The film Moffie has started a campaign to bring awareness to homophobia in South Africa. They have a series on YouTube that has various videos of South African gay men recounting their experience with the word, moffie. The men are using this chance to reclaim the word but also acknowledge the pain they received from it. 

The film industry in South Africa is not as extensive as American cinema, but the stories they tell bring attention to the past and present of the country. The appeal of film is not high to South Africans, but the international appeal has made it apparent there is an audience for South Africa’s film industry. Some major films have been filmed in South Africa but were meant for the American audience. If the resources that came to South Africa were used improve the infrastructure of the film industry there, then the audience there would feel more inclined to support. 

Moffie is sparking needed attention to South Africa for the film industry to be taken seriously there. The primary problem that affects the industry is the fact the audience doesn’t feel the need to go to the theaters and watch. If more money in distribution and marketing were put towards the films created in South Africa, then it would have a better chance of reaching the people. Films like Moffie show that South Africa produces undeniable talent. If the proper actions aren’t taken to broaden the exposure of films that are made there, then the film industry will never reach its maximum potential.

“The subject matter did bother me at first,” he says from his home outside Cape Town, where he’s self-isolating under coronavirus lockdown. “It was my mum who actually said to me, ‘Why make another film about white men in apartheid South Africa?’ “

“But the challenge is to find the centre of it that resonates with you completely. And for me, that became not just about the character’s sexuality, but about the shame factor: the fact that under this regime, boys were sort of shamed into becoming a certain kind of man. Because we keep asking the question, especially in South Africa: where does our toxic masculinity come from? When I looked at it that way, when I sort of saw this as an exploration of our past that informs our present, I was more comfortable with it.”

“I know it’s a very triggering film – it had to be,” he admits. “We’ve had an overwhelming range of reactions to the film in South Africa: some from gay men who had been to the army and felt identified and recognised, some from men who don’t necessarily acknowledge the fact that they are still traumatized. One member of the press had a panic attack at a screening. These are common experiences, but they haven’t been widely addressed in South African culture.”

Though the film is set in the whites-only domain of the army, Hermanus doesn’t skimp on depicting anti-black violence: “It was a dangerous choice, I know, to have all of the black characters be physical objects, victimised on the sidelines. But that’s how it was: there’s a white gaze there, and we needed to see that.” He cites inspiration from the 2010 Abdellatif Kechiche historical drama Black Venus – which depicted the white objectification and abuse of black South African performer Saartjie Baartman, to divisive effect.

Hermanus is prepared for pushback on the point of view he’s taken, but doesn’t see South African cinema evolving via kid-glove treatment of its own ugly history. “The challenge in the South African film landscape right now is that it still seems to exist very much within racial boundaries: white money making nostalgia pieces for white people that are devoid of black people, and then you’ve got black filmmakers making romantic comedies and genre films about black lives,” 

The Controversy of the Iran Nuclear Deal
Under the Iran Nuclear deal, Iran is limited to 5,000 IR-1 enrichment machines, down from their original 20,000; the excess machines were to be dismantled and placed under the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) observance. For 15 years, the only enrichment facility allowed is at Natanz. Iran is only allowed to keep 300 kilograms of 3.67% enriched Uranium total in all forms.
All excess enriched Uranium was required to be sold, shipped abroad, or diluted to natural uranium levels. A whole host of other regulatory changes, restrictions, and plans for developing Iran’s nuclear capabilities are also included and can be seen in the table below.

The importance of the Iran nuclear deal is not left out of contemporary US politics; remaining outside of the JCPOA is an important platform in former President Donald Trump’s 2020 campaign, whereas his opponent President Joe Biden has affirmed the US’ reentry into the treaty upon his election.
The US’ reentry into the JCPOA means one thing: Iranian nuclear material refinement will continue. While Remaining outside of the JCPOA the United States can apply sanctions against Iran’s oil and banking sectors to hopefully reduce cashflow available for Iran’s infrastructure development. In Iran, President Hassan Rouhani stated in 2019 that Iran would resume high level enrichment of uranium if the rest of the P5 plus Germany could not protect them from US sanctions.

