Buddhist mobs in Sri Lanka last week led anti-Muslim riots that left at least three dead and more than 200 Muslim-owned establishments in ruins, just the latest bout of communal violence there stoked by Buddhist nationalists. In Myanmar, ultra-nationalist monks led by firebrand preacher Wirathu have poured vitriol on the country's small Muslim population, cheering a military crackdown forcing nearly 700,000 Rohingya into Bangladesh.

For many in the West, schooled in Buddhism via the beatniks, Hollywood, meditation classes, tropical holidays and inspirational Dalai Lama quotes, the visceral response of these monks can be a shock. But Michael Jerryson, an expert on religion at Youngstown State University who has just completed a book exploring Buddhism and violence, says throughout history some Buddhists - like any faith - have used religion to justify violence.

"There's a common mindset, whether it's Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Thailand… that Buddhism is somehow under threat," he said, describing the latest incarnation of violent Buddhist rhetoric. Despite centuries of largely peaceful co-existence and trading, Buddhist fundamentalist groups portray Islam as invasive, toppling ancient Buddhist empires in Malaysia and Indonesia and now threatening the same for modern Buddhist nations through jihad or high birth rates.

Foster said that she checked into a lot of statistics recently which led to her decision to smash her cell phones which actually pose more of a danger than AR-15’s historically speaking. “I’ve just decided after looking at all the statistics online about deaths caused and violence and all of the rest of it that I have decided to make a change in my household and two objects in my household have the potential to cause deaths for innocent people,” she explained.

“These two objects have caused families to break up, they’ve caused all kinds of turmoil all across the world, not just the United States, so, today I have decided to do my part to take these two objects off the streets so where they don’t have the potential to hurt anybody anymore ever again.”

But on Wednesday, after more twists than a Chubby Checker dance marathon, Germany will get yet another grand coalition. Some 24 weeks after voters gave the CDU/CSU and SPD their worst whipping since 1949, they are back in power. Nothing has changed and yet everything has changed in Berlin. Germany’s third grand coalition since 2005, and Merkel’s fourth and likely final electoral term, is doomed to succeed.

But, 13 years on, things are far from grand for this coalition. A trade war looms with the US on steel, the backbone of Germany’s manufacturing industry and a threat to its buoyant economy; Brexit Britain is racing towards the abyss; and the remaining EU27, whether north-south or east-west, is drifting apart on an upcoming budget, refugees and security issues.

After 171 days in limbo, Merkel will take her fourth oath as chancellor on Wednesday, as usual with the optional religious appendage “may God help me”. Germany’s wily chancellor will need help from all quarters to please everyone – internal party rivals, a wounded SPD, an impatient France and a divided EU – as the countdown begins for her departure from the political stage.

Not surprisingly, then, many senior figures in Brussels are openly dismayed at the prospect of Salvini becoming Italy's next prime minister. After last weekend's chaotic general election result, however, this now looks like a distinct possibility. Over half of Italian voters supported hard-right, openly racist or Eurosceptic parties that until recently would have been described as 'fringe' - creating a stalemate that casts grave doubts over the EU's plans for further fiscal and political integration.

"The populists have won," was one government senator's gloomy summary when the outcome became clear on Sunday. Five Star Movement (M5S), the anti-establishment organisation founded by comedian Beppe Grillo in 2009, were the biggest winners of all with 32% of the vote. The ruling centre-left Democratic Party slumped to 19%, prompting the immediate resignation of their leader and former prime minister Matteo Renzi.

Nigel Farage has also displayed his usual gift for understatement by announcing that Italy's electoral earthquake means, "the end of the EU is nigh. Why are they rebelling against the establishment? Primarily because migration has become the fault line in European politics and all the social democrat, socialist parties are seen to be just simply too soft on this issue."

"Everything will change," is how one Italian newspaper summed up the country's new political reality. Right now, this is exactly what the EU's top brass are afraid of.

But Netanyahu now faces three different investigations and a recommendation by the police to indict him; many believe this time really might be different. The embattled prime minister came to Washington this week, seeking solace in international statesmanship — and the warm embrace of President Trump. And indeed, the picture Netanyahu secured in the White House on Monday was a memorable one: two politically divisive leaders, both convinced they are subject of a “witch hunt” by overzealous prosecutors in their own party, smiling and grinning as they promised to remake the Middle East together.

We spoke with one of those who hopes to follow Netanyahu, the hard-line young Cabinet minister Naftali Bennett, for a special episode of The Global Politico. Bennett, whose conservative, largely religious party, Jewish Home, is currently a member of Netanyahu’s governing coalition, has often prodded and pushed the prime minister to the right.

A longtime skeptic that there is a two-state solution to be had with the Palestinians, Bennett favors annexing the West Bank to the state of Israel. (It’s not annexing, he insisted in our conversation, since he contends the land seized in the 1967 war already rightfully belongs to Israel.) And he is clearly dubious about the Trump administration’s current promise to unveil a grand new peace proposal that will somehow bring the two parties back to the negotiating table.

The opposition – and even some of the parties on the Right – will claim that Netanyahu is corrupt, is a hedonist and is destroying the country. He, in return, will warn of the destruction of Israel if Yesh Atid’s Yair Lapid or Labor’s Avi Gabbay comes out on top.  The Likud will attack the media, the police, the attorney general and the courts. Everything will be fair game; nothing will be off limits. 

The Left will not be that different. It will slam Netanyahu, his wife and son. It’ll accuse him of being against peace, against Arabs and against basic freedoms.  Politicians from across the spectrum will try to divide and conquer. They will separate the religious from the secular, and the settlers from the Tel Avivians. 

In short, this election has the potential to become extremely ugly, to the point that it could cause Israeli society long-term damage. This election – whenever it comes – will be historic. It will either solidify Netanyahu’s leadership like no Israeli politician before him, or turn a page in history with Netanyahu removed from office and a new politician elected to lead the country.  

Whatever the result, the elections should not make us forget the real challenge: to advance Israel, to keep it safe, and to ensure the country’s continued economic, military and social growth in the years to come. This is what truly matters.  

But the metastatic nature of violent jihad means the story isn’t likely to end there. Islamic State’s forerunner, al-Qaeda,faced the possibility of destruction in late 2001 when it was driven from its sanctuaries in Afghanistan by invading US forces. It survived and helped inspire a new generation of extremists - including those who formed Islamic State.

Groups around the world that are associated with Islamic State include some that were established directly as franchises, some that existed previously and have rebranded themselves as affiliates, others that operate separately but have sworn allegiance to Islamic State and still others that just share its goals.

Some of this is true – but FIVE of the world’s most violent cities are right here on the American mainland and another is in an American territory. The list was created by researchers of anti-violence think-tank Seguridad, Justