The second Apollo 11's crew set foot on the lunar surface back in 1969, the Moon suddenly felt a lot closer. It wasn't just some distant light in the sky anymore-it was a place we'd actually been. Boldly. Briefly. Just once.

For the next fifty years, though, silence. After Apollo 17 rolled to a stop in 1972, no one walked on the Moon again. That long wait is finally coming to an end.

We're not just going back for a quick visit this time. We're returning with bigger goals, more players at the table, and a real plan to stay.

From Apollo to Artemis

Those original Apollo landings were once the highest point of space race. Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin took the first step, and later crews-like Harrison Schmitt and Gene Cernan on Apollo 17. Then the program ended, priorities shifted, and the Moon became a memory instead of a destination.

But things have changed. In April 2026, NASA's Artemis II mission made history. Four astronauts-Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch, and Jeremy Hansen-climbed aboard the Orion spacecraft and flew around the Moon. It was the first time humans had gone that far from Earth since 1972. They splashed down safely ten days later. It wasn't a landing, but it was the crucial preparation.

Next up: Artemis III

If everything stays on track, we could see footprint back on the lunar surface by 2027 or 2028. This time, astronauts will land near the south pole, where there's water ice tucked away in shadowed craters, potential fuel and drinking water for future missions.

It's Not Just NASA Anymore

The new space race looks very different. China is moving fast, aiming for its own moon landing around 2030. Their Chang'e 7 mission, launching later this year, will put a rover and even a little hopper on the south pole.

Private companies are in the competition too. SpaceX's Starship, Blue Origin, and others are building the systems that will actually get people down to the surface. Smaller company like Intuitive Machines and Astrobotic have already started dropping robotic missions on the Moon through NASA's commercial program. The cost of reaching the Moon is dropping, and that changes everything.

The difference this time, the goal isn't for a competition nor a quick trip. It's building a real, small bases, and research labs. Maybe even the first humans born off Earth in the coming decades.

The Moon has been waiting a long time. Now we're finally ready to go back-not as tourists, but as people planning to stick around.

The silence is ending. The next chapter is just beginning.

Carl is a passionate student leader, journalist, and tech enthusiast from the Philippines. Through various leadership roles, and journalism involvement he have developed strong skills in communication, teamwork, discipline, and responsibility.

Last week, I came across a post that claimed that leaders like Vladimir Putin or Ayatollah Ali Khamenei are only admired and trusted by the people because they are “Anti-West”. But that kind of struck my mind and forced me to observe this statement more deeply.

“Are leaders like them really Anti-West, or just defenders of their sovereignty?”

“The term ‘Anti-West’ is often used as a catch-all label, without clarifying whether it refers to ideology, policy disagreement, or geopolitical resistance.”

If you look at the situation a little more keenly, you’d notice that the term “Anti-West” is rather lame and pointless when most Asian or African leaders have never actually started anything against the western culture, religion, or people, and for some, not even against Western governments themselves. They have only defended themselves or stood against the oppression and actions of Western leaders and governments.

Over the past century, nations all over the world, especially in Asia and Africa, have had their rights violated by ideologies imposed by Western leaders and governments. Yet, they always stood against the leaders and the oppression, not against Western culture, religion, or ordinary people.

Now you might think: these were not invasions but interventions to prevent massacres. But are we even listening to ourselves when we say this?

Here’s a quick look at some invasions and interventions that occurred in the last few decades:

IRAQ WAR (2003–2011)

Led by the United States and its allies, it was a war imposed after claims that Iraq was building Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) that posed a major threat to global security. So, in order to prevent mass destruction, Western leaders did what they thought was right, or at least justified. Mass destruction itself.

Estimated deaths: 300,000 to 500,000 people, mostly civilians.

FRENCH COLONIZATION OF ALGERIA

BRITISH COLONIAL RULE IN INDIA

SUEZ CANAL CRISIS (1956)

The UK, France, and Israel invaded Egypt after Gamal Abdel Nasser nationalized the Suez Canal, which was completely justified under international law.

