PARIS — French President Emmanuel Macron’s wife Brigitte apologized for being caught calling feminist activists sales connes — which roughly translates to “stupid bitches”— but said she should be able to speak her mind away from the cameras. Interviewed by online news outlet Brut, Macron insisted that her remarks were made in private — she was attending a show by comedian Ary Abittan, who had been accused of rape in a case which was later dismissed — and that she would not have used these words in public. “I’m sorry if I hurt female victims [of sexual assault],” Macron said. She then added: “I’m the president’s wife, but I’m also myself, and in a private context, I can let myself loose in a way which isn’t appropriate … people have the right to [freely] speak and think.” In a since-deleted clip published by gossip outlet Public, Macron is seen asking comedian Abittan, before his performance, how he is doing, to which he responds that he is “afraid,” likely referring to the possibility of protesters interrupting his show. The French first lady then responds: “If there are stupid bitches, we’ll toss them out.” A small group of activists wearing cardboard masks with Abittan’s face attempted to interrupt a show in Paris, yelling “Abittan rapist” while being pushed back by security, video published by French outlet Le Média showed. Macron’s comments drew outrage from French politicians, feminist organizations and film industry celebrities alike. The hashtag #JeSuisUneSaleConne (#IAmAStupidBitch), launched in solidarity with the protesters, was shared by several high-profile figures, including Judith Godrèche — a French actress who has played a central role in confronting sexual violence in the film industry — and Oscar winner Marion Cotillard. Abittan is on his first tour since investigating judges decided not to charge him with a crime after he was accused of rape. While the plaintiff was found to have suffered post-traumatic stress, justice officials said they could not establish sufficient grounds to determine that the sexual encounter had been forced. Abittan has denied wrongdoing and said the act was consensual.

French President Emmanuel Macron’s wife Brigitte sparked outrage after calling feminist protesters sales connes — roughly translated as “stupid bitches” — backstage at a comedy show. In a since-deleted clip published by gossip outlet Public, Brigitte Macron is seen asking comedian Ary Abittan before his performance how he is doing, to which the former responds that he is “afraid,” likely referencing the possibility of protesters interrupting his show. Abittan is on his first tour since investigating judges decided not to charge him with a crime after he was accused of rape. While the plaintiff was found to have suffered post-traumatic stress, justice officials said they could not establish sufficient grounds to determine that the sexual encounter had been forced. Abittan has denied wrongdoing and said the act was consensual. After Abittan said he was afraid, the French first lady responded: “if there are stupid bitches, we’ll toss them out.” Abittan’s return was protested by the feminist group Nous Toutes, whose members disrupted the show to denounce what they called a “communication campaign aimed at portraying him as a traumatized person while humiliating and belittling the victim.” In a statement to French newswire AFP published Monday, Macron’s office said the remark should be understood as “criticism of the radical methods used by those who disrupted and obstructed Ary Abittan’s show.” Condemnation came from political figures across party lines, as well as activists and film industry professionals. Marine Tondelier, head of the French Greens, called the remark “extremely grave” and conservative Senator Agnès Evren described it as “very sexist.” Prisca Thévenot, a lawmaker from the president’s party and former government spokesperson, deemed the comment “inelegant.” “When it comes to women fighting against violence against women, we don’t speak that way,” former President François Hollande said Tuesday on RTL. Judith Godrèche, the French actress who has played a central role in confronting sexual violence in the film industry, took to Instagram to criticize Macron. “I too am a stupid bitch. And I support all the others,” she wrote.

