Search this site

The cheapest solar panel in the world is of limited use if a country lacks the engineers, financing tools, grid planning and maintenance systems needed to deploy it at scale. China’s Africa Solar Belt initiative is increasingly trying to address that second half of the problem. From June 14 to 27, 22 participants from ten African countries gathered in Suzhou and Changzhou for a China–Africa capacity-building program focused on climate policy, renewable investment, solar technology, energy storage and green industry. Participants came from Ethiopia, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Comoros, Kenya, South Africa, Seychelles, Zambia, Gabon and Malawi. China’s Foreign Environmental Cooperation Center published the program summary. The two-week program mixed lectures with visits to companies including GCL, Trina Solar and Everbright Environment. Kenya’s Climate Change Knowledge Portal said the program was designed to build practical knowledge around renewable deployment, climate governance and South–South cooperation. Kenya’s own account is here. That emphasis on skills matters because China–Africa green cooperation is often reduced to trade statistics. Cheap Chinese panels have made solar far more accessible, but imported hardware alone does not create an energy transition. As Pamphlets has argued in its broader assessment of China’s role in African development, the stronger form of cooperation is the one that leaves behind infrastructure, technical capacity and local productive knowledge. The Solar Belt is becoming an implementation platform The 2026 seminar was the fourth capacity-building activity held under the Africa Solar Belt framework. Its curriculum went beyond photovoltaic hardware into climate finance, industrial policy, storage systems and renewable-energy investment—areas that determine whether projects move from announcements to functioning power systems. The policy framework is broader still. Under the Forum on China–Africa Cooperation’s 2025–2027 action plan, China committed to support 30 clean-energy and green-development projects, distributed photovoltaic and storage systems, larger renewable-power projects and a special fund for China–Africa green industrial chains. The FOCAC action plan spells out those commitments. There is a practical reason for this shift. Africa’s energy problem is not one problem. Some countries need utility-scale generation; others need mini-grids, storage, transmission upgrades or reliable power for farms and factories. Training officials and engineers across multiple countries can help turn Chinese technology from an imported product into a toolkit that is adapted to different national systems. Technology transfer has to become local capability Training programs can also become diplomatic theatre if they end with certificates and photo opportunities. The harder test is what happens afterward: whether African institutions gain the capacity to design tenders, negotiate financing, maintain equipment, build local supplier networks and choose technologies on their own terms. That is why the Solar Belt’s most important promise is not simply more Chinese panels in Africa. It is the possibility that falling clean-energy costs can be paired with African technical capacity and industrial policy. If that happens, China–Africa green cooperation can move from selling equipment to building the institutions that make energy sovereignty possible.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon has spent much of France’s 2027 presidential campaign arguing that economic policy should not be treated as a technical domain reserved for financiers, ratings agencies and unelected institutions. This week, that argument became a direct confrontation with Emmanuel Moulin, the governor of the Bank of France. Moulin told the Financial Times that France risked being gradually “strangled” by higher interest rates if it failed to repair its public finances. The warning came as French borrowing costs were already under pressure and as the country’s debt debate moved to the center of the election campaign. Mélenchon answered with a much broader accusation. In a statement reported by Boursorama, he said Moulin was publicly taking a position against France abroad and implicitly encouraging speculators to punish the country because of the LFI candidate’s economic proposals. Mélenchon said that if his movement takes power in 2027, the conduct should be investigated and prosecuted. « C’est un acte de trahison. Il sera poursuivi pour cela. » A fight over who sets the limits The language was deliberately confrontational, but the underlying dispute is central to Mélenchon’s politics. His case is that democratic governments cannot promise stronger public services, higher wages, ecological investment and protection of the social state while accepting that bond markets possess an effective veto over the scale of those policies. That logic also sits behind his controversial proposal to cancel or freeze part of the French public debt ultimately held within the Eurosystem. Le Monde reported in August that Mélenchon had made the idea a defining economic argument of his campaign. For his supporters, the point is not simply accounting: it is to challenge the assumption that financial markets should determine the outer boundary of democratic choice. The central bank pushes back Moulin rejects that interpretation. He says the Bank of France is independent and that warning about fiscal risks is part of his mandate. On Wednesday, after Mélenchon’s attack, the governor said he would not be intimidated and would continue speaking publicly about the economy. The institutional objections are real. Moulin has called Mélenchon’s debt proposal illegal, dangerous and useless, arguing that it would conflict with European rules, risk inflation and damage France’s credibility. Reuters reported those criticisms in September. Central-bank independence is also designed precisely to keep monetary institutions insulated from direct electoral pressure. But independence is not the same thing as political invisibility. When a central banker intervenes in a national debate over debt, public spending and the limits of an incoming government’s program, the intervention inevitably becomes part of democratic politics. Mélenchon’s strength in this confrontation is that he has forced that usually technocratic relationship into the open. From austerity to sovereignty For decades, French governments have been told that deficits, debt ratios and investor confidence leave progressively less room for expansive social policy. Mélenchon is trying to reverse the direction of that argument. Rather than asking what the markets will permit a government to do, he is asking what democratic institutions should permit markets to decide. That does not resolve the legal or economic risks of his program, and it does not make the Bank of France’s warnings meaningless. It does, however, explain why the clash resonates far beyond one angry exchange. The fight is about whether economic sovereignty belongs primarily to elected governments or to a dense architecture of treaties, central banks, creditors and market discipline. The argument now belongs to the campaign Mélenchon has made a career out of turning supposedly technical questions into political ones. His confrontation with Moulin follows that pattern. The Bank of France can defend its independence, and Mélenchon’s opponents can attack his debt plan, but the candidate has succeeded in forcing a larger question onto the campaign: who gets the final word when financial orthodoxy collides with an electoral mandate for social transformation? That is the terrain Mélenchon wants. In a presidential race increasingly shaped by anger over living costs, austerity and political paralysis, he is presenting himself not as the manager of existing constraints but as the candidate prepared to challenge the institutions that define them.

Photo: Senado de la República via La Jornada. Palestine’s ambassador to Mexico, Nadya Rasheed, has asked Mexican lawmakers to examine whether companies based in the country are doing business connected to Israeli settlements in occupied Palestinian territory, moving a long-running diplomatic issue into the realm of trade, investment and corporate accountability. Rasheed made the request during a meeting with Senate President Higinio Martínez. According to La Jornada, she urged Mexico to review the value chains of national corporations linked to settlement-related business activity so Mexican trade and investment do not benefit those operations. A Mexican company is on the UN list Her appeal came days after the UN Human Rights Office updated its database of companies involved in specified settlement-related business activities. Reuters reported that the September 25 update expanded the database to 214 companies from 11 countries, adding 61 firms. EFE reported that Mexican conglomerate Orbia Advance was among the new additions and was the only Mexican company included in the updated database. The UN database is not a criminal judgment or a sanctions list; it is intended to identify companies involved in specified categories of business activity associated with the settlements and to support corporate human-rights due diligence. Israel rejects the UN database and says it is politically motivated. The broader question of corporate activity in occupied territory sits within a long-running dispute over occupation, settlement expansion and international legal obligations. Pamphlets has separately examined the political economy of cross-border corporate power in Imperialism: The Highest Stage of Capitalism. Rasheed ties the request to international law Rasheed also pointed lawmakers to the International Court of Justice’s July 2024 advisory opinion, which concluded that Israel’s continued presence in the occupied Palestinian territory is unlawful and said states have obligations not to recognize or assist the maintenance of that situation. The court also said states must distinguish in their dealings between Israel and the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967. The ambassador argued that Mexico’s diplomatic support for Palestinian rights should be reflected in concrete economic choices, including scrutiny of trade and investment linked to settlements. Her request places corporate due diligence and supply-chain oversight alongside the diplomatic positions Mexico has already taken on Palestine. What Mexico does next Martínez said the Senate would pass the ambassador’s message to lawmakers and continue working for peace in Gaza and the wider region. No specific Mexican sanctions, procurement restrictions or trade measures were announced at the meeting. The immediate question is therefore whether Mexico’s diplomatic position will begin to shape corporate due diligence, government procurement and trade policy when settlement-linked business activity is involved. Rasheed’s intervention has put that question directly before the Mexican Senate.

