Author: Devon Rudolph (Page 2 of 2)

Josephine Wender

10/15/25

BERLIN — After approximately an hour and a half of wandering the streets of Neukölln looking for anyone, anywhere willing to talk to us, Alex, my dejected classmate, and I head to “The Blue House,” owned by the non-profit Give Something Back to Berlin. Amid the chilly, misty fog – as the name suggests – a bright blue building emerges from the haze. Huddled around a small white table in The Blue House sit approximately fifteen people from all over the world, pouring tea into small ceramic cups and eating cherry tomatoes and blueberries from a white plastic bowl, all gathering to practice their English skills. Today, a Japanese film crew is there to film the evening’s programs. 

Yara is from Russia, we learn. She left Russia at the beginning of the Ukraine War in order to escape the inevitability of her husband’s conscription. Her feelings about Germany are complicated, she explains. Berlin is more accepting than the smaller city of Hannover, but she still cannot find a job here. She likes German food, but her Ukrainian friends don’t. German apartments are weird, she says, because they come completely unfurnished, not even with lightbulbs in the sockets. 

Sam is from Syria. He has been attending these English language table events for eight years and recently finished his linguistics PhD program in the UK. This is more than just a way to polish language skills, he asserts to newcomers. This is a way to meet and connect with an international community open to talking about the pains and joys of their everyday lives, forming a family. “There were even twenty students from the U.S. in a journalism program who visited a few years ago,” he exclaims to the film crew. As our class trip has been active for many years, we have a pretty good idea who those students could have been. We keep that to ourselves. 

Najib is from Afghanistan. He has been in Germany for three years, prior to which he worked in the Afghan foreign ministry. He got to travel a lot in his old life, he muses with a smile. While working as a diplomat, he was able to visit Japan, India, Pakistan, China, and several countries in Africa. It is clear he misses the job. He is currently in the process of writing a book about Afghan diplomacy and how important it is for young people to learn about foreign affairs. He promises he will send it to me as soon as it is finished and translated into English. His kids aren’t with him and, despite his extensive experience and impressive resume, cannot get a job in Germany. So here he is, practicing his English and German in the hope that this can change. Still, he explains to me, there are positives and negatives to any country. 

These events are weekly, with new groups of people descending upon The Blue House every seven days. At tonight’s language table sat Yara, Sam, and Najib. Chance would say that there is no reason these three would ever interact, yet alone share chuckles at the bureaucratic inefficacy of the German refugee system and bond over their shared love of Turkish kebabs. Still, tonight, here they sat, kindly sharing their stories with us and each other and therefore inducting Alex and me into this new family.

By: Amna Cesic

10/15/25

BERLIN — Today I wandered through the Sonnenallee, a stretch of Berlin located in the Neukölln district. The street is commonly referred to as “Arab Street,” but I quickly realized that it is so much more than that. It is layered with identities. Palestinian, Syrian, Afghan, and countless other flags line the street, blanketing the city in black, green, red, and white. The people, constantly on the move, enter and exit stores with a familiarity and ease that made me feel instantly comfortable.

The air hums with languages that don’t quite blend together, yet somehow coexist. Arabic, Dari, and even Farsi text cover the signs of grocery stores, restaurants, and bakeries, which all smell faintly of pistachios and cinnamon.

Drawn by the aromas, my classmate and I quickly ducked into a small pastry shop at the center of the street. The man behind the counter smiled knowingly as I ordered two pieces of baklava covered in chocolate and pistachios. It tasted like the desserts I always eat at home, a unique connection I realized I had with people in a country I had never been to before. Around us, people chatted in German and Arabic, creating a sound that was distinctly Berlin but undeniably foreign too. I thought about how food has the power to dissolve borders, offering community among all those who share it. In that moment, I realized that something as simple as a dessert could bridge the distance between cultures more effectively than any politician ever could.

We took a break from food and stopped at Refuge Worldwide, a community radio station tucked between cafés and grocery stores. We met a woman who worked there, someone involved in amplifying refugee voices through sound. She handed us her contact information, and it felt like being handed an opportunity. Her willingness to speak with us was a reminder of how dedicated many people are to supporting and uplifting refugee communities.