Estimated deaths: Around 1,000 civilians.

And many, many more across the world.

But most importantly, the recent situation we are witnessing:

THE IRAN–US–ISRAEL WAR:

On 28 February 2026, the United States and Israel launched surprise airstrikes on Iran, targeting Iranian nuclear facilities, military bases, air defenses, and senior government and military leadership, “allegedly” for security reasons. However, the attacks reportedly resulted in the deaths of approximately 1,700 civilians. After the attacks, Iran decided to retaliate.

And guess the explanation they have for it.

“THE THREAT OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS”

Even though Iran didn’t warn them about any attacks or specify their reasons for building their nuclear program, I mean what if it was for regional stability or maybe due to the threat they faced from the US?

If we put this all aside for a second and think hypothetically or fictitiously, what if any other nation in the world, like the Russians, Chinese or the Muslims or anyone in the world, tries to change the regime of any Western country (when the civilians are clearly opposing it), conducts interventions with their military, tries invading or successfully invades them? Then the people will most probably react to this, and so will their leaders, their government. So, in this situation, what would you call them? Anti-Russians? Anti-Chinese? Anti-Islamist (which most countries in the West are. Remember the ban on Hijab/Niqab in France)? No, you wouldn’t. Instead, you’d take a stand for them too, call them innocent, and lay down your support because they’re clearly just defending themselves.

The people or the leaders and governments in Asia or Africa do the same. Then why are they called Anti-West? Because they stand against oppression and defend their sovereignty?

Now, by saying all of this, I am not defending the leaders of Asia, Africa or others that are allegedly called Anti-West, but what I am willing to do here is to prove my point that none of them, or at least most of them, have ever done anything that would offend Western culture, religion, or people, and in some cases not even the government and leaders. But yes, they did defend themselves, their nation and their people, which is the main reason why they are respected around their region, not because they are ‘Anti-West.’

Subscribe

One of the best pieces was written by Cezka Dela Cruz, a student of literature and philosophy who got a bit lost and became an engineer, never stopped reading and writing though, and is now trying to reclaim that lost path towards becoming a writer that people read and draw inspiration from.

We conducted an interview with Cezka and here is how it went.

1- Why did you choose the painting Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan?

Ivan the Terrible and his Son Ivan is a painting I have old memories with. It was the abject regret, terror, and overall deeply human look painted onto the face of Ivan the Terrible that left a deep impression on me when I was in high school. I remember being awestruck by the thought that an artist would dare render this blood-stained sinner with compassion. It made me think that maybe I can be forgiven, if not so at least given sympathy. I don't recall doing anything particularly horrible or unforgivable, but I do remember being unable to shake that feeling of penitence. It wasn't enough to be a not-bad person, I had to repent for never being good enough. I still don't know where this came from. It was just...ingrained.

2- What is your most and least favorite part of creating something?

I really hate being a beginner at something. It sucks to suck at something, you know? I have trouble learning new things. Like drawing or playing an instrument. I get discouraged when I see the gap between my beginner level and the level at which I want to draw or play. But I'm just impatient, really. When I was younger I'd give up and never try again, but I've been doing better at keeping myself motivated.

Ego and delusion aren't inherently bad things, I think. You need an ego to create; you need the conviction that what you are making deserves a tangible existence. Delusion motivates me the most. It's that important choice between "I will write better" and "I write better". Even if it isn't true right now, it'll be true at some point as you chip away at mediocrity to level the foundations of mastery. In the process of creating, I try to block everything and everyone out. No influence, no noise- just, my own private World of Forms à la Plato. I delude myself that of this story I'm writing, nobody else in the world, in history, has ever written. I have to believe that I'm writing something worth reading to convince myself to finish it. Otherwise I grow ashamed and it just stays in my drafts. Even if the first draft is very rough, what's important is that the text exists. I then edit it properly after my ego and delusion wears off.

3- Who is your inspiration in literature and what inspires you about them?

