Outbreaks in a Post-COVID World

by Emerson Prentice for The 44 North, Contributing Writer - Politics

Hantavirus through a microscope, via the CDC

"Unlike COVID-19, for many, the horrific memories of the 2014 Ebola outbreak have faded." 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) responded to a hantavirus outbreak reported on May 2. The outbreak resurfaced panic and fears from the COVID-19 outbreak of the 2020s. Despite reactions, global health organizations like the World Health Organization (WHO) assure the risk from hantavirus to the US is low.  

The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) is experiencing its own outbreak of a different nature—Ebola. On May 15, researchers identified an outbreak of a rare strain. It's a species of Ebola unlike that which scientists have seen before. Both the hantavirus and Ebola virus have confounded scientists tracking the outbreaks because of the unique nature of the strains. 

The two outbreaks in quick succession and in close proximity to the COVID pandemic have shaped public response—fear is top of mind, and trust in public health officials globally is low. Aid has also been lacking as the outbreak has since outpaced the response. 

Like for hantavirus, the CDC says that the risk of Ebola to the US remains low. However, the situation in the DRC continues to be deeply concerning. As of June 3, there have been 62 confirmed deaths from Ebola, though officials from WHO and other public health organizations believe the true death toll may be far higher. They also warn that this outbreak has the potential to be the largest in history, which could, in part, be due to the rollback of aid from the US during the Trump administration. 

Obtaining an exact count of those infected by Ebola is an obstacle, not for lack of testing but for lack of existing tests due to the rare strain. And even when there is sufficient testing available, disseminating results to patients can be a lengthy and difficult process, due to the terrain in the DRC and conflict in the surrounding area. 

Medical officials have further expressed frustration with the speed of the global response, considering the potential severity of the outbreak. The lack of funding invested in proper testing for the disease is playing a role in the slow-moving response. For this strain, there is no vaccine or proven treatment, despite pledges to develop adequate testing and treatments—like those from the company KH Medical—even when it’s not commercially beneficial. 

In the resurgence of Ebola, past survivors like Patrick Faley remind people what the previous outbreak—which took the lives of 11,000—looked like. Unlike COVID-19, for many, the horrific memories of the 2014 Ebola outbreak have faded. 

Photograph from the last Ebola outbreak in West Africa in 2014. Via Getty Images.

Faley outlined how an Ebola outbreak is especially devastating because of the way in which it attacks communities. Families can no longer properly care for their loved ones or carry out rituals with the dead without the danger of infection, particularly because of the lack of protective gear.  

The Trump administration is also taking dramatic precautions to deal with returning passengers to the US who were exposed to the hantavirus. Following a three-week quarantine, they will be closely monitored by public health workers or law enforcement for an additional three weeks. 

These restrictions have exceeded those which were imposed during the hantavirus outbreak in 2018, which was successfully contained. Practices in 2026 are in stark contrast to Trump’s criticisms of ‘overly strict’ COVID-19 restrictions. 

Fear of infection may still be justified, particularly with increasing global travel during the World Cup. For most individuals, though, common infections like respiratory and intestinal viruses would be expected—not Ebola or the hantavirus. Vaccination rates in America, Canada, and other countries have also been falling, which further increases the potential threat of infections to the public. 

Amid the outbreak, the Trump Administration’s focus has been on protecting US soil from infection rather than providing aid. Trump has emphasized isolationist policies despite growing concerns from public health officials about the potential global repercussions. This approach is further highlighted in his travel bans and mandated quarantines in Kenya for US citizens.  

Trump’s response mirrors that which he implemented during the COVID-19 pandemic—the prioritization of a border sealed from external infection. 

On May 18, the CDC and the DRC began implementing travel screening and entry restrictions to manage the outbreak. If you have recently travelled through an affected country, you’re advised to follow travel health notices and seek medical attention if you develop symptoms. 

The danger of the largest Ebola outbreak in history and its global impacts continues to loom amid slow aid reaction, surging fears, and an increasing spread. 

---

Emerson Prentice is a Freshman at Stanford studying Anthropology. At school, she is the Campus Life desk editor for the Stanford Daily, a DJ for the campus radio station KZSU, and an associate producer for the Stanford Storytelling Project’s award-winning podcast, “State of the Human.” For fun, Emerson also loves to run, cook, and birdwatch!

---

Growing Divide Over Iran’s Future Puts U.S. Policy Under the Spotlight

by Wardah Malik for The 44 North, Contributing Writer - Politics

Lindsey Graham (left) with President Donald Trump, who is holding a signed “Make Iran Great Again” hat. (Lindsey Graham/X)

"The future of Iran remains uncertain. But what is clear is that democracy cannot be forged through violence, repression, or outside interference." 

Two days after the United States announced the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, President Donald Trump was photographed on board Air Force One with a hat that said “Make Iran Great Again,” foreshadowing the war that now involves nearly 10 countries across the Middle East. 

While the dynamics that define U.S. involvement in Caracas do not exactly mirror Tehran, what remains the same is the commitment to a new approach to foreign affairs that is swift, harsh, and openly involves regime change. 

“They have waged war against civilization itself. Our resolve, and likewise that of Israel, has never been stronger,” Trump said of U.S. military attacks against Iran. Yet, this resolve and the U.S.’s objectives beyond regime change have been ill-defined, a reality that has 56% of Americans opposing military action. The American public that elected Trump on the basis of a “no new wars” promise is not eager to participate in a conflict with no clear end, raising the question: Who wants this war? In part, the answer is found in the Iranian diaspora, many of whose visions for a “new Iran” seem to rely on Trump.  

Via PBS News/NPR/Marist Poll, National Adults

On February 28, 2026, Iranians across the world took to the streets to celebrate the U.S.-Israeli strikes that killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who led Iran for more than thirty years. “We needed this help for decades,” claim Iranian-Canadians, a number of whom attended rallies waving pre-revolutionary Iranian flags alongside the Israeli flag and photos of Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s last shah. 

Often seen wearing a “Trump Was Right About Everything” or a MIGA hat, this segment of the Iranian diaspora routinely borrows rhetoric to push forward a pro-monarchist agenda that positions Pahlavi as a democratic, secular figure—a reliable Western ally in the Middle East. For example, following the U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites in 2025, the National Union for Democracy in Iran, a U.S.-based pro-monarchy group, released its “Emergency Phase Booklet,” a nearly 200-page document that echoes international democratic norms whilst framing the U.S. as a valuable partner in Iran’s “peaceful transition to a democratic future.” It directly names Pahlavi as the “leader of the national uprising.” Notably, this title gives Pahlavi the power to veto the institutions and selection processes in a transitional government—a highly undemocratic right.  

Despite United States Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth insisting that Iran is “not Iraq,” historians cannot help but to note several instances where U.S. intervention in the Middle East—and its preference for certain leaders—has led to decades of conflict, worsening human rights, and heightened instability. Furthermore, those familiar with Iran’s history note the Pahlavi dynasty’s tendency towards authoritarian rule, from banning the hijab (Kashf-e hijab) to the establishment of the SAVAK Secret Police that executed hundreds of political dissidents; an experience that sparked the 1979 Islamic Revolution and ultimately gave rise to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. 

While Reza Pahlavi cannot be held responsible for the autocratic nature of his family’s rule, his supporters, cult of personality movement, self-appointment as Iran’s transition leader, and his open disregard for federalism or language rights for Iran’s ethnic minorities indicate that his rule will likely mark a return to autocracy.

https://youtu.be/1Fs2xL_DmIA?si=g7cZ1rqZD4_dZGST

As pro-monarchists insist that Pahlavi is the democratic future of Iran and others in the diaspora scramble to find alternative viable leaders, Iran has strengthened hardline elements in its establishment, effectively narrowing political space and deeming any form of legitimate dissent or opposition as a security risk. It’s under these conditions that the new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, has been appointed; a move that Trump argues won’t “last long” without the U.S.’s approval.

Trump told ABC News, “We want to make sure that we don’t have to go back every 10 years, when you don’t have a president like me that’s not going to do it.”

With the war entering its sixth week, thousands of civilian lives—including those of Iranian schoolchildren—have been lost in Iran, Lebanon, and Israel. Now a regional and global crisis, the U.S.’s initial military attack proves that the collapse of a regime, especially when driven by foreign actors, does not automatically lead to democracy. Instead, it creates an intense power vacuum that exacerbates political unrest and silences the voices that demand a better future for ordinary people. 

So, where does this leave the Iranian people?

Some in the diaspora who thank the U.S. and Israel for their involvement—arguing that “nothing is scarier than the [Islamic] regime”—overlook just how frightening cycles of foreign intervention can be. And while both the U.S. and Israel justify their military actions as acts of solidarity with Iranian protestors, there are clear strategic interests in dismantling the Islamic regime that undermine civilian life in pursuit of geopolitical advantage in the region. 

The future of Iran remains uncertain. But what is clear is that democracy cannot be forged through violence, repression, or outside interference. Those desperate for regime change must remember that the way change is pursued is fundamental to lasting peace and stability.

---

Wardah Malik is a Toronto-based researcher, editor, and historian. She is the founder of Historyless Magazine, an independent publication covering global affairs and underreported political narratives. Her work spans media, human rights, and community-based research, including projects on press freedom, public health, and gender-based violence. Her research interests include governance, decolonizing language, and the preservation of underrepresented histories. Wardah holds an MPhil in World History from the University of Cambridge.