Later in the afternoon, we stopped for lunch at a traditional German restaurant. I ordered veal schnitzel and fries. It was a simple dish, but somehow it felt symbolic of much more. Eating something so German after a morning immersed in a predominantly refugee neighborhood highlighted how cultures intertwine and overlap, creating spaces that are unique.

The day concluded with a phone interview with an Afghan woman now living in Chicago. Her voice was remarkably strong and determined. She spoke about the refugee process and the uncertainty she struggled with the most. “You never really stop being a refugee,” she said.

Her words lingered long after our conversation ended. I thought of the Afghans and refugees I’d seen today, gathered around each other laughing. Berlin seems like a place for new communities to form and for refugees to have a voice. The city understands what it means to rebuild, which might be why so many are drawn to its streets.

This documentary was an extremely powerful film. From a psychological standpoint, there are so many questions that seem unanswerable regarding the responsibility of a genocide on this scale. I am someone who tends to lean towards the side of forgiveness when it comes to judgement, but this film exposed me to true psychopathic people. The quote that evil is the absence of empathy struck a chord, and I think that is the most basic descriptor. It is understandable to feel remorse for some characters on trial considering the guilt they felt afterwards, but those who maintained their beliefs that Jews were below human categorization are absolutely impossible to justify. I was most shocked by the rhetoric from these apathetic people, believing that Germany would actually someday come to honor their legacy and history of the Nazis. My belief is that dignity is an integral aspect of the human experience. Everyone involved had to find some way to justify their behaviors, either by making excuses or standing by their initial beliefs.

As I am currently taking the Constitutional Interpretation course, I appreciated some of the measures taken to create precedence for a court across nations trying defendants for crimes against humanity. Impartiality in the structure of the case, even for those having committed the most horrific crimes, is absolutely necessary to uphold democracy. Considering nothing like the Nuremberg Trials had ever happened in the history of humanity, I appreciated the legality the trial upheld, even if politics influenced every aspect of its makeup. 

One aspect of the trial that I feel relates integrally to the field of journalism is the connection to humanity. Witnesses work in a trial the same way that human testimony works in a long form piece, they give meaning to the numbers and documents. This was a thought expressed in the film, as simply reading statements and clarifying facts of the case are unimportant if the judges don’t understand the gravity of the situation for individuals suffering. The strongest cases appeal to the human experience as well as the level of the atrocity. This also seems to be a key difference between short-form and long-form journalism. Short-form journalism is important to share facts with the public as they become available, but the deepest reader impact will be from pieces that go behind the scenes and talk with those affected, factoring in the information shared from short form reporting. 

One last thought about this film was the strength of the short film played at the court recorded as concentration camps were being liberated. This part of the movie was truly hard to watch. Seeing the manner in which people were being handled, the state of their body in starvation, moments like this make clear that words can only do so much, and sometimes it is only through being able to see the event will the gravity of the situation sink in. 

For my reporting in Berlin, I plan to continue my investigation into the rise of the AfD party. 

Thus far, I have been able to interview a number of sources who have discussed the background narrative around the far-right rise across Europe and its relation to issues involving migration. I spoke with one former State Department employee who has been a really great source, and is able to deeply discuss how immigration across Europe has turned citizens towards far-right movements. He talked about Russia’s involvement in the regional wars that cause instability in countries, leading to mass migration and weakening the democracies in surrounding countries. This particular narrative seems extremely relevant, and a topic I hope to make an integral part of my background story. 

Another source that I have spoken to here in the German department has been very helpful in explaining some of the causes of this shift right in Germany. This professor has discussed how the effects of the east/west Germany split and reconnection after the wall fell has left lingering effects. He talked about the idea of guilt and shame, and how eastern Germans feel that their views went unheard for so long, and now the AfD party is listening. 