I love reading and writing short stories; I love how they convey a whole world, whole characters, in this seemingly fluid yet heavily structured medium of writing. I was personally inspired and my skills were sharpened by a short-story writing lecture I attended in May. The lecture was led by the authors Heather Ann Pulido and Richard Giye. It was part of the Ped-Agan Writing Workshop, a yearly creative writing fellowship hosted by the local government. Sir Richard explained that the short story is typically meant to be read and digested in one sitting. This entailed a decisive and succinct characterization of the cast and setting, and required the ability to wrap every detail up to provide a satisfying conclusion by the end of one's pages. Ma'am Heather further discussed how essential symbolism and metaphor are to maximize the limited word and page count of a short story. She also talked about the use of contextualization, localization, and indigenization. These are tenets used in education for curriculum development, but are useful in creative writing; they help one write in "local color" (the common term). Their lecture taught me to be more careful about each word I place and made me consider creative sources that are closer to me and my lived experience as well as that of my community and locality.

4- Can you describe your writing process?

I usually start with a recurring thought or idea. When the tiny seed of a story idea takes root, I daydream or actually dream (in deep slumber) of it a few times before I find the first words to bring this idea onto the page. These first words are not so important- they can always be edited- what I need from them is the assurance that this idea will survive being said out loud. I never start writing with an outline or a plan, so it can be a hit or miss whether I finish a story or not. After some more rough paragraphs, I end up writing and rewriting this first draft until I reach that feeling of the story writing itself. Like I found a rhythm in the words that the story voluntarily wants to follow. It is at this point that the story becomes something that can be completed.

For the actual writing- the setting words on the page part- I begin with a vague idea of where I want to go (setting) and who I want to meet (characters). For example: "I want [ character 1 ] to reach [ place A ] while avoiding [ character 2 ] because of [ this major plot point ] that will lead to [ this major conflict ] which will then be resolved into [ this kind of ending. ]" Now I have to figure out how to get this character there, and how to convey what it is like to be in the place that appears so vividly in my imagination. I rely a lot on inference and plausibility. I consider the biases of the character, the environmental influences. I really like the hidden, unspoken parts of humanity, and enjoy leveraging these traits to incite a character to do this or that thing. My favorite literary device is Chekhov's gun. Besides the epic imagery of Chekhov literally holding a gun to the reader, I like loading each detail and building up various points in the foreground and background so they can be used as red herrings or essential plot devices for the big payoff by the end of the story.

A huge thanks to Cezka who not only wrote a thought provoking piece but also gave really interesting answers to our questions.

One of the winners of category “Ivan the terrible and his son Ivan” is Umbar Nadeem, an aspiring poet and writer who has been writing since childhood and uses her poetry as a way of self-expression. She often explores themes of identity, culture, injustice, and faith through her works.

We conducted an interview with her and this is how it went:

1- Why did you choose the painting Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan?

I chose the painting Ivan the Terrible and his son Ivan because when I saw it, I just felt like there was a lot of emotional context to it. I have seen this painting before, but I will be honest, I did not know the background story to it. So when I did more of my research, I realized how emotionally charged it truly was. When I read about the relationship between the father and his son, it really resonated with me and something in me just told me I needed to write a poem based on this piece.

2- What is your most and least favorite part of creating something?

This is honestly a tricky question for me because there are so many parts of creating that I love yet also hate. I have to say my least favorite part about creating something is the overthinking and self-doubt that comes with it. I feel like no matter the kind of artist one is, there will always be a sense of fear regarding the creation of a certain piece whether it be a painting or an article or poem. I think naturally as artists, we become our harshest critics and sometimes we overthink our every artistic move despite it being seen as beautiful by someone else. On the other hand, I think my favorite part of creating something would have to be the feeling of getting that first spark of a creative idea and wanting badly to put it into action. I love this moment because it is essentially the beginning of a creative process and with every idea, there is that desire to make it a reality.

3- Who is your inspiration in literature and what inspires you about them?