Russian and Chinese Support
Russian and Chinese influence over the JCPOA deal has allowed Iran to continue their nuclear program. A nuclear deal with Iran without Russia and China would not have been possible, as the two countries have supported Iran for years. China has invested heavily in the country as a part of the Belt and Road Initiative, and Russian arm sales and petroleum/natural gas buyouts have secured a stable income for Iranian energy. Supporting the Iranian economy allows continued enrichment and nuclear study.
Back in the news cycle once again, Iran was rocked by explosion after explosion in the month of July, one of these targeting the famous Natanz nuclear facility. Other explosions occurred at an ammunition dump, a power station in Isfahan, Tondgooyan petrochemical plant, and a gas storage tank complex near Mashad. Of uncertain origin, reports regarding the Natanz explosion from the Iranian government indicate sabotage.
Iran has blamed both Israel and the US, while an independent and unverifiable hacking group calling itself the Homeland Cheetahs has claimed responsibility for the attack.

Is There Historical Precedent?
The Homeland Cheetahs claim to be an Iranian dissident group, and their name is similar to groups linked with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s cyber force – Persian Cat and Charming Kitten.
It seems highly unrealistic the Natanz explosion was caused by such a hacking group, as it is unlikely physical damage could be caused through cyber means. In 2010, more than 15 nuclear facilities in Iran were targeted by a virus known as Stuxnet, a continuous replicating virus that targeted the Windows-based Siemens Step7 software utilized by the facilities. In total, more than 984 total uranium enriching centrifuges were destroyed, resulting in the loss of millions of dollars. The virus allowed the hackers to control what ever piece of machinery or system it had infected, and the centrifuges targeted were shaken apart.
Overall, the attack is estimated to have reduced efficiency by 30%. This is a direct example of physical damage resulting from a virus, but the damage was machine related. It is reported the Natanz attack was not machine related, and therefore is likely not the result of a virus or cyber-attack.

More likely, and reported by the Iranian government, is physical sabotage. The Hamshahri newspaper of Tehran wrote on 7 July “"the site is being constantly protected by machine guns and more powerful air defense systems such as the S-300 are stationed at sensitive places and near the borders, so an air strike on the site in Natanz is almost impossible." The Iranian government has so far corroborated the Hamshahri assessment, stating the attack occurred from within, as no exterior shrapnel from any rocket or bomb was recovered at the scene. Iran has so far refused to offer any more comment, preferring to wait for the investigation to be completed.
The New York Times reported the blast to have delayed Iran’s nuclear program for up to another two years, a considerable setback for the nation. The JCPOA comes to term fully in 2030, but several restrictions are reduced in 2025 to the point where Iran can easily recover from this incident. Iran could possibly develop a nuclear weapon within months of the JCPOA ending, and continued support from Russia and China can only work to further Iran improvements.

Is There Historical Precedent?
The Homeland Cheetahs claim to be an Iranian dissident group, and their name is similar to groups linked with the Iranian Revolutionary Guard’s cyber force – Persian Cat and Charming Kitten.
It seems highly unrealistic the Natanz explosion was caused by such a hacking group, as it is unlikely physical damage could be caused through cyber means. In 2010, more than 15 nuclear facilities in Iran were targeted by a virus known as Stuxnet, a continuous replicating virus that targeted the Windows-based Siemens Step7 software utilized by the facilities. In total, more than 984 total uranium enriching centrifuges were destroyed, resulting in the loss of millions of dollars. The virus allowed the hackers to control what ever piece of machinery or system it had infected, and the centrifuges targeted were shaken apart.
Overall, the attack is estimated to have reduced efficiency by 30%. This is a direct example of physical damage resulting from a virus, but the damage was machine related. It is reported the Natanz attack was not machine related, and therefore is likely not the result of a virus or cyber-attack.