PARIS — Brigitte Macron’s youngest daughter testified in court on behalf of her mother on Tuesday as part of the family’s effort to forcefully combat transphobic rumors that the French first lady was assigned male at birth. “Not a week goes by without someone telling her about this,” Tiphaine Auzières told the court. “She cannot ignore all the horrible things people say about her.” Auzières was the sole witness to take the stand in a two-day trial of 10 people charged with cyberbullying Macron by sharing messages on X promoting conspiracy theories that metastasized online. The claims included that her mother was assigned male at birth; is transgender; or was born under her brother’s name, Jean-Michel Trogneux, before assuming a new identity — an allegation first circulated by fringe French conspiratorial outlet Faits et Documents. A verdict is expected later Tuesday evening. Auzières said the conspiracy theories had made it “impossible” for her mother “to have a normal life.” When asked about her uncle Jean-Michel, she testified she had seen him “a few months ago” and that he was “doing very well.” The 10 defendants — eight men and two women from their 40s to their 60s — cut an unlikely cross-section of France. They range from a well-off computer scientist working in Switzerland to a heavily disabled man “who spends a lot of time on Twitter,” a self-described spiritual medium crippled by debt and a soft-spoken deputy mayor in a rural town. The messages read aloud in court swung between crude jokes about Brigitte Macron’s alleged gender identity, conspiracy theories about a media cover-up, and sneers at the 24-year age gap between her and the president. Most cited free expression in their defense, invoking the legacy of Charlie Hebdo — the satirical weekly famed for its provocative cartoons and its defiance in the face of the 2015 terrorist attack on the magazine that left 12 people dead. Auzières said the widespread rumors had led her mother to change her behavior, constantly worrying that the way she dressed or presented herself could be used by conspiracy theorists to attack her. She also said her mother had grown “anxious” that her seven grandchildren could face bullying at school. While she was not on trial, the impact of American far-right influencer Candace Owens was palpable throughout the proceedings. Several defendants had shared videos about Macron by Owens, who is being sued by the French presidential couple in a separate case in Delaware, or said they had been influenced by her content. Presented during the trial as a key node in spreading the rumor, Aurélien Poirson-Atlan also tried to shift responsibility onto Owens. Poirson-Atlan, whose X account, ZoeSagan, once counted hundreds of thousands of followers before being suspended last summer, claimed he was “being used as a replacement for Ms. Owens” in the proceedings. One of the cited posts he published was a translation of a post by Owens. Brigitte Macron, 72, met her current husband Emmanuel when he was her teenage student at a private school in Amiens, a city about 1.5 hours north of Paris. The Macrons’ U.S. lawsuit states that “at all times, the teacher-student relationship between Mrs. Macron and President Macron remained within the bounds of the law.” The suit also provides pictures of Brigitte as a child and of her first marriage in 1974.

THE COMPLEX LEGACY OF POPE FRANCIS His was a dramatic papacy, frustrating conservatives and progressives alike. Beloved by the faithful, he leaves behind a divided Church. By BEN MUNSTER and HANNAH ROBERTS in Rome Andreas Solaro/AFP via Getty Images Just weeks before he died, Pope Francis was doing what he does best: infuriating conservatives. In an extraordinary intervention in mid-February, the pope initiated a head-on clash with the new U.S. administration, slamming President Donald Trump’s plans to deport millions of undocumented migrants as a “violation of dignity,” and accusing Vice President JD Vance of misusing an obscure theological term. Washington responded with predictable fury, but the Holy See was undeterred.  It was a vintage Francis move: impulsive, instinctively protective of the poor and defenseless, and — mercifully — light on theological jargon. But it was also illustrative of the pope’s willingness to abandon diplomatic niceties and take a divisive, outspoken approach at a time of increasing fragmentation. Advertisement Francis, who died on Easter Monday at the age of 88, leaves behind a complex legacy. He was elected in 2013 on a mandate to clean up the Church, after his predecessor Benedict XVI abruptly resigned following the so-called Vatileaks scandal. The first Latin American and Jesuit pontiff, he was also first to use the name Francis, in reference to Francis of Assisi, the 13th century champion of the poor. But he departs an institution that, while outwardly committed to advocacy for the dispossessed and marginalized, has made inadequate efforts to address its own failings, from priestly abuse to the misuse of Vatican finances.  Jorge Mario Bergoglio was born in 1936 in Buenos Aires to Italian migrants Mario, a railway worker, and Regina, a homemaker. Reportedly clever, mischievous and fond of football, he worked stints as a nightclub bouncer and janitor, before studying chemistry and then working as a lab technician in a food laboratory. A serious bout of pneumonia led to the removal of part of one of his lungs in 1957. Soon after, he joined the Jesuits, following an apparently inspired visit with a local priest.  Bergoglio initially struggled to reconcile his vocation with more civilian instincts, later confessing  he was “dazzled” by a young woman he met while at seminary. Nevertheless, he rapidly climbed the ranks of the Argentine Church, gaining a reputation for magnanimity and earning the sobriquet “slum bishop” for doubling the number of priests in Buenos Aires’ poor neighborhoods. But he was already a divisive figure: During the bloody “dirty war” of the junta against its adversaries in the 1970s, Bergoglio — then the leader of Argentina’s powerful Jesuits — was accused of complicit silence when the military abducted dissident clerics who were under his authority. Others, however, claimed he attempted to protect his subordinates. IN THE ETERNAL CITY   Francis slipped into his now familiar persona of humility and simplicity when he was made cardinal by Pope John Paul II in 2001, cultivating a name for eschewing priestly extravagance, living modestly and using public transport. After Benedict XVI quit, he seemed to embody reformists’ ideals in a Church desperate for change, becoming the first pope from outside Europe since the eighth century’s Syrian Pope Gregory III. His papacy marked a break with Benedict’s distant, academic style. He headed a drive for the Church to resemble more of a “field hospital,” prioritizing the needy and downplaying the importance of sexuality. ”Who am I to judge,” he famously told reporters in 2013 when asked if a gay person could become a priest.  Tiziana Fabi/AFP via Getty Images Isabella Bonotto/AFP via Getty Images Andreas Solaro/AFP via Getty Images Franco Origlia/Getty Images Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images That message, delivered with characteristic cheek, marked the start of Francis’ yearslong bid to realize the progressive ambitions of the Second Vatican Council — the 1960s-era global consultation that sought to align the Church with the liberal revolutions of that era. From the outset, he projected a message of tolerance, defended migrants and harshly criticized capitalist excess, while striving to balance that agenda with the conservatism of the fast-growing Catholic cohorts in Africa, Asia and Latin America.  To an extent, Francis was able to chip away at the Church’s millennia-old structure, opening up high-level Vatican offices to women and lay people.  But for the most part, these chaotic efforts only annoyed conservatives and disappointed liberals. For instance, he maintained barriers to female priests, and was forced to dilute a landmark declaration of same-sex blessings under pressure from outraged African bishops.  Advertisement Francis was also divisive on the international stage. He won the admiration of followers in the global south and received blowback from supporters in the West with his urgent calls for peace in Ukraine, silence on China’s oppression of religious minorities and harsh condemnations of Israel’s invasion of Gaza — reflecting a complex worldview forged in leftist Peronist Argentina. His leadership style could also be unpredictable, as he would cancel plans after leaks by journalists and abandon promises.  All of this helped nurture an increasingly radical conservative faction — particularly in the U.S.  The de facto leader of the opposition to Francis was arch-conservative Cardinal Raymond Burke, renowned for wearing ludicrously ostentatious cosplay bishops’ vestments, while lamenting that the Catholic Church is “too feminized” and pinning the priest shortage on the introduction of altar girls. Burke repeatedly clashed with Francis over his supposed woke agenda, with one particularly bizarre feud unfolding over the alleged supply of condoms to Myanmar by the Order of the Knights of Malta. Burke’s broadsides continued without cease for years. He challenged the pontiff’s push to end the church’s ban on communion for remarried divorcees, and fulminated over his crackdown on the Latin mass. The pope responded by quietly marginalizing Burke, eventually removing his right to a subsidized Vatican apartment. Indeed, Francis was no shrinking violet, and his avuncular image belied a talent for playing adversaries off one another, ensnaring them when they least expected. More prosaically, he liked to insult them — even saying his pompous conservative critics are mentally unstable. Filippo Monteforte/AFP via Getty Images His conservative foes, meanwhile, used Benedict as a totem for their values while he still lived. They claimed the throne of Peter was vacant under Francis’ rule, with some even dubbing him the “antichrist.”  They were helped by Francis’ own blunders, including his patchy efforts to clean up the Vatican’s finances. In 2017, a top auditor was mysteriously ousted, leading to a botched investment in London real estate, as well as the conviction and imprisonment of former cardinal Angelo Becciu. Francis met Becciu privately as the trial was underway, raising questions about his judgment.  His handling of abuse allegations against top lieutenants raised similar issues. The pontiff was seen as protecting and even elevating close friends accused of serious sexual misconduct. This included Jesuit priest and mosaic artist Marko Rupnik, whose garish artworks were recommissioned by the Vatican even after rape accusations emerged. Inconsistency might have been the defining feature of the pope’s reign. Rather than reforming the Church, he has largely left behind chaos — and a theological quagmire — for whoever succeeds him.  As conservatives now sharpen their knives, that battle looks to be fraught. On the one hand, Francis dramatically reshaped the geographic breakdown of the clerical elite over the years, appointing 110 of the 138 cardinals who will be eligible to elect his successor, many of them from outside of Europe. But Rome insiders warn that’s no guarantee of their support for his vision after he’s gone; Vatican alliances rarely survive the shift to a new pontiff.  All the same, much of the drama around his papacy has been an elite one: At his death, he enjoyed approval ratings among the world’s 1.4 billion faithful that would be the envy of most politicians. Advertisement