I love this question because I have to say, I have so many forms and sources of inspiration when it comes to my writing. In the sense of literature, I feel very inspired by many different writers and poets - some of which include Mahmoud Darwish, Nizar Qabbani, Sabahattin Ali and Franz Kafka. I have always been heavily inspired by revolutionary writers such as Darwish and Qabbani in particular because of the raw beauty of truth and emotion they depict in their writings in relation to their homelands. They have also inspired me to write my own poems for Palestine and to always highlight the importance of resistance. I also love Turkish authors such as Sabahattin Ali because they have a beautiful way with their words and can make me feel emotions I didn't even know existed. And reading Kafka over time has made me realize how much of myself I see in him and how deeply I can relate to his experiences of feeling insecure and unworthy. Other than my inspirations in literature, I also feel inspired to write when I hear music and listen to certain musical artists. For example, whenever I listen to Fairuz, I get a deep sense of longing to write about my grief and the things or people I have lost. Other times, when I hear a song by Aroof Aftab, I want to write about a warm sunny day in my homeland of Pakistan. Or if I listen to Turkish artist Sezen Aksu, I am immediately immersed in her land of sorrow and passion and romance and could write lovesick poems for days. So in hindsight, I think it really all depends on the circumstance a person is creating or the kind of inspiration they are taking from.

4- Can you describe your writing process?

My writing process is not really a usual one - it's honestly very all over the place and typically depends on how I am feeling or what it is that I am writing about. Generally speaking, it looks a lot like me coming up with an idea or a subject to write about, then jotting it down in my notes and promising myself I will come back to it later. But it's actually quite funny because most of the time, I forget to even come back to the idea. So recently, I started taking more initiative to write my ideas down in a physical journal and even draft them out on paper. This way, I feel like I am getting more done and having the physical writing process in front of me also makes me feel more accomplished. After drafting out my idea, I like to transfer my thoughts to an online document and then I basically just make edits to my writing as I go. When it comes to writing poetry in particular, I usually don't like to edit too much simply because I believe that poems should be kept in their most raw, vulnerable state. I feel like poetry reads best this way - when it looks messy and doesn't look too polished. For me, a poem can be written very quickly -- if I have even an inkling of an idea, I just start writing out my feelings and the lines come to me just like that. But if I am writing a short story or article, it definitely takes more time and effort and I have to really get myself to write. But overall, I think what makes one's writing process and flow of creativity special is how it serves the artist and understanding what works best for them.

A huge thank you to Umbar who not only presented an amazing piece but also gave such interesting answers to our questions.

Imagine a child, living in another country. Life was steady. There was laughter, joy, happiness, and the comfort of knowing what the next day would bring. But then, without warning, things change. Rules tighten, there are soldiers in the streets, and the life you built brick by brick begins to crumble. Although this scenario feels distant to some, it's reality for many immigrant families around the globe. As geopolitical tensions rise and policies grow more restrictive, entire communities are left navigating uncertainty and fear; waiting in dread for what comes next. However, among those the majority of affected are young immigrants, who must navigate these sudden changes along with their own personal battles of finding their identity in a world full of twists and turns. Despite the rising conflicts against systematic borders and discrimination, communities have the ability to respond in unity, empathy, and collective action

For immigrant children, geopolitical tensions are not irrelevant headlines- they are lived realities that shape their everyday lives. These challenges are especially visible in the way conflict and displacement disrupt access to education and stability. As reported by UNHCR, the UN Refugee Agency, in their latest article, 61% of refugee children are able to attend primary school, compared to 91% of children worldwide. This large gap accentuates how geological conflicts and migration directly limits opportunities for young immigrants. Education is a huge advantage in life, a key source of stability. Without it, our generation's future is left vulnerable to the world outside of refugee camps. On the occasions young immigrants are forced to sacrifice school or struggle to access it, they’re not only losing education, but the desperate need for normalcy during already unstable times. In addition to emotional barriers, the emotional and psychological impact further emphasizes their vulnerability. In the article Understanding Mental Health in Immigrant Teens (Ages 13-18) from 2000 to 2024, the author reports, “These teenagers typically face unique challenges, such as adapting to new countries, languages, and social systems, which can exacerbate mental health difficulties…can lead to long-term mental health disorders that impact not only their personal development but also their potential contributions to society” In other words, these challenges have the ability to worsen young immigrants’ mental health and, in the event that it’s left unaddressed, may have lasting effects on their development and future contributions to society. These mental health challenges are often caused by traumatic experiences (displacement, family separation, stress of adapting to a new environment, etc.). At a stage where identity as well as self worth are still developing, these pressures will deeply affect how young immigrants view themselves and their place in the world. Without proper support, these emotional struggles have the ability to maintain long term effects on their development and well-being.