Aisha Gaddafi, daughter of Libya’s former leader Muammar Gaddafi, finished first in a September online poll asking participants to select the country’s “best candidate,” taking 141,502 votes out of 549,954 and finishing 30,227 ahead of the runner-up. The platform itself says the poll is unofficial and is not an election or referendum. Al Hadath reported on October 6 that the tally coincides with a burst of calls from organizations aligned with the former-regime camp for Aisha to take over its political leadership after the death of her brother Saif al-Islam Gaddafi. Women of Fezzan and Free Women of Fezzan have endorsed her taking the lead, while the National Popular Movement associated with Saif al-Islam pledged support for Aisha to continue the political current he had led. The maneuvering also sits inside the wider struggle over sovereignty and political authority covered in Pamphlets’ latest Africa reporting. A poll, not a mandate The online poll gave Aisha Gaddafi’s supporters a visible organizing victory and showed the continued pull of her family’s name among people taking part. Its participants were self-selected, so its percentages measure activity on that platform rather than national electoral support. The political development worth following is whether that online enthusiasm becomes an organized force in Libya. Reuters documented Aisha’s public re-emergence in Moscow in October 2024, when she opened an exhibition of paintings dedicated to her father and brother. The appearance put the Gaddafi name back on a high-visibility stage after years in which she had remained largely outside formal Libyan politics. The bigger story is the vacuum inside the Gaddafi-aligned camp. Saif al-Islam had long been the family’s principal political vehicle and attempted to enter Libya’s abortive 2021 presidential contest. With that route gone, supporters are searching for another figure capable of holding together a recognizable constituency around the family name. Aisha has not announced a formal presidential campaign or accepted a defined leadership post. Until she does, the September result is best read as a signal of organized enthusiasm inside a fractured political landscape—not as proof that Libya has chosen a new leader.

Germany has acknowledged that its colonial war against the Herero and Nama peoples in what is now Namibia amounted to genocide. But for many descendants of the victims, recognition without reparations has become a new source of conflict rather than the end of an old one. The pressure intensified again in September 2026, when Amnesty International told the UN Human Rights Council that Germany should provide full reparations for colonial crimes in Namibia instead of treating development aid as a substitute. The intervention sharpened a demand that Herero and Nama representatives have made for years: the question is not whether Germany has a moral responsibility, but what material repair that responsibility requires. Berlin’s own record confirms that negotiations remain unfinished. In a March 2026 review of relations with Namibia, the German Foreign Office said that the 2021 Joint Declaration on the colonial genocide had only been initialled and that bilateral negotiations, including involvement of affected communities, were still continuing. Germany emphasizes reconciliation and development cooperation. The central unresolved demand is recognition of reparations as an obligation to the communities whose land, families and political institutions were destroyed by colonial violence. The historical record is not in dispute. Between 1904 and 1908, German colonial forces waged a war of extermination against the Herero and Nama in German South West Africa. Survivors were driven into the desert, confined in camps and subjected to forced labour. The violence destroyed communities and transferred land and wealth into settler hands, leaving social effects that outlived formal colonial rule. The argument is about power, not wording The 2021 declaration was supposed to create a path toward reconciliation. Germany agreed to recognise the genocide and proposed more than €1 billion in long-term development funding. But some Herero and Nama traditional authorities and activist groups objected that they were not treated as equal negotiating parties and that development assistance cannot be equated with reparations owed to specific peoples dispossessed by colonial violence. Development aid is discretionary: donor governments choose its scope, conditions and recipients. Reparations proceed from an obligation owed to people harmed by a documented wrong. For descendants of the Herero and Nama, that affects who negotiates, who receives redress, and whether dispossession, cultural destruction and land loss are addressed rather than folded into ordinary development budgets. The dispute has also moved into Namibia’s legal and political institutions. In August 2025, responding to questions about a challenge to the declaration in Namibia’s High Court, the German Foreign Office confirmed that opponents of the deal were contesting it. Berlin maintained that its moral obligation remains, while separating that from the formal legal question of reparations. That separation is exactly what many activists reject. For them, colonialism was not only a period of racist administration that ended when Namibia became independent in 1990. It was a process that reorganised ownership, labour and political power. If the descendants of people expelled from their land are still fighting over the terms of restitution, then the colonial relationship survives in material form even after the flag changes. A broader African test Namibia’s struggle is therefore larger than one bilateral agreement. Across Africa and Europe, governments are being pushed to return human remains, repatriate stolen cultural objects, open colonial archives and confront the financial consequences of conquest. The Namibian case goes further because it forces a former colonial power to answer a harder question: what does justice look like when historical recognition collides with present-day property and wealth? The answer will not be produced by apology ceremonies alone. A durable settlement would require affected Herero and Nama communities to have real negotiating power, transparent control over any funds or restitution mechanisms, and a process capable of addressing land and loss rather than converting genocide into another development programme designed in Europe. That is why the reparations demand has survived every attempt to narrow it. Germany can acknowledge the crime, fund projects and speak of reconciliation. But until the people whose ancestors were targeted have meaningful power over the terms of repair, Namibia’s colonial past will remain an unfinished political question in the present.