My goal in Germany is to find a person who embodies this narrative. I hope to find someone who has moved towards support of the AfD party in the last decade and hear their story. I feel I have enough sources to feel confident about having a complete background narrative by the end of this semester, and finding this source who is actually an AfD supporter will be my bigger challenge. Alternatively, I could also see a story that features a German resident who strongly opposes the AfD party, and sees others close to them move further to the right. In this case, it would be a little more secondary, but I can also see this angle as a way to incorporate more stories about the immigrants coming to Germany and the support this person wants to bring to them. 

In order to find some of these sources, I am beginning to reach out to connections my current sources have given me. I know that I will be able to speak to the daughter of one of my sources who is currently studying at the University of Berlin. Also, the German professor said he would be able to send my information to some of his friends living in Berlin, so I am hopeful to get a few more interviews that way. Another option that I am considering is to reach out to school groups at, for instance, the University of Berlin that are in support of the AfD party. As a fellow student, I might be more likely to be able to interview them. Finally, I can see myself meeting everyday residents in Berlin and asking questions that way to understand the perspective on the streets. 

Questions for the AfD representative:

• Why do you believe so many Germans are resonating with the values of the AfD?
• Why are immigration policies at the center of your party’s platform?
• What would you tell a prospective refugee to whom you have just denied entry into your country?

Starting at the beginning of open source intelligence in history, I can understand why its resurgence in the digital age is so popular. Before the advent of the internet, open sourcing was more closely tied with the “librarian” image, but today it has become an integral aspect of information gathering for stories of high levels of risk. Watching the methods used by Bellingcat, it is clear that OSINT has a real place in the ecosystem of news today, and I imagine will only continue to gain popularity as deepfake videos and other AI created content begins circulating. 

The most central value for Bellingcat and other similar organizations is the meticulousness with which they find their information and the degree of transparency they are able to present. One problem in society today is the distrust towards mainstream media. Citing sources, linking videos, re-creating scenes using mapping software are all methods that yield high legitimacy perceptions for viewers. Although this documentation of history is not appreciated as widely today as it deserves, I can only hope that in the future the atrocities covered are given justice in the history books, and it is projects like these that make that possible. 

A few things that stood out to me in the readings for this week was the data available for those willing to seek it. Hearing about the documents posted on Chinese websites citing laws that allowed the government to create re-education camps was truly shocking. In other oppressive regimes like Russia, their strategy has been to declare reports of [insert unjust claim] a complete fabrication by western media sources. I was actually surprised that China was attempting to rectify their actions through citing laws that would allow them to carry out this action, and that this information was publicly available. This served as an example for me to see how oppressive regimes can be called out by citizens with enough persistence. 

Another interesting aspect of OSINT from the sources was the reach of this method into “black box” areas. The report by the listening post about the Sanaya prison that was recreated through interviews without a single photograph or video for reference is investigative journalism at its finest. This group was reporting about something entirely unknown, with every effort made to maintain privacy. 

Though the OSINT methods alone are impressive, I think they are most effective when combined with more standard journalistic practices. Rebuilding an event or scene is only emotionally capturing when it is coupled with interviews, pictures, or video. It is the personal narrative that was so strong in the Human Rights Watch piece that gives meaning to their open source intelligence gathering, 

Lastly, it is hard to read about the Trump administration’s decisions to cut funding to projects like the Yale Humanitarian Lab and feel confident in the direction our country is headed. The Financial Times’ story about tech giants and governments’ relationship further illustrates dangers facing the US and Europe as democratic values are eroded.

When understanding this situation in Syria over the past decade and a half is taken in full, it becomes apparent that those who faced persecution have not stopped struggling. Putting the readings and video from this week in chronological order, Syrians first lived through a civil war, were terrorized by ISIS, lived in poorly accommodating refugee camps for those who escaped, looked for asylum, and now face pressure to return to an insatiable regime. 

The Beekeeper of Sinjar was one of the most horrifying and detailed accounts of a mass tragedy I have ever read. It is one thing to learn about the holocaust in history books, but to know that these stories happened in my lifetime was truly saddening. Reading the stories of so many women who were forced into abusive situations and the people who helped them, I question our own morality today in the comforts of a (relatively) stable democracy and society. I understand that policy-makers must make decisions in the best interest of their constituents, however I find it hard to believe that someone could read this book and not want to offer the protections of their country. Perhaps it is my optimism that thinks this, but I believe that if those who held hostility towards Syrian refugees would read this book, the xenophobia would begin to dissipate. The personal narrative through which this story is told allows Mikhail to cover atrocities in a way that keeps the reader connected to the characters, and root for the protagonists risking their lives. 