Immigrant youth not only face internal struggles, but also encounter systematic barriers that make it difficult to fully adapt and fit into their new environments. As addressed by Thiago Pasin in his article The language barrier: Daily Struggles of an Immigrant in Science, “The language barrier can impact immigrants' confidence in our abilities… afraid of being misunderstood or judged for my accent or grammar mistakes…” This matters due to the fact that communication skills are vital to survive. Because young immigrants are scared to use their voice or advocate for themselves, they’re unable to fit in, expand their learning horizons, etc. Language differences will create an immediate divide, setting immigrant students apart from others. Beyond language, many young immigrants experience discrimination and xenophobia (dislike towards foreigners and immigrants), which will lead to isolation and exclusion. As supported by Journal of Adolescent Health, “immigrant youth are more likely to experience bullying victimization than native-born youth… more likely to report interpersonal, socioemotional, health, and substance use problems.” This statistic clearly demonstrates that when shown hate from peers, young immigrants are impacted negatively, dealing with their emotions alone, leaving them vulnerable. This is important because even kids who aren’t immigrants have a chance of experiencing this- how are their feelings any different than young immigrants? In many cases, fear surrounding immigration status adds another layer of stress as families may worry about deportation or legal instability. These external pressures limit access to essential needs such as education, healthcare, stability, jobs, or community support. To conclude, immigrant youth are not only adapting to a new culture, but they’re also navigating environments that may not fully accept or support them, which impacts their ability to thrive.

Despite these challenges, communities have the power to create meaningful change through unity, empathy, and collective action. Schools and local organizations can play an important role by supporting inclusive environments where young immigrants can feel seen and supported. Some examples of these organizations are United We Dream, The Immigrant Youth Justice League, and more local organizations are Logan Square Neighborhood Association and Oakland International High School, which model community school integration. As the article, How Educators Can Support Immigration and Immigrant Students, a key take away is “Welcoming and inclusive classrooms help all students thrive.” Programs that provide language assistance, mentorship, and mental health resources help bridge the gap between struggle and stability. Additionally, community-led initiatives and nonprofits can offer safe spaces and essential services to families navigating uncertainty. On a border level, advocacy for more equitable policies allows immigrant youth to be given equal opportunities to succeed. To sum it up, when communities come together to support one another, they not only address immediate needs, but also empower young immigrants to rebuild a sense of belonging and hope for the future.

The realities of young immigrants aren’t rare minorities or disturbances- they’re part of an ongoing global reality that continues to affect many children every day. Growing up in the middle of war, displacement, and uncertainty forces young immigrants to face conflicts head on that are far beyond their years. Limited access to education, emotional and psychological strain, language barriers, and discrimination all shape how they see themselves and their future. While many show incredible resilience, strength alone should not be what determines whether they succeed. Every child, regardless of who they are, where they come from- they all deserve the opportunity to feel safe.valued, and hopeful about what lies ahead.

From 1801 to 1812, Lord Elgin had workers take down over 75 meters of carved panels from the Parthenon , along with 15 stone blocks and a few statues from the roof ends - while The Hellenic Republic Of Greece was under Ottoman rule. These pieces weren’t meant to be split up; breaking them went against how they were built. Tools used included saws and iron bars that permanently damaged the structure. Many people called his extraction method ‘destructive’. Documents confirm that in 1809, a load of 12 wooden boxes sank near Kythera Island, sitting beneath seawater for nearly twenty-four months. Specialists say this led to more wearing down and discoloration. It is difficult to pretend these items were “protected” when instead they were slowly breaking due to the lack of care from the British side.