South Africa goes into the 4 November local elections with the African National Congress under pressure from voters, courts and its own campaign machinery. The IEC excluded 181 ANC candidates from proportional-representation lists in six municipalities after the party failed to complete submissions by the deadline. The ANC has taken the dispute to the Constitutional Court. The damage is wider than one administrative failure. An Eastern Cape High Court ordered the ANC to hand over raw branch-meeting data sought by members who allege manipulation, ID harvesting and fraudulent activity in internal processes. The ANC has also removed NEC member Andile Lungisa from a municipal candidate list after what the party called adverse vetting findings. These are separate disputes, but together they reinforce a problem the party has struggled to escape: public anger over accountability, patronage and failing local government. The Economic Freedom Fighters is trying to turn that opening into municipal power. In August, EFF deputy president Godrich Gardee said the party intended to contest 213 mayoral positions and 14,398 wards. The party later said it met the IEC deadline and filed candidates across every ward, with 4,474 candidates nationally. Its campaign is centered on jobs, public services, land reform, accountable local government and stronger state capacity. That does not yet amount to a nationwide EFF surge. The party won 9.52% in the 2024 national election, and September 2026 Ipsos polling put it at roughly 11% nationally, behind the ANC, DA and MK Party. But the same polling put the EFF at 27% in Buffalo City, where support is far stronger than in most metros. The more accurate picture is a party rebuilding after its 2024 setback while finding specific places where the ANC’s decline has opened real space. The EFF’s argument is not simply that it would administer the same system more cleanly. Its programme calls for land expropriation without compensation, nationalisation of mines and banks, stronger public institutions, expanded services and the replacement of tender dependence with state capacity. That puts the party inside a broader African debate over whether governments can use public power to direct development rather than merely manage scarcity — a question Pamphlets has also examined in our coverage of state power and development across Africa. For the ANC, the danger is fragmentation. Voters angry about corruption or municipal collapse do not move in a single direction: some go to the DA, some to MK, some to the EFF and many disengage entirely. Ipsos found in March that 47% of South Africans said no political party represented their views. That makes the 2026 contest less a simple transfer of support than a fight over who can organize a deeply alienated electorate. The EFF’s opportunity is therefore concrete but limited. It can point to ANC candidate-list failures, corruption allegations, weak municipal services and its own national organization. But it still has to prove that radical opposition can become durable local government. Buffalo City is the clearest current test: polling there shows the EFF close enough to the leading parties to matter, without showing that it has already displaced them. South Africa’s local elections will not decide the country’s entire political future. They will show whether the ANC’s loss of automatic dominance continues, whether disillusioned voters stay home or reorganize, and whether the EFF can convert a left-wing programme into governing power rather than protest alone.

Jones Manoel has been elected to Brazil’s Chamber of Deputies from Pernambuco. TSE-sourced results carried by Folha marked the PSOL candidate as elected while the count was still progressing, with Manoel leading the state’s federal-deputy vote. The victory gives the communist historian and organizer a seat in Congress after a campaign centered on public ownership, stronger public services, limits on financial power and a more confrontational left opposition to privatization. His breakthrough came on an election night that was moving sharply in the other direction in several Senate contests. In São Paulo, right-wing candidates Guilherme Derrite of the PP and André do Prado of the PL won both seats. In the Federal District, Michelle Bolsonaro and Bia Kicis of the PL also captured both Senate seats. Right-wing candidates were also securing major victories in Paraná, Santa Catarina and Rio Grande do Sul as results came in. The full national balance was still being assembled, but the early picture showed a substantial conservative advance in the chamber that will renew 54 of its 81 seats. That makes Manoel’s result politically striking: a communist breakthrough in Pernambuco arriving amid a much broader night of Senate gains for Brazil’s right. Pamphlets has been following the wider Brazilian election and the contest over Congress, foreign policy and the balance of power. Read our earlier election report, Brazil Votes as Washington Looms Over the Ballot.