BRUSSELS — The boys are back in town. It all started with a ceremonial photo taken after the formation of the new Belgian government: white, middle-aged men in the front row, a few female ministers behind them — their faces hidden in the shadows — with no person of color in sight. The photo led to so much backlash that it was retaken — but critics, including a minister in the new Cabinet, say it reflects an issue that remains unresolved. The appointment of just four women out of 15 ministers sparked anger on social media and among politicians. It also presented a stark contrast with the government of previous Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo, which achieved gender parity among its ministers. “How is it going? Hope we (half of humanity) are not bothering you too much!” wrote Marie-Colline Leroy, the former Belgian secretary for gender equality, in a post on Bluesky. Vanessa Matz, modernization minister in the new government, told POLITICO that the situation makes her “uncomfortable.” “I don’t find it normal … four women … is obviously very, very few,” said Matz, who hails from the francophone centrist Les Engagés party. Furthermore, none of those women made it to the kern, or core Cabinet of deputy prime ministers that discusses the most important issues, Matz pointed out. ‘SMURFETTE PRINCIPLE’ Katrien Van den broeck, who worked in the communications department of the previous De Croo government and is a trainer at the Alliance of Her platform, which empowers women to pursue careers in politics, compared the situation to the village of iconic Belgian comic characters the Smurfs. “There’s many kinds of men in that village … And there’s one woman, Smurfette, and one woman is enough,” she told POLITICO. “And basically, what we see in the government is the Smurfette principle.” “Diversity is not an issue for this government, it’s not a priority. But it should be,” she added. The conservative Belgian government, formed at the end of January after seven months of negotiations, consists of the right-wing New Flemish Alliance (N-VA), the francophone center-right Reformist Movement, the francophone centrist Les Engagés, the centrist Christian Democrat and Flemish party, and the center-left Flemish Forward party. King Philippe of Belgium (right) shakes hands with newly sworn-in Prime Minister Bart De Wever during the oath ceremony at the Royal Palace in Brussels. | Jasper Jacobs/AFP via Getty Images Ministerial positions are allocated on the basis of vote share, with political parties putting forward nominations. Four parties nominated just one woman each, with Vooruit nominating none. The imbalance is even more striking considering that Belgium, sometimes seen as a close second to Scandinavian countries in terms of gender equality, in 1994 became the first country worldwide to introduce legally binding gender quotas for parties in all elections. In response to the flurry of criticism, Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever of N-VA said “it is a shame” that there aren’t more women in the government. “It’s more of a coincidence, not a choice. It’s not elegant, in these times, to have only men in the Cabinet — but it can happen,” he said. Van den broeck pointed out: “As prime minister, you have some leverage. You can send them back and say: I want an equal government.” De Wever’s administration pushed back, with a spokesperson saying: “Each party decides for itself whom it wishes to appoint. The prime minister does not intervene in the parties’ choice.” New Defense Minister Theo Francken, also of N-VA, brushed aside the criticism, expressing disappointment that someone might be judged based on their gender and not their abilities. “Aside from the fact that the world is on fire and there are much bigger issues, I am surprised by this criticism,” he wrote in a long post on X, finishing with the statement: “Long live meritocracy.” Van den broeck ascribed the outcome to Donald Trump’s return to the White House. Trump’s clear message that “diversity is not necessary anymore” is spreading from Washington, she argued. POLITICO contacted the political parties in the new government for comment, but did not receive a response. PRESSING FOR PRESENCE Robie Devroe, a researcher on gender and political representation at the University of Ghent, pointed out that the lack of diversity among ministers “also relates to minorities, age, level of education, sexual orientation.” That lack of diversity could affect upcoming legislation and reduce the rights of women and minorities — and may also result in some perspectives being neglected, such as on abortion law, where Belgium is set to discuss an extension to the current legal limit of 12 weeks. It could also affect interest in politics, Devroe continued. Politicians who are female, from an ethnic minority or who have disabilities serve as role models for their respective groups. “If those groups in society see that politics is largely dominated by white, middle-aged men, this will also diminish their interest in politics because they will have the feeling that politics is not for them,” she explained. The opposition socialist party has put forward a proposal that would enshrine gender parity in the constitution. Minister Matz said it’s time to talk about quotas. According to her, the introduction of quotas at the federal level is “a necessary evil” and should last until they are no longer necessary. “If we don’t have them, we’ll never get there. We have to push things forward,” Matz said. Matz acknowledged that as a woman in such a male-dominated government, she feels a greater responsibility to advocate the interests of women. “I have three wonderful [female] colleagues who, like me, believe it’s important — so we’re not going to let anyone push us around,” she said.