---

Reckoning with Violence from Safety

by Emerson Prentice for The 44 North, Contributing Writer - Politics

A Map of the Middle East with a pin on Iran

"News has seeped into frequented apps like TikTok and Instagram. The war has become inescapable while remaining unreachable. And, like all global citizens, we’re asked to take a stance. Gen Z is dealing with a strange alternate reality of wartime—we’re deeply aware of what is happening because of its prevalence on our devices, but we’re also unbelievably removed from it." 

From here, we may be safe. 

Despite threats of potential drone warfare in California and rising gas prices, my college campus and the college campuses of America are not warzones—they’ve remained relatively insulated. 

Biking on paved paths, business seems to be running as usual, never mind the air raids that began on Feb. 28 in the Middle East. Classes are still on, finals abound. Any real threat of violence a student feels on campus is most likely an inflated one. This is all true from where I stand in Palo Alto. 

For schools in the Middle East, for one girls’ elementary school in particular, safety isn’t guaranteed. Desks proved to be no match for bombs.

American college students are utterly protected from this type of violence by nature. Some students do come to American universities from countries riddled with warfare. For domestic students, though, we cannot reckon with the unimaginable because we cannot reckon with what we will never hear, smell, or feel. The violence is all painfully distant, truly unknowable.

And at the same time, our generation sees violence more than any generation has before because of the rise of technology. In many ways, we are far more aware of war than those before us. As the conflict in the Middle East has pushed on for weeks, our eyes are glued to our screens, and our screens are filled with carnage. It creates an unsettling juxtaposition between the lives of students in America and the lives of students on battlefields. 

News has seeped into frequented apps like TikTok and Instagram. The war has become inescapable while remaining unreachable. And, like all global citizens, we’re asked to take a stance. Gen Z is dealing with a strange alternate reality of wartime—we’re deeply aware of what is happening because of its prevalence on our devices, but we’re also unbelievably removed from it. 

So how does our generation deal with it? What is the rational response to what you know is distant injustice?

College campuses have seen protests about this conflict and others. Students circulate Instagram infographics with percentages and standalone quotes to convey lives lost. We hold fleeting, often unserious conversations about how “Iran is going to bomb us.” These are in many ways ill-informed and shallow, but their existence and prevalence assure that the conflict remains in the cultural conversation. Without the posts and posters, how would our generation even know it was happening? Wouldn’t our lives feel untouched?  

College administrations, adults, and professors have a profound and accurate sense that youth cannot grasp what is happening in the Middle East and in most global conflicts. Older generations scoff that students are chanting slogans we cannot understand. 

Truthfully, as we are attempting to reckon with what is happening in relation to our unaffected lives, we’re untangling what these conflicts mean in a wider historical sense. Without the necessary background knowledge, is it our responsibility to stay quiet? Or are we still obligated to speak up no matter how much we know? 

The easiest and safest answer to these questions for bustling college students is, of course, the most common response from anyone—silence and ignorance. Our focus should by definition be our education during our time on campus. It’s exceedingly easy to write over any other civic responsibilities with heavy courseloads, but also somewhat essential.  

The same importance of education could be said for the students of the bombed elementary school in Iran—the conflict was not something the young girls should have felt concerned with, and yet violence for them was shockingly inseparable from their place of schooling. They did not have the privilege to choose to escape it, while American students do. So what are American students meant to do with that privilege? 

Notably, this ease of ignorance is not the same for all university students. Some have families that are directly impacted by this violence. Some have homes they do not know the stability or existence of anymore. 

It’s a blessing to not have to reckon with war—it’s an underappreciated privilege my generation was born with. But it creates a complex situation for us as students. One of the most popular majors at my university is international relations, and political science majors graduate from colleges across the country every year. For these students in particular, forming a complex and deep understanding of war is imperative. Students interested in fields like engineering or computer science may also go on to work at companies like Palantir, which are deeply implicated in war. 

An education on a safe campus can and should never be fully separated from an understanding of war. 

These complex questions of what Gen Z should be doing during a war that isn’t theirs are ones the students of America are asking themselves every day—and rightfully so. They’re important questions to help us develop as global citizens and community members, to deepen our understanding of what we owe each other. 

Even more, questioning is a quintessential aspect of maturing as a young person—it’s how we grapple with the world we were thrown into. 

The truth is, we simply don’t have the answers to these questions. However, we can still respond. As the youth of America, we certainly have the courage, tenacity, and time to continue struggling through the work of questioning. This work, especially in colleges and universities, is precisely what we have to offer right now. And as we’ve seen in movements across U.S. campuses, youth voices—fully informed or not—are undeniably catalysts for change.

---

Emerson Prentice is a Freshman at Stanford studying Anthropology. At school, she is the Campus Life desk editor for the Stanford Daily, a DJ for the campus radio station KZSU, and an associate producer for the Stanford Storytelling Project’s award-winning podcast, “State of the Human.” For fun, Emerson also loves to run, cook, and birdwatch!

---