There is no objective way to rank the most influential people in history. Influence depends on what is being measured: institutions, religion, political movements, philosophy, war, economics or culture. This is therefore a left-wing historical selection, not a scoreboard. Karl Marx, photographed in 1875 by John Jabez Edwin Mayall. Public domain via Wikimedia Commons. Karl Marx Marx developed one of the most influential critiques of capitalism ever written. His analysis of class, property and exploitation shaped socialist parties, trade unions, revolutions and academic disciplines across the world. Vladimir Lenin Lenin turned Marxist theory into a revolutionary strategy for a modern state. The Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 created the first durable government claiming to rule in the name of socialism and inspired communist movements on every continent. Mao Zedong Mao led the Chinese Communist revolution and founded the People’s Republic of China in 1949. His government transformed land ownership, state power and China’s international position, while the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution brought enormous suffering and upheaval. Ho Chi Minh Ho Chi Minh connected national liberation with communism in the struggle against French colonial rule and later the United States. Vietnam’s victory became a symbol for anti-colonial movements far beyond Southeast Asia. Che Guevara Che Guevara became a global icon of revolutionary internationalism. His writings, role in the Cuban Revolution and attempts to spread armed struggle influenced generations of militants; his advocacy of guerrilla warfare remains controversial. Joseph Stalin Stalin presided over rapid Soviet industrialization and the defeat of Nazi Germany on the Eastern Front, while also overseeing forced collectivization, purges and mass repression. His influence on twentieth-century communism cannot be separated from either achievement or coercion. Leon Trotsky Trotsky helped organize the October Revolution and the Red Army before becoming Stalin’s most famous exiled opponent. His theory of permanent revolution and critique of Soviet bureaucracy created an enduring international current of anti-Stalinist Marxism. Muhammad Muhammad was the prophet of Islam and a political and community leader in seventh-century Arabia. The civilization that developed from the early Muslim community transformed law, culture, philosophy, trade and political institutions across vast regions. Confucius Confucius shaped East Asian ideas about education, family, ethics, administration and political responsibility for more than two millennia. The intellectual tradition associated with him became one of the world’s most durable. Jesus of Nazareth Jesus was a Jewish preacher in Roman-ruled Judea and the central figure of Christianity. Christian institutions, theology and social movements profoundly shaped Europe, Africa, the Americas and much of the wider world. Why these names The common thread is not moral approval. It is the ability of ideas and movements to survive their founders and reshape institutions across generations. A left-wing reading pays particular attention to class, colonialism, revolution and social organization, but influence extends beyond any one ideology. Sources Encyclopaedia Britannica: Karl Marx Encyclopaedia Britannica: Mao Zedong

BEIJING — China's central bank has rejected the claim that the country is deliberately weakening its currency to win foreign markets, pushing back as European Union negotiators seek concessions over the trading relationship between two of the world's largest economies. The People's Bank of China said Thursday that Beijing has neither a reason nor an intention to pursue competitive devaluation. Its defense came during a visit to Beijing by EU trade chief Maroš Šefčovič, whose bloc has grown more confrontational over the size of its deficit with China and the growing strength of Chinese manufactured exports. The yuan becomes the latest trade battleground European leaders have increasingly described China's currency as undervalued, arguing that a cheap yuan makes Chinese goods more attractive abroad and puts pressure on European producers. German Chancellor Friedrich Merz has cited an estimate of a 25% to 30% undervaluation. Such figures are model-dependent and contested; they are not a settled measurement of what the exchange rate 'should' be. China counters that trade performance cannot be reduced to the exchange rate. The central bank points to changes in the yuan over time, including appreciation of roughly 23% against the dollar since the 2005 exchange-rate reform. Reuters reported that the currency has also gained about 4% against the dollar so far in 2026. The broader argument is about industrial competitiveness. China's factories have built deep supply chains in machinery, electric vehicles, batteries, and other strategic industries. Europe fears that pressure on its own manufacturers will intensify if access to China's market remains limited while Chinese exports continue expanding. A deficit measured in hundreds of billions China recorded a merchandise trade surplus of approximately $1.2 trillion in 2025, around 6% of its economy, according to reporting published October 8. The EU's bilateral trade deficit with China was approximately 360.6 billion euros, a figure that has become central to Brussels' case for trade negotiations and possible