First published on Caglecartoons.com, the Netherlands, Jan. 1, 2025 | By Joep Bertrams First published on Caglecartoons.com, Bulgaria, Feb. 5, 2025 | By Christo Komarnitski First published on Caglecartoons.com, Feb. 3, 2025 | By Jeff Koterba First published on Caglecartoons.com, the Netherlands, Jan. 1, 2025 | By Schot

Jamie Dettmer is opinion editor at POLITICO Europe.  Freed from the Assad family and its apparatus of cruel repression, Syrians remain euphoric about the sudden collapse of a regime that ruled by leveraging fear, surveillance and intimidation, resorting to bestial torture and wanton slaughter when all else failed. “You can walk around Damascus now without encountering checkpoints, without having to see pictures of Bashar al-Assad everywhere,” said Bassam al-Kuwatli, president of the Syrian liberal party Ahrar. “The statues of him are gone, and so, too, the fear of being harassed at every turn by his henchmen.” Kuwatli is experiencing the shock of return — last week, he came back to his home city after 28 years in exile. “I was worried I wouldn’t recognize anything, but the core of the city hasn’t changed a bit.” he told POLITICO. And he had no trouble crossing the border from Lebanon despite his expired Syrian passport. “They just stamped an extra piece of paper,” he said.  Once in Damascus, Kuwatli found “people were allowing themselves a bit of optimism.” But the hopefulness, he noticed, was laced with caution. “Will there be trouble or not? Are they going to restore democracy or not? People aren’t absolutely sure. Part of this is because the new administration isn’t talking to them — just to the West and especially the Western media,” he said. And it’s true. Syria’s new leader Ahmed Hussein al-Shar’a, the head of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) — the main insurgent Islamist faction that marched into Damascus last month — has gone out of his way to reassure Western nations of an inclusive transition that’s respectful of the country’s religious sects and ethnic minorities. Though he hasn’t actually defined what the transition will yield — and some are beginning to wonder if he even knows. There’s also the worry that the HTS definition of inclusion may not bear much resemblance to that of Western powers — nor to that of many Syrians, especially pro-democracy activists and the urban middle class of the country’s big cities. But Shar’a has been lobbying intensely, hoping to have the decades-old economic sanctions on Syria lifted in order to rebuild the war-devastated country. And with the support of Turkey and the Arab rulers of the Gulf, all of them keen to secure reconstruction deals with Syria’s new rulers, he’s been making headway. Last week, the U.S. administration announced a six-month sanctions exemption for transactions and business conducted with the transitional governing institutions, aiming to ease the flow of humanitarian assistance. And after a high-level weekend meeting in Riyadh, European foreign ministers have now agreed to meet at the end of this month to discuss lifting sanctions. Germany, Italy and France in particular have been pushing for EU sanctions on Syria to be relaxed. “Germany proposes to take a smart approach to sanctions, providing relief for the Syrian population. Syrians now need a quick dividend from the transition of power,” German Minister of Foreign Affairs Annalena Baerbock told reporters. But Shar’a remains an enigmatic figure. He’s undergone a makeover, quickened over recent months, and has sought to distance himself from his jihadist past and ties to al Qaeda, framing it almost as a youthful indiscretion. Syria’s new leader Ahmed Hussein al-Shar’a, the head of Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, has gone out of his way to reassure Western nations of an inclusive transition that is respectful of the country’s religious sects and ethnic minorities. | Ali Haj Suleiman/Getty Images Certainly, while governing the rebel enclave of Idlib over the past eight years, HTS’ rule wasn’t as harsh as that of the Islamic State or the Taliban, focusing on governance and the effective delivery of local services. According to a study by Munqeth Othman Agha of the Middle East Institute, HTS “pursued a legitimacy-building strategy, adopting revolutionary nationalist rhetoric and engaging tribal leaders and community notables.” Accordingly, some civil society groups were able to operate and girls were able to attend classes — although some restrictions were still imposed on the latter. However, HTS didn’t recognize independent political parties in Idlib, and stifled dissent, curtailing and hindering the activities of journalists and critics. The group also maintained tight control over the daily lives of civilians. “People were detained following comments made in private conversations pertaining to the cost of living or religious matters,” noted the U.N.’s 2022 Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Syrian Arab Republic. Furthermore, “so-called morality codes disproportionately affected women and girls, amounting to gender-based discrimination in the enjoyment of their rights,” the report said. The morality police are known to have enforced dress codes on women. HTS also denied detainees access to lawyers, and committed war crimes by “carrying out executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court.” There were corroborated reports of arbitrary arrests, torture and sexual violence, while a “spoils of war committee” seized houses not merely from suspected supporters of Assad, but also from those critical of HTS. The report noted that “the property of minority groups, such as Christians, were specifically targeted.” The good news is that Syria’s transitional education minister, Nazi al-Qadri, has now promised there will be no restrictions on the rights of girls to learn. And after overrunning Aleppo in late November, HTS went out of its way to reassure the city’s Alawi, Christian and Kurdish communities, allowing houses of worship to function and quickly boosting basic services. Much as in Damascus now, they were keen at the time to maintain stability, and encouraged government institutions and civil servants to get on with their jobs. But despite all of that, the group’s jihadist roots and previous governance are still cause for concern. Shar’a, for his part, has said Idlib may not be the model that a future Syria follows, and announced the beginning of a national dialogue. However, he also said elections could be as much as four years away, allowing plenty of time to reshape the country along Islamist lines. Some fear that HTS is only keen on stability for now, with an eye toward consolidating its hold on power while ensuring that other armed factions and minority groups decommission and disarm. “They are allowing civil society groups to register, but they don’t have a registration process for political parties,” Kuwatli said. “They say they will do it when they have some structure in place.” But perhaps HTS just doesn’t have a full plan. “I do get the impression they were surprised by the fall of Damascus — and hadn’t expected it for another 14 months,” he added.

