a legacy of failure.

There is, of course, progress. Treaties have been signed. Stockpiles destroyed. Large areas cleared. Dedicated individuals risk their lives every day to disarm these hidden killers, one painstaking step at a time. Their work is heroic. It is also, in a just world, unnecessary.

Because the real solution is not better mine detection. It is not faster clearance. It is the absolute, uncompromising rejection of landmines as acceptable instruments of war.

Anything less is complicity. This day of awareness should not be comfortable. It should not be a box to tick or a moment to signal virtue. It should be a confrontation. A demand. An accusation.

Why are these weapons still in the ground? Why are communities still living in fear of something buried decades ago? And why, despite all our technological advancement and moral posturing, have we accepted this as normal?

Until those questions are answered with action, not statements, not promises, but measurable, relentless action, this day remains what it truly is: a reminder not of progress but of how much we are still willing to ignore.

The mines are still there.

And so is our responsibility.

Maya Angelou - Still, She Rose

There are voices that echo and then there are voices that settle into the bones of culture; permanent, resonant, undeniable. Maya Angelou (April 4, 1928 – May 28, 2014) belongs to the latter. To read her is not merely to encounter poetry; it is to step into a life that refused silence, refused diminishment and refused to be anything less than fully, unapologetically human.

Angelou’s poetry has often been described as accessible, and sometimes that word is used dismissively, as if clarity were a weakness. But her genius lies precisely there. She did not write to obscure; she wrote to reveal. Her lines are direct, rhythmic, almost conversational, yet they carry the weight of history, trauma, and triumph. “Still I Rise” is not just a poem; it is a declaration, a mantra, a cultural artefact that has outlived trends in literary taste. Critics who seek dense abstraction will not find it in Angelou’s work. What they will find instead is something more difficult to achieve, emotional precision without pretension.

Her poetry draws heavily from oral traditions, sermons, spirituals, storytelling and that influence gives her work its unmistakable cadence. There is music in her words, not in the ornamental sense but in the structural one. She understood rhythm the way a performer does, which is no surprise given her background in theater and performance. This performative quality makes her poetry feel alive, almost incomplete on the page until spoken aloud. Yet this strength is also, for some, a limitation. On the page alone, without her commanding voice, certain poems can feel simpler than they truly are.

But to isolate Angelou’s poetry from her life is to misunderstand both. Her autobiographical work, especially I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings, reshaped how personal narrative could function in literature. It was not merely a memoir; it was a political act. By telling her story of racism, trauma, displacement and resilience, she challenged a literary world that had long marginalized voices like hers. The courage to articulate such experiences, especially at the time she did, cannot be overstated.

Angelou’s activism was not performative, nor was it confined to the page. She stood alongside major figures in the civil rights movement, lending her voice and her presence to causes that demanded both. Yet her activism was never strident in the sense of alienating rhetoric. Instead, it was rooted in dignity. She insisted on humanity first, on the idea that equality was not a radical demand but a fundamental truth. This approach made her work widely accessible, though some critics argue it softened the sharper edges of political critique. Perhaps. But it also broadened her reach, allowing her message to travel across boundaries that more confrontational voices sometimes cannot cross.

There is, inevitably, a tension in Angelou’s legacy between literary merit and cultural impact. Some critics place her outside the canon of “great poets” in the traditional sense, arguing that her work lacks the complexity or innovation of more formally experimental writers. This criticism, while not entirely unfounded, misses the point. Angelou did not seek to reinvent poetry as a form; she sought to reclaim it as a voice. Her contribution is not measured solely by technical innovation but by cultural resonance.

And that resonance is immense. Angelou became more than a writer, she became a symbol. Her readings, her speeches, even her presence carried a sense of authority and warmth that transcended literature. She spoke at presidential inaugurations, appeared in public discourse as a moral voice and embodied a kind of wisdom that felt both earned and generous.

What makes Angelou endure is not perfection but authenticity. She did not hide her pain, nor did she romanticize it. She transformed it. In doing so, she offered readers not just art but permission to feel, to speak, to rise.

In the end, Maya Angelou’s greatest achievement may not be any single poem or book, but the space she carved out in global culture, a space where voice matters, where story is power, and where rising again and again, is an act of defiance and grace.

Puppi & Caesar #42 #cartoon by Thanos Kalamidas

 

Another cartoon with a mean and know-all of a bully cat, Puppi and her intellectual, pompous companion categorically-I-know-all, Caesar the squirrel!  

For more Puppi & Caesar, HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!

---

The allies that never were by Gabriele Schmitt

There is something deeply ironic in watching political forces that once flirted across the Atlantic now recoil from each other in thinly veiled contempt. First Giorgia Meloni recalibrated, stepping away from the fever-dream expectations of her loudest international admirers. Now Germany’s AfD follows suit, signalling clearly and unapologetically that American influence, military presence and geopolitical adventurism are no longer welcome on their terms. And just like that, the fantasy collapses.

For years the transatlantic far-right tried to sell a narrative of ideological brotherhood. A shared crusade, they claimed, against liberalism, globalization, migration and the so-called decay of Western identity. It was a convenient myth, loudly amplified by American political figures who believed they had found eager disciples in Europe. But myths have a way of shattering when confronted with reality and reality has arrived with a vengeance.