The video we watched of the refugee camps was also disheartening. Without other options, refugees were living without sufficient water, food, or medical care. It was especially sad to see that the few mental health resources provided were not being used by most, even though it is undoubtedly true that all refugees are still suffering from trauma. The reason for this, as was speculated, is that there is a stigma around seeking support for mental struggles. I can understand how families go through such terrible experiences, knowing that others of their same community face the same problems, and do not believe themselves to be harmed much worse than their neighbors, and decide not to ask for help. The fact that this type of suffering has been almost normalized for this community is unacceptable.

Moving forward to this year, it seems as though Germany and other European countries have begun retreating into their hole of xenophobia again, with the struggles of Syrians being many years ago. The idea of the government paying migrants to leave and go back to Syria certainly sends the message that they are not wanted. I find the article discussing the ideas that now there are different categories for Syrian refugees, with “good” Syrians being doctors who are necessary to their welfare, while “bad” Syrians do not hold high-paying jobs and should return. I find this rhetoric to be entirely hypocritical, and almost aiding in the brain-drain of the country.

The rhetoric from the AfV party and the Chancellor Fredrick Mertz is part of a larger trend worldwide towards far-right anti-immigration sentiments. When reading about the methods for deterring refugees from entering Germany, I was struck by the similarities between their method and the policies in the US; offering money to those who are deported, a focus on criminality in the selection process for deportations, and a rollback of refugee initiatives. One quote that struck me from the Reuters article was from the chief of staff to Mertz: “As long as we have irregular and illegal migration to Germany, we simply cannot implement voluntary admission programs.” I find this statement highly concerning. The idea that refugee policies wouldn’t be reinstated until illegal immigration falls to zero is not only unrealistic, but is very clearly a false rationalization of their anti-immigration policies to avoid responsibility for refugees. 

Negative consequences of changes in immigration and refugee policies are clearly seen in the Pakistan guesthouse, holding Afghan women initially promised asylum. The women cannot envision a life back in Afghanistan, but fear they may be returned if Germany continues closing doors for refugees. I find the arguments given by the AfV party for anti-immigration policies completely unconvincing when set in contrast with the situation of these women. The idea that Germany must shut its doors to women fearing prosecution because the country has reached “capacity” for refugees is hard to believe. Especially when analyzing the attack on Church asylums, a space able and willing to house refugees, the government’s claim appears completely unsubstantiated. 

Reading the introduction to the investigation pieces on the Pentagon records, a set of clear and concise facts are presented. As a student of journalism, however, I know the process to get to the point where an author can make those claims is incredibly difficult and lengthy. The authority the author of the piece claims is so strong because they have done their due diligence on the story so thoroughly there can be no question of the truth. Writing with full certainty is hard to find in some shorter form news pieces, as they generally discuss the “what” and not always can determine the “why” or the “how.” 

Additionally, reading this series I felt reassured that the way in which our country, as well as other struggling democracies, will eventually come back together must be through a strong journalistic backdrop. As these articles helped uncover government secrets many would have regarded as untouchable, it is clear that this type of reporting holds governments to a level of accountability that is not otherwise possible. The depth into which this investigation reaches is hard to do in a way that keeps the reader convinced of both its veracity and the author’s authority. As a reader, I can understand how dropping in pieces of information, like the number of interviews the Times conducted or links to official government documents, serves to strengthen the impact of the story.

The readings from this week really showed me how much I don’t know about the war in Ukraine. Firstly, involving the political situation for refugees in Europe and the US, I understand the tightrope that nations walk by offering wide-ranging support for Ukrainians. It is a situation where all countries want to prioritize their own citizens, however if no country provided refugee support there would be a far greater humanitarian crisis. This seems to be a common moral issue for the leaders of many countries, as their constituents undoubtedly have different views on the responsibilities of their country to help non-citizens. Stemming from this debate, the question of responsibility remains unanswered, as solutions of immigration crisis are not quite so clear. 