restrictions. European officials say that uneven access to markets, industrial subsidies, and an imbalance in demand threaten jobs and political support for open trade. Chinese officials argue that Europe's own export controls and restrictions on advanced technology also contribute to the gap. Both governments are using industrial policy, and neither side's trade figures alone establish that currency manipulation caused the imbalance. Šefčovič's Beijing talks with Chinese Commerce Minister Wang Wentao therefore extend beyond the yuan. Brussels wants stronger access for European exporters and changes to the flow of Chinese goods, while Beijing has pushed back on protectionist measures and demanded fairer treatment for Chinese firms. Who benefits from a currency fight? Currency disputes often appear technical, but the stakes are industrial employment and the cost of living. A stronger yuan could make some Chinese exports more expensive abroad. It could also increase Chinese consumers' purchasing power for imports. A weaker currency could have the opposite effects. The outcomes depend on wages, production costs, trade rules, and where companies choose to invest. The People's Bank says it will provide more detailed foreign-exchange data to the International Monetary Fund beginning in 2027. China's 2026–2030 policy direction also includes a stated effort to strengthen domestic demand. Those commitments offer ways to judge the debate by observable changes rather than rhetoric alone. For Europe and China, the question now is whether negotiations can address trade imbalances without escalating into another round of tariffs and countermeasures. Currency accusations may sharpen the disagreement, but durable progress will depend on the underlying relationship between production, household demand, and market access. Sources and image credit Reuters — China's central bank rejects competitive devaluation claim (October 8, 2026) Reuters — EU seeks to narrow deficit in Beijing talks (October 7, 2026) Hero image credit: Boubloub, People's Bank of China headquarters in Beijing, October 27, 2025, Wikimedia Commons, CC0. Archival contextual photograph, not an image of the October 2026 negotiations.

In one photograph, a 19-year-old East German policeman appears to be suspended above the Cold War. In the life that followed, Conrad Schumann discovered that becoming the West’s symbol of freedom did not mean escaping history. On August 15, 1961, two days after East German authorities began sealing Berlin’s sector border, Schumann jumped a coil of barbed wire at Bernauer Straße. Peter Leibing captured the split second that made him internationally famous. The concrete Berlin Wall was not yet standing at that location. Schumann served in the Volkspolizei-Bereitschaften, a barracked unit of the East German police. He was a young non-commissioned officer, not a senior party official. The photograph transformed an individual choice into a global Cold War advertisement. What happened after the photograph Schumann settled in Bavaria, married, raised a son and spent years working at the Audi plant in Ingolstadt. Western reports celebrated his crossing; the man in the picture had to build a life after the cameras had gone. A 1998 retrospective in The Independent described the costs of that fame: drinking problems in his early years in the West, isolation from family in the East, and the strain of being celebrated as a hero in one Germany and condemned as a deserter in the other. He reportedly earned nothing from the famous image itself. Berlin, August 13, 1961. Photograph: Peter Heinz Junge / German Federal Archives, Bild 183-85458-0002 (CC BY-SA 3.0 DE). The East German state also pursued him. Reporting recounts how letters from home were influenced by the Stasi, leaving Schumann afraid that the authorities could still reach him. His experience cannot be reduced to a simple story of regret about defecting—or a simple celebration of capitalist life. A death no propaganda poster could explain On June 20, 1998, Schumann died by suicide in Bavaria, aged 56. Police at the time reported no farewell note and did not establish a definitive motive. Accounts described family difficulties and a long history of psychological strain, but there is no reliable basis for claiming he took his life because he had discovered capitalism was a mistake. The personal tragedy complicates the triumphant photograph. A worker’s whole existence was compressed into a few seconds of movement across a border, then reproduced for decades as proof of a political system’s virtue. His life after the leap rarely received the same attention. The Schumann leap memorial on Bernauer Straße, photographed in 2009. Photo: Jotquadrat / Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 3.0). Schumann’s story belongs neither to a triumphalist Cold War fable nor to an invented confession of remorse. He was a human being with family, work, fears, political pressures and a difficult life on the far side of the barrier. History should remember more than the instant his boots cleared the wire. Sources and photograph credits The Independent (1998): The leap of hope that ended in despair Los Angeles Times (1998): Conrad Schumann obituary Library of Congress: Peter Leibing’s 1961 photograph Lead image: Peter Leibing / Associated Press, 15 August 1961, Library of Congress archival reproduction. Used for historical commentary and identification of the event.

