UNITED STATES AND WAR ON TERROR: COSTS OF THE PYRRHIC VICTORY

The withdrawal of American troops from Afghanistan during August 2021 puts an end to the longest war that America has ever fought and the first phase of the Global War on Terrorism. In this regard, two important questions arise, which we will try to answer in this paper. First, what are the main external and internal consequences that the United States has faced due to engaging in the “War on Terror”? Second, did the U.S. achieve its goals in that war? The external effects we have identified are the crisis of global leadership, the weakening of relations with the allies, the growth of China in the lee, and the rise of populism. Among the internal ones, we included the strengthening of the presidential function, the increase of state power, more profound social polarization, an increase in budget expenditures, and a growing deficit, as well as human casualties. In the end, we contributed to the debate on the nature of the U.S. “victory”. We are providing the argumentation in the direction that the final output of War on Terror should be named Pyrrhic victory.

Breaking Away

The Second World War ended in victory for the Nationalist government. It was a Pyrrhic victory, however, as the Nationalists would soon be defeated by the Communists in the civil war, and Yuan-tsung was at a crossroads, wondering what to do: join her rich friends and flee to Hong Kong or stay in China. Despite her mother’s insistence that she go south with her rich friends, she decided with her younger siblings’ support to stay, believing that earthshaking events were about to happen in China and that they would provide material for her literary endeavors. She decided to go north to Beijing and meanwhile began to read some radical literature, such as Gorky’s Mother.

Evolution of a costly immunity to cestode parasites is a pyrrhic victory

Parasites impose fitness costs on their hosts. Biologists therefore tend to assume that natural selection favors infection-resistant hosts. Yet, when the immune response itself is costly, theory suggests selection may instead favor loss of resistance. Immune costs are rarely documented in nature, and there are few examples of adaptive loss of resistance. Here, we show that when marine threespine stickleback colonized freshwater lakes they gained resistance to the freshwater-associated tapeworm, Schistocephalus solidus. Extensive peritoneal fibrosis and inflammation contribute to suppression of cestode growth and viability, but also impose a substantial cost of reduced fecundity. Combining genetic mapping and population genomics, we find that the immune differences between tolerant and resistant populations arise from opposing selection in both populations acting, respectively, to reduce and increase resistance consistent with divergent optimization.

The implications of COVID-19 legislation on chronic ailments patients: perspectives from Botswana

Purpose COVID-19 is one of the greatest public health challenges in the 21st century. The World Health Organisation recommended physical distancing to halt the upward trajectory of the infections. Countries including Botswana imposed lockdown for non-essential workers. This paper aims to argue that lockdown as imposed by the Government of Botswana was a necessary measure given the nature of transmission of COVID-19. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses exploratory research to unpack impacts of the novel COVID-19 regulations or be responsive to new concerns by breaking new ground through delving into new problem areas. The paper used a use case to explain a single outcome for a single case. Findings The restriction on the freedom of movement is necessary to protect citizens, particularly, those with chronic illness from contracting the deadly virus. The paper further observes that while the legislative intent of the GOB was to protect those with chronic illnesses from COVID-19, the lockdown resulted in near death experiences for some chronic ailment patients. These experiences result from unfettered discretion of functionaries who were policing and manning the streets and those who are conferred with authority to issue travel permits to seek and obtain medical assistance, lack of public transport and the processes of applications for the permits, which exposed citizens to COVID-19. Research limitations/implications The study was desk based. It may have yielded different results. Lockdowns limited mobility for non-essential services. The full impact of the restrictions and the attendant defaulting was yet to be fully realised. Observing the COVID-19 protocols and bureaucratic requirements for obtaining information from the government offices were major challenges. Practical implications Achieving total lockdown as an end in itself may amount to a pyrrhic victory – the authorities may successfully achieve total lockdown but with heavy costs on gains made in combating ailments. Botswana has fought many other pandemics and chronic illnesses still subsist and need to be catered for. For patients, there is not only the complexity of dealing with one chronic condition but also the work of trying to live “normal” lives in the face of co-morbidity, which can be overwhelming. The COVID-19 pandemic adds to the “work” that patients must do to manage and live with such health conditions and the psychological distress. Social implications Authorities need to be fully aware of the consequences of their actions. Abrasive actions may lead to a higher constituency of discontent. Botswana has had a good track record of being democratic, and this needs to be strengthened. Originality/value The implementation of the COVID-19 regulations particularly the requirement for a travel permit to seek health-care services may hinder access to essential health services and ultimately increase the pressure on emergency services or, at worst, increase mortality. Clear guidelines and sober interpretation of the regulations are necessary. This will also make it easier for the frontline security officers manning the streets to correctly understand the prevailing circumstances. In view of the massive gains garnered in combating chronic illnesses, it is important that such gains are not reversed, while the GOB fights COVID-19. People living with HIV/AIDS, the elderly and people with pre-existing health conditions are known to be at significantly higher risk of developing severe illness when contracting COVID-19. Achieving total lockdown as an end in itself may amount to a pyrrhic victory – the authorities may successfully achieve total lockdown but with heavy costs on gains made in combating other chronic ailments.

Local Communities and ISDS

Foreign investors and states frequently cooperate to facilitate investment projects in the natural resource sector. National elites tend to be involved in these cases, acting like partners to the foreign investors, because they often benefit economically and have an interest in the continuation of extractivism. Meanwhile, local communities are in a weak position, with limited or no public support and few legal options. They may still resist a project, sometimes forcing the state to cancel it, yet cancellation may only be a pyrrhic victory. Foreign investors can rely on investment treaties and ISDS to interpret and enforce the political signals and givings granted by the host state. The cases analysed in this chapter show how ISDS tribunals overlook investor misconduct and the context of extractivist projects while making local communities invisible.

The battle of the tests: a Pyrrhic victory? A case note on the Supreme Court judgment in Peninsula Securities Ltd v. Dunnes Stores (Bangor) Ltd

In Peninsula Securities, the Supreme Court held that a restrictive covenant, granted in a lease to an anchor tenant of a shopping centre not to allow any retail unit in the centre to be leased to competing shops, does not engage the doctrine of restraint of trade. The question of its enforceability therefore hinges on whether the relevant covenant breaches competition law, and specifically whether it is anti-competitive by object or effect. This relatively straightforward conclusion of the Supreme Court in Peninsula Securities masks over 50 years of conflicting judgments and uncertainty in the area. Prior to Peninsula Securities, the majority decision of the House of Lords in Esso Petroleum v Harper's Garage gave rise to a ‘battle of the tests’: the majority opined that the doctrine of restraint of trade would only be engaged if the covenantor contracts to give up a freedom they already had (what has come to be known as the ‘pre-existing freedom test’; Lord Wilberforce, dissenting, formulated what came to be known as the ‘trading society test’ which is basically a rule of reason test. In Peninsula Securities, the Supreme Court clearly sided with the latter, but in reality neither test is likely to be considered in future challenges to an anchor tenancy restrictive covenant – the key question is whether it is anti-competitive, something which only the relevant facts of the case will determine.