Anchal Vohra is a Brussels-based international affairs commentator. Sayed Mohammad Akbar Agha, a stout man with a big black turban, sat on a thin mattress in his living room in Kabul, two armed men guarding his sprawling mansion. It was 2016, and Agha — a Taliban leader imprisoned for abducting three U.N. officials — had been pardoned by then Afghan President Hamid Karzai and turned into a peace negotiator. “We will allow the girls to study and women to work,” he told me in Urdu. “First, the Americans need to leave.” And they did. The Americans and European allies evacuated in 2021, and for a time, the Taliban projected a less regressive return to power. But the charade was short-lived, and soon enough, it banned girls from attending secondary school and university, barred women from nearly all professions and restricted their movement. Finally, two months ago, it outlawed Afghan girls and women from speaking in public.  Cutting their losses and leaving the country without any assurances for Afghan girls and women, Western allies are yet to come up with a coherent response to the gender apartheid undertaken by the Taliban. And it has left many activists wondering if the West ever really cared. Yet, amid this grim reality, a landmark ruling from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) seems to offer some reprieve to the Afghan women who somehow manage to reach the EU and seek asylum. Stating that cumulative discriminatory measures under the Taliban count as persecution, the October ruling makes Afghan women and girls eligible for asylum in Europe based solely on their nationality and gender. But as the EU moves away from its value system, particularly on immigration, the question is whether the bloc’s countries will actually offer asylum to every Afghan woman — or ship them elsewhere. According to Stavros Papageorgopoulos, acting head of legal support and litigation at the European Council of Refugees and Exiles (ECRE), any Afghan woman who applies for asylum anywhere in the EU must now receive it. The ruling is expected to make the process much easier, and some analysts believe that those with rejected applications could now be able to seek protection, while those applying for the first time needn’t prove harassment. Normally, an important element in assessing individual asylum cases is the evidence proving whether an applicant was individually affected or targeted — evidence that is often difficult to obtain, Papageorgopoulos explained. But the new ruling clarifies that the oppression of Afghan women is so severe that it amounts to persecution in and of itself. “There is, therefore, no need to conduct a further individualized assessment of the situation of each applicant,” he said. “This evidently makes the process to receive refugee status more straightforward, so it has great practical impact.” Even before this ruling, some European countries — such as Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Switzerland — had already adopted the ECRE’s January 2023 guidelines for asylum, deciding to grant protection to all Afghan women and girls.  But as the populist right surges in elections, compelling the center right toward anti-immigrant policies, there are growing concerns that these guidelines could be abandoned and the court ruling navigated through other provisions, such as repatriation to third countries outside the EU. Some conservatives are already arguing against the policy, saying it’s a huge pull factor that could open the floodgates and invite more Afghans, who are already among the top asylum seekers in Europe. As the EU moves away from its value system, particularly on immigration, the question is whether the bloc’s countries will actually offer asylum to every Afghan woman — or ship them elsewhere. | Omer Abrar/AFP via Getty Images For example, Gregor Rutz from the right-wing Swiss People’s Party recently tabled a motion to reverse the policy in Switzerland, claiming it had led to an increase in arrivals. Pointing to data from February 2024, when Afghans made up 52 percent of all new applications, “these figures speak for themselves,” Rutz said. But according to activists in countries where the policy predates the ruling, these are unfounded fears. “If you are an Afghan woman, how can you get out of Afghanistan when you can’t get out of your home without a male guardian?” asked Gérard Sadik, the head of asylum issues at French NGO La Cimade. “If you succeed and escape, you arrive in neighboring countries. But then you have to make the tough passage to Europe through