Because here’s the uncomfortable truth: nationalism does not travel well. It is, by its very nature, selfish, territorial and suspicious of outsiders, even when those outsiders claim to be allies. The AfD’s recent posture is not a betrayal of its ideology; it is its purest expression. “Germany first” does not leave much room for American bases, American wars or American expectations. And certainly not for American politicians attempting to shape German domestic discourse like it’s another swing state.

This is where the disappointment from figures like Vance and the broader MAGA ecosystem becomes almost amusing. They invested heavily, politically, rhetorically, even emotionally, in the idea that Europe’s far-right movements were extensions of their own struggle. They cheered them on, amplified their voices and in some cases, crossed the line into outright interference. The assumption was simple, shared enemies would naturally create lasting alliances.

But alliances built on resentment are fragile. They lack the substance required to survive conflicting interests. And when those interests collide, as they inevitably do, the façade crumbles.

AfD’s stance is not subtle. It is a rejection not just of American foreign policy but of American influence altogether. It is a declaration that Germany should not be a staging ground for conflicts that are not its own. And while this position may resonate domestically with voters weary of global entanglements, it sends a very clear message across the Atlantic, you are not as welcome as you thought.

This is the part that MAGA never quite understood. Their worldview is deeply rooted in American exceptionalism, the belief that the United States is not just a nation, but a model to be exported, imposed and admired. Even when they claim to oppose interventionism, there remains an underlying assumption that America sets the tone. That others will follow.

But Europe, even its most radical factions, has its own history, its own priorities, and its own version of nationalism. And that version does not include playing second fiddle to Washington’s ambitions or its political theatrics.

What we are witnessing now is not a fracture; it is a correction. A return to the logical endpoint of nationalist politics, isolation, competition and mutual distrust. The illusion of a unified far-right international has been exposed for what it always was, a convenient narrative not a durable reality.

And perhaps the greatest irony of all is this: in their attempt to build a global ideological movement, they have proven why such a movement can never truly exist. Nationalism cannot be globalized. The moment it tries, it ceases to be nationalism at all.

So here we are. The cheers have faded, replaced by awkward silence and thinly disguised frustration. The allies that never were have gone their separate ways, each retreating into their own version of sovereignty.

And in the end, it turns out that “America First” and “Germany First” were never meant to stand side by side.

The illusion of control in a scroll-driven world by Sidney Shelton

Governments around the world like to project confidence when it comes to protecting young adults from the harms of social media. New laws are proposed, age limits debated, warning labels suggested and algorithms scrutinized. On paper it can look like progress. But in reality, the effort to meaningfully reduce harm often feels like trying to regulate the tide with a bucket.

Yes, countries can legally act. They can pass legislation requiring platforms to remove harmful content faster, restrict data collection, or limit targeted advertising to minors. Some have even explored curfews, forcing platforms to lock out younger users during nighttime hours. These are not trivial steps, they signal awareness and, at times, political courage. But whether they truly minimize harm is another question entirely.

The core issue is that social media is not a static industry. It evolves faster than law can keep up. By the time a regulation is drafted, debated and enforced, platforms have already shifted their features, redesigned their interfaces or subtly altered how content spreads. What lawmakers regulate is often yesterday’s version of the problem.

Meanwhile, social media companies are not passive actors. They are global, resource-rich and deeply incentivized to resist anything that threatens engagement. Their business model depends on attention, and attention is often captured most effectively through emotional intensity, outrage, insecurity, validation loops. These are precisely the mechanisms that can harm young adults, affecting self-esteem, mental health, and even identity formation.

So when regulations emerge, companies rarely reject them outright. Instead, they adapt just enough to comply on the surface while preserving the core mechanics underneath. A feature may be renamed, a setting buried deeper, a safeguard made technically available but practically invisible. Compliance becomes a performance rather than a transformation.

There is also the problem of enforcement. Passing a law is one thing; enforcing it across borders is another. Social media platforms operate globally, while laws remain largely national. A country can impose fines or threaten bans, but such measures are blunt tools. Too harsh and they risk backlash from users and economic consequences. Too soft, and they are easily absorbed as a cost of doing business.

And then there is the cultural dimension. Young adults are not just passive recipients of social media, they are active participants. They build identities, communities, and even careers within these platforms. Attempts to restrict access can be perceived not as protection, but as control. This creates a paradox: the very group meant to be protected may resist the measures designed to help them.

Does this mean regulation is pointless? Not entirely. It can set boundaries, create accountability, and shift public expectations. Over time, it can push platforms toward safer designs, especially when combined with public pressure and media scrutiny. But it is not a silver bullet, and pretending otherwise risks complacency.

Real harm reduction requires a broader approach. Education plays a crucial role, teaching young people not just how to use social media, but how it uses them. Transparency must go beyond legal requirements and become a standard expectation. And perhaps most importantly, there needs to be a cultural shift in how we value attention itself.

The uncomfortable truth is that the power of social media does not come solely from the companies that build it. It also comes from the millions who use it, feed it, and depend on it. Governments can try to reshape the system, but they cannot do it alone and certainly not through legislation that is always one step behind.

So yes, countries can act. But whether they can truly minimize harm remains uncertain. For now, the sense of control they project is, at best, partial and at worst, an illusion carefully maintained in a world that refuses to slow its scroll.