In 2010, Indian filmmaker Neeraj Ghaywan made a striking debut at Cannes with Masaan - a poignant tale of love, loss, and the oppressive grip of the caste system, set against the holy city of Varanasi.
Their prognostications on the fate of white farmers got nearly as much screen time as South Africa's democratically elected president, who largely restricted himself to quiet, short interventions.But Ramaphosa will likely be happy with that. The golfers, along with his white agriculture minister, himself from an opposition party which is part of the national unity government, were there, at least in part, as a shield - a kind of diplomatic golden dome if you will, and it worked.
Trump returned repeatedly to the issue of the plight of the farmers – dozens of whom he has welcomed into the US as refugees. But President Ramaphosa wasn't biting and the provocations were largely left to blow in the breeze.At one point, he referred to the golfers and an Afrikaner billionaire who had joined his delegation, telling Trump: "If there was Afrikaner farmer genocide, I can bet you, these three gentleman would not be here."But even though President Trump didn't manage to get a rise out of the South African president, that does not mean his efforts over more than an hour were in vain; they certainly were not.
This performative style of diplomacy is aimed as much at the domestic American audience as it is at the latest visitor to the Oval Office.Central to the Make America Great Again (MAGA) project is keeping up the energy around perceived grievances and resentment and President Trump knows what his supporters want.
If some foreign leaders are learning to navigate these moments with skill, Donald Trump may have to change the playbook a bit to continue to have the impact he wants.
Follow the twists and turns of Trump's second term with North America correspondent Anthony Zurcher's weeklyJustice Amy Coney Barrett, who was appointed by US President Donald Trump as one of the court's conservative justices, recused herself from the case. She did not provide a reason.
The announcement also did not come with a formal opinion - only a single page that read: "The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court."Court watchers viewed the case as a test of the US Constitution's religious boundaries.
The 1st Amendment prohibits the government from taking any action to establish a dominant religion. Taxpayer funds, such as those earmarked for public schools, have long been considered off limits to religious institutions.The two sides of the case presented dueling views of religious freedom.