mountains and smuggling routes — that’s very dangerous and very difficult. Women are more vulnerable, so they rarely travel on foot. The majority of Afghans who come to the EU are men,” he said. It’s mostly Afghan men who undertake the treacherous journeys to Europe, and men who wait years to seek family reunification with their wives and children. Activists also point out that the data of a single month doesn’t indicate that the decision to grant asylum to Afghan women and girls led to an increase in overall numbers. In Switzerland in particular, fewer women applied for asylum after the policy was adopted than before — just over 700 in 2023 compared to 809 in 2022. Lionel Walter, a spokesperson for the Swiss Refugee Council, similarly said he could safely deny the existence of any pull factor so far. “The vast majority of Afghan women in exile are already with their families. Few, if any, ever travel alone,” he said. Additionally, “two-thirds of those who applied between October 2022 and September 2023 were single” and couldn’t claim a right to family reunification. The ruling also only applies to Afghan women and girls who are physically present in an EU nation — not to those in a third country, such as Iran or Pakistan. Moreover, other provisions like the Dublin Regulation, which determines the EU country where an asylum request should be processed, guard against secondary migration, Eva Singer of the Danish Refugee Council said. If the authorities found out that an Afghan woman already sought asylum in an EU nation, for example, “they would be returned according to Dublin rules.” However, in mid-October, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen wrote a letter to the bloc’s national leaders, asking them to explore “return hubs,” citing Italy’s deal with Albania as a model. And this has called many things into question. According to Dr. Alema Alema of German NGO ProAsyl, as the EU strengthens border controls under the Common European Asylum System (CEAS), “reforms could change the practice of granting asylum to Afghan women.” Overall, there’s no denying that the number of Afghan asylum seekers have gone up as conflict has gripped their country and NATO allies left the reins to the Taliban. But with the oppression they’re under, Afghan women perhaps make clearest case for protection. And yet, activists now fear European governments will come under pressure from the populist right and mull third country repatriation for all asylum seekers — including Afghan women.

Alexander Lukashenko, who has ruled Belarus for three decades, has some wise insight on what it takes to be a president: Be a man. “God forbid that a woman is elected in Belarus,” the president, who has been called Europe’s last dictator, told journalists on Thursday, arguing that the job of president in Belarus is much harder than in the United States. “It’s the hardest work, you shouldn’t burden a woman like that.” Lukashenko, who has been in power since 1994, said Belarus may eventually come to a style of politics like that of the U.S. “But for now it is different. This is not a feminine style,” he argued, adding that he believes “a woman should be a woman.” “We should not shift our responsibilities to women. I admire women, I do not diminish their role at all. But they should be there for us to lean on, a strong shoulder.” Lukashenko, who is running for another term in the country’s upcoming Jan. 26 presidential election, may have been referring to his rival in the previous 2020 vote, Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya.  Tsikhanouskaya ran for president after her husband, a leading opposition candidate, was arrested and jailed during that election campaign. The vote sparked mass protests that nearly caused Lukashenko’s downfall — but that were eventually crushed in a brutal Russia-backed campaign to suppress opponents. Now living in exile, Tsikhanouskaya is the main face of the pro-democracy opposition. She has urged Belarusians to “reject this farce” because “it’s a sham with no real electoral process, conducted in an atmosphere of terror.”  But that doesn’t trouble Lukashenko, who also claimed in his Thursday remarks that a person doesn’t become president but is “born to be president.” “A person by nature must have basic qualities that will be useful to him as president.” In addition to possessing such qualities, Lukashenko also strengthened his power in January by signing a law guaranteeing himself immunity, lifelong protection and state-provided property upon his resignation from the presidency.