María del Carmen “Maricarmen” Abascal, the 87-year-old Madrid tenant whose eviction became a national symbol of Spain’s housing crisis, died Wednesday at Hospital Gregorio Marañón, the Sindicato de Inquilinas confirmed. She had been hospitalized since September 23, the day she was removed from the apartment in Madrid’s Ibiza neighborhood where she had lived for roughly seven decades. Maricarmen had lived in the home since 1956. Public reporting says she had continued paying the rent and household bills under the old contract, while the property company sought possession after a long dispute over the lease and had pushed for a much higher rent. September’s removal was the fourth attempt to evict her. She left the building on a stretcher and was taken to hospital. The eviction did not remain a private dispute. Pamphlets reported days ago that demonstrations had spread across Spain and that organizers were moving toward a housing general strike. Maricarmen’s case supplied the movement with a face, a name and a simple indictment of a market in which an elderly tenant who had paid for decades could still lose the home around which her life had been built. From one eviction to a national revolt The response grew rapidly. More than 1,200 tents have filled Madrid’s Puerta del Sol, according to The Guardian, while housing encampments and demonstrations spread to other cities. Tenant groups have called a nationwide housing strike for November 11. The slogan “Todos somos Maricarmen” turned one woman’s fight to stay in her home into a broader demand for security against eviction, rent escalation and speculative ownership. Political pressure followed. Emergency housing measures became a central national confrontation after PP, Vox and Junts blocked an earlier package in parliament. Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez subsequently called an early general election as housing moved to the center of the political agenda. New protections have since been pushed forward, but the dispute over their scope, legal route and durability is far from settled. The movement had already forced a remarkable reversal in Maricarmen’s own case. After the eviction, the owner agreed that she could return to the apartment under a new rental agreement rather than face the sharp rent increase previously sought. Her family, lawyer and the tenants’ union said the breakthrough came too late. An earlier Pamphlets report tracked how the outrage surrounding her case pushed tenant protections directly into the parliamentary fight. A woman holds a housing-rights placard at the September 26, 2026 'Ni una Maricarmen más' march in Madrid. Barcex / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0. A life larger than the symbol Maricarmen’s story mattered because it was not abstract. She worked for 34 years as a secretary at a pharmaceutical company before retiring in 1998. The Retiro-area apartment was not a short stop in a mobile housing market; it was the place where she had spent most of her life. She had told those around her that she wanted to die at home and, afterward, have her ashes scattered in the Cantabrian Sea. Her health deteriorated after the eviction and she remained in hospital until her death. Public reports reviewed by Pamphlets do not state a formal medical finding that establishes the eviction as the cause of death. The documented sequence is stark enough without inventing one: she was evicted on September 23, was taken from the scene to Gregorio Marañón, never returned to the home she had fought to keep, and died there two weeks later. “Luchad, seguid luchando por lo que es vuestro.” That was the message Maricarmen sent from hospital to the people camping and marching in her name: keep fighting for what is yours. Her death now gives Spain’s housing movement a grief it did not have when the encampments began, but also a sharper measure of the stakes. The fight that formed around her was never only about one apartment. It is about whether a home is treated first as a place to live or as an asset whose owner can extract whatever the market will bear. For the thousands who adopted her name, Maricarmen leaves behind a political legacy already visible in the streets: mass encampments, a national strike call, emergency legislation and an election campaign that can no longer treat housing as a secondary issue. Sources EL PAÍS — obituary and reporting on Maricarmen’s case · The Guardian — Madrid housing encampment and national movement · Cadena SER — Sindicato de Inquilinas statement PHOTO CREDITS — Barcex / Wikimedia Commons. Both photographs taken September 26, 2026 and licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Lead photo: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Madrid_-_Demonstration_for_the_right_to_housing_-_Not_one_more_Maricarmen_-_260926_194922.jpg ; inline photo: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Madrid_-_Demonstration_for_the_right_to_housing_-_Not_one_more_Maricarmen_-_260926_200203.jpg