From the point of view of the Christian group that traveled to Ukraine, the answer is far more simple: all countries should support Ukraine against the unjust aggressor. I found the documentary to be very well-made, and the fact that the main characters were Christians made the explanation around the religious “persecution” from the Ukrainian government far clearer. The narrative served, in my mind, as a strong example of having the right person tell the story. The main character was devoted to the Christian cause, and I found greater authority in their telling due to their group affiliation. Connections as such are important to utilize when selecting characters for our own stories in this class. 

Regarding the educational and career opportunities in Ukraine, I was interested in doing more research into a potential “brain-drain” happening as the war continues. This could be an idea for the first news story, and I would look to talk with experts to see if the final destination of the intellect may be Germany. I am also very interested in understanding the parallels between right-wing extremism in Europe and in the US. Some of the anti-immigration sentiments expressed in Germany with attacks on Ukrainians is highly similar to America’s own crackdown on illegal immigrants. Specifically, this new idea of moving immigrants to other countries upon entry seems to be a new worldwide development. 

I do not believe that the war between Russia and Ukraine will be the last. The reporting regarding technologies used in this war was, in my mind, very telling about what the future of conflict could look like. I am also very interested in digging deeper into this topic of warfare, especially in how governments are changing their defense departments to adapt as technology improves. European countries are witnessing a new style of war play out, and, in my opinion, should be making improvements now to maintain defense units that truly are capable of defense. While the effort of local citizens in Ukraine fighting for their country by bringing down Russian drones is beyond admirable, I doubt other countries will want to plan for this as their solution to drone attacks.

The readings for this week paint a very grim picture of the current state of our journalistic freedoms at this moment in time. The thought that a government can act as the media’s de facto editor-in-chief is a problem for the future of journalism and the democratic status of our country. At the core of this issue as stated in the articles, I believe, is that “shared facts,” truths universally believed by citizens, are being deteriorated. The rhetoric from Trump describes half of our society as puppets, doomed to the evil matrix created by mainstream media, while his followers are fighting this corrupt “wokeism.” 

The division in beliefs is therefore being further polarized by Trump’s attacks on media organizations. Many of our readings addressed Trump’s actions against PBS and NPR, highlighting the unprecedented power the President is using to control and censor journalism. The articles addressed the far-reaching impacts of these types of federal action, affecting news organizations across the country. While self-censorship is undoubtedly a major issue at play, I also believe that a subconscious type of individual censorship could become a problem. In news organizations controlled by the billionaires and Trumpies, reporters could be dissuaded from covering topics they believe will not be published or will not accurately reflect their views. I see this as a major concern, as reporters and organizations run the risk of tolerating this journalistically limiting trickle down. 

Another interesting aspect of Trump’s actions is the phrasing of his justification. In the official statement released by the White House regarding the government funding for news organizations, “bias” is the sole reason stated for the cuts. If a political spectrum truly does exist, how could we as a society possibly determine an unbiased viewpoint on any issue? Is the middle most belief the most unbiased? I find this reasoning entirely unacceptable, as the administration does not attempt to explain what unbiased reporting is, and their actions merely indicate that journalism supporting the President will be supported. 

Lastly, I do think the issue of publishing information about immigration raids is an interesting topic, as I can see a real debate with valid arguments on both sides of the issue. As a writer for the Daily Princetonian, I would be hesitant to write an article breaking the news that our star quarterback has a secret knee injury hours before a game. My organization is not beholden to the University in any way, yet I still have a vested interest in Princeton. Regardless of reporters’ individual beliefs on the raids, we still have a vested interest in democracy and allowing its continuation. This issue becomes more complicated when the realities of the situation in our country are factored into the situation, such as the mishaps with wrongful deportations. At the core, though, I would argue that allowing other situations to cause a change in reporting standards is signaling that the country’s democracy has deteriorated. 

I chose an article from Fox News for my additional piece to discuss the differences in shared facts: https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/bozell-graham-trump-successfully-defunds-npr-pbs-getting-started