Kristina WiIfore is co-founder of #ShePersisted, a global platform for addressing digital threats to women leaders. As Moldova hurtles toward critical elections on Sunday, the stakes couldn’t be higher. Malicious actors, bankrolled by foreign sources, are working to sway the country’s public. And their target? President Maia Sandu — fighting not only for reelection but for her country’s future as a European democracy.  As Moldova’s first female president, Sandu’s candidacy has become ground zero for a flurry of gendered disinformation attacks, all designed to undermine her leadership and derail the nation’s EU membership referendum, which coincides with the election. This is no ordinary election. It’s an all-out assault on Moldova’s sovereignty, and at the heart of the battle lies one simple truth: Whoever controls the narrative determines Moldova’s future. In a crowded field of 10 candidates, Sandu’s still expected to win the first round, despite being buffeted by efforts to weaken and discredit her and the women serving in her administration. These attacks are gendered, insidious and relentless, looking to exploit traditional gender norms in a country where 97 percent of the population believes women should be “cherished and protected by men.” But this isn’t about traditional values — it’s about manipulating them to maintain Russia’s grip on Moldova. President of The European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen shakes hands with President of Moldova, Maia Sandu. | Elena Covalenco/AFP via Getty Images Disinformation targeting female leaders isn’t just a women’s issue. It’s a democracy issue; it’s a human rights issue; and in the digital age, it’s also a matter of national security. These weaponized lies are meant to fracture the foundations of participatory governance and erode trust in democracy. Our organization, #ShePersisted, has been tracking these toxic trends since 2022, identifying common gendered narratives aimed at women in politics across major digital platforms in countries like Italy, Hungary and Ukraine. Now, it’s Moldova that’s become the latest battleground in Russia’s destabilization playbook. The parallels to the U.S. are striking here. Much like Vice President Kamala Harris, who has similarly been the target of disinformation campaigns, Sandu’s candidacy has been a lightning rod for misogyny cloaked in political rhetoric. And just as we’ve seen false claims about Harris’s identity and qualifications, Moldova’s social media platforms are awash with deepfake videos and conspiracy theories aimed at the sitting president. Both women have dealt with an onslaught of digital attacks designed to weaken the public’s trust in their leadership — attacks that are gendered, racist and xenophobic — and it’s no accident these narratives spread so easily. Social media algorithms reward the most divisive content. For the Kremlin, manipulating online discourse by gaming algorithms is as easy as shooting fish in a barrel, all thanks to the oligarchs of tech that foster this environment, where digital distortions flourish in the name of keeping users hooked and advertisers paying. In Moldova in particular, the malign actors are explicitly pro-Russian, using inauthentic and coordinated behavior to seed and amplify their attacks. And the campaigns are part of a broader strategy to destabilize the country, oust pro-European Sandu and drag Moldova back into Russia’s orbit. The Kremlin’s use of deepfakes and false narratives — claiming Ukrainian F-16s will soon land on Moldovan soil and fabricating stories about compulsory EU-mandated “sexual education” — mirrors the chaos it tried to sow in the 2016 U.S. election. Its methods, however, have become more sophisticated. According to a joint statement by the U.S., Canada, and the U.K., Russia is now actively using “disinformation, criminal and covert activities, and corruption to undermine sovereignty and democratic processes” in the upcoming Moldovan elections. In Moldova in particular, the malign actors are explicitly pro-Russian, using inauthentic and coordinated behavior to seed and amplify their attacks. | Daniel Mihailescu/AFP via Getty Images Despite the red alert, though, it’s still largely U.S.-based digital media companies that are acting as modern-day conflict profiteers. Earlier this year, #ShePersisted combined social listening with forensic data analytics to understand the toxicity directed at women leaders in Moldova. The results? A chilling glimpse into the future of global disinformation campaigns. From deepfakes of Sandu resigning while wearing a hijab to offers of bribes for voters to reject Moldova’s EU integration, the manipulation is as multifaceted as it is dangerous. In one case, exiled oligarch and opposition leader Ilan Shor — widely seen as “Moscow’s man in Moldova” — used Facebook to run hundreds of ads that were viewed 155 million times. And the fact that he could do this while not, in fact, being in Moldova is a testament to the power online infrastructure afforded him, as Meta has repeatedly failed to track and remove these coordinated campaigns. But the threats aren’t confined to political manipulation. Human traffickers and scam artists are leveraging these same platforms to victimize Moldovans too. In a country where 80 percent of the population is deeply concerned about human trafficking [LINK?], social media platforms have become the primary tool for traffickers, targeting vulnerable women and girls. And what has Meta done? Almost nothing. Regardless of clear abuse, social media giants continue to prioritize profits over safety, allowing both gendered disinformation and criminal exploitation to thrive. For Moldova, the road ahead is now fraught with peril— it’s a path the U.S. knows all too well. And as Sandu prepares for a tight election, the parallels between the challenges faced by women leaders worldwide are impossible to ignore. Whether it’s Harris or Sandu, gendered disinformation is among the most powerful tools bad actors use to erode democratic progress around the world today. And if social media platforms don’t step up to enforce their own rules — removing posts inciting violence, disabling accounts that spread gendered falsehoods and curtailing the amplification of disinformation — they’ll continue to be complicit in corrosion of democracy. Moldova’s election isn’t just a fight for one woman’s political future, it’s a fight for the future of democracy itself. Like any good fight, it requires action — in this case, both online and off. And if we fail to address the weaponization of gendered disinformation now, the next battlefield could be much nearer to home.