Later, The Hellenic Republic Of Greece gained independence in 1832 and has argued against their removal ever since. The British Museum purchased the sculptures in 1816 with permission of the Ottomans, yet the original firman document has never been located. According to The Hellenic Republic Of Greece, consent was never given. The idea that an occupying empire could legally sell another nation’s history is absurd when judged by today’s standards of cultural rights.

Furthermore, historical evidence provides the fact that the removal and handling of the Parthenon sculptures resulted in significant physical damage. During the extraction, marble blocks were cut apart with metal tools which left permanent marks and a structural loss on the Parthenon itself. The shipment accident in 1809, where crates sank close to Kythera and was underwater for two years, caused erosion and staining. Around the 1930s, aggressive cleaning methods in the British Museum using wire brushes had altered the original surface of the sculptures , scraping away ancient patina that held key archeological information. Later, the reports mysteriously vanished and were crudely covered up by the museum.The historian William St. Clair was initially told he couldn't see the papers due to supposed "security implications," a claim the museum later admitted was false. Although the United Kingdom has long argued that the statues were taken to ensure their safety, the documented history of damage contradicts that claim. Instead of the statues being protected, they suffered harm that would not have occurred in their original environment.

International frameworks strongly support restitution. The UNESCO 1970 Convention recognizes the right of states to reclaim cultural property removed in violation of national laws. Additionally, UNESCO’s Intergovernmental Committee has urged the United Kingdom multiple times to negotiate in good faith, including 2021 negotiations, when it was stated that the dispute “must be settled bilaterally.” The European Court of Human Rights has also acknowledged the centrality of cultural heritage to community identity. Beyond law, global opinion agrees: surveys show that at least 90 percent of Greek citizens and over half of British citizens support the return of the sculptures. Multiple countries and international bodies have expressed clear support for The Hellenic Republic Of Greece’s request. Over 30 nations have issued formal statements backing The Hellenic Republic Of Greece’s claim, including Italy, Cyprus, and numerous member states within the European Union and the UNESCO. Back in 2022, Italy gave back a piece of the Parthenon - proof that bringing parts together can actually happen. Groups including UNESCO keep urging talks, stressing the sculptures belong as one whole, not split across borders. This growing global support reflects a broader movement to correct past cultural wrongs and respect national heritage. The Hellenic Republic Of Greece has stated - it will not accept a loan, as that implies British ownership.

The Hellenic Republic Of Greece has also taken active steps showing readiness and capability to house the sculptures. The Acropolis Museum opened in 2009 at a cost of over €130 million, featuring a Parthenon Gallery designed with the same proportions and orientation as the original building. The remaining original sculptures in Athens are displayed alongside plaster casts of the pieces in London, clearly showing the gaps left by colonial extraction. Museum visitors can see these missing pieces, proving that their removal distorts history instead of preserving it.

Despite repeated proposals for long-term loans, joint exhibitions, cultural exchange programs, and shared research initiatives, the United Kingdom has rejected permanent reunification. Whenever short-term exhibits come up, Britain insists The Hellenic Republic Of Greece to recognize its so-called ‘ownership’, which has been called offensive and degrading.

The Parthenon statues are vital to Hellenic identity. These belong where they began. Taken away and harmed while held elsewhere, is still a painful reminder today, showing what happens when heritage is ripped from its roots. The Hellenic Republic Of Greece continues to push through talks instead of conflict. Getting these pieces back for good , means healing a wound left open by theft long ago. This shields cultural roots while pushing a worldwide benchmark for handling heritage right - though some nations hold back from taking back relics, The Hellenic Republic Of Greece’s team moves to revive its past, urging global backing for this push to keep cultures alive.