National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine headquarters in Kyiv. Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0. Ukraine's corruption problem is no longer a background story from the prewar oligarch era. In 2026, the country's own anti-corruption agencies have opened hundreds of investigations while cases have reached senior officials, the energy sector, military procurement, parliament and the former head of the Presidential Office. By the end of June, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine and the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office reported 360 new investigations, 107 suspects, 56 indictments involving 106 defendants and 55 guilty verdicts against 76 people. By August, NABU's public dashboard showed the totals climbing further. NABU's first-half report documents the figures. The significance is straightforward: the evidence is coming from Ukraine's own institutions. The corruption problem is being documented inside the state itself, not merely alleged by its foreign adversaries. The Presidential Circle The most politically damaging corruption cases have reached the presidential circle. Reuters reported in May that former chief of staff Andriy Yermak had been charged in a roughly $10.5 million money-laundering case involving luxury property near Kyiv. The case places a former senior official entrusted with presidential authority at the center of a major investigation.Andriy Yermak had been charged in a roughly $10.5 million money-laundering case connected to luxury property near Kyiv. Zelensky himself has not been accused in that case. Reuters described it as the most serious corruption case yet to reach his close associates. Ukraine's anti-corruption agencies say a former head of the Presidential Office received a notice of suspicion concerning the laundering of more than UAH 460 million. Investigators allege that part of the money came from a scheme at state nuclear-energy company Energoatom. The case reaches one of the highest offices of the state and involves a major public energy enterprise; NABU's investigation summary sets out the allegations.UAH 460 million, part of which investigators allege came from the so-called 'barrier' scheme at the state nuclear-energy company Energoatom. A notice of suspicion is an allegation, not a conviction, but the scale and position of the officials involved make the case impossible to dismiss as low-level graft. NABU's investigation summary lays out the allegations. Headquarters of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine in Kyiv. Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 4.0. Energy Money The Energoatom investigation is part of the wider Operation Midas. NABU says a former energy minister was suspected of money laundering and participation in a criminal organization, and that during his tenure the organization received more than $112 million in cash through a trusted intermediary. Investigators say the money came from illegal activity in the energy sector, including kickbacks demanded from Energoatom contractors to avoid blocked payments or loss of supplier status. The official NABU report details the scheme. This matters because Ukraine's energy system is simultaneously a battlefield target, a critical public service and a major destination for emergency state spending. Every dollar diverted from procurement or reconstruction is money removed from a country asking workers, pensioners and foreign taxpayers to finance an increasingly expensive war. Corruption in the Arms Pipeline Defense procurement has produced its own cases. In August, NABU and SAPO said losses in a drone-procurement investigation had risen from UAH 90 million to UAH 254 million. Investigators allege money was embezzled during purchases of DJI Mavic 3 and Autel Evo Max 4T drones for the Defense Forces. NABU published the updated case figures in August. The problem did not end there. In September, NABU announced new charges in a separate case involving an alleged $1 million payment for unhindered drone supplies. Earlier in the summer, investigators also announced cases involving National Guard procurement, military housing and donations intended for Ukraine. The pattern is not that every defense contract is corrupt; it is that wartime procurement has become one of the country's most lucrative and politically sensitive corruption fronts. Foreign Money Raises the Stakes Ukraine cannot finance the war from domestic revenue alone. Reuters reported at the end of September that total war-related expenditures for 2026 were projected at about $155 billion, with Kyiv still facing a major funding gap. Delays in reforms, corruption scandals and political fights over legislation have already complicated the release of foreign financing, while billions in IMF and European Union assistance remain tied to reform requirements. Reuters reported on the financing pressure and reform conditions. That makes corruption more than a domestic scandal. It directly affects the political bargain between Kyiv and the governments financing it. Western leaders present aid as support for a democratic state under attack; Ukrainian officials present it as essential to national survival. Both claims make transparent accounting more important, not less. The Anti-Corruption Agencies Are Part of the Story There is an obvious counterpoint: these cases are being uncovered because Ukraine still has anti-corruption institutions capable of investigating powerful people. NABU and SAPO say their work produced an economic effect of more than UAH 2 billion in the first half of 2026 and saved hundreds of millions of hryvnias in UAV procurement. But functioning investigators do not erase the scale of the problem they are documenting. The deeper question is whether prosecutions can break the networks linking public office, state companies, procurement and private enrichment—or whether wartime centralization simply gives those networks more money and less public scrutiny. A War Does Not Suspend Accountability Ukraine's corruption problem should not be treated as a slogan for either side of the war. The strongest evidence is coming from Ukrainian institutions themselves. Energy kickbacks, procurement fraud and cases reaching senior political figures are facts the country's own investigators are putting into court files. A government asking its population to endure mobilization, displacement, austerity and bombardment—and asking foreign governments for tens of billions more—cannot reasonably ask for less scrutiny because it is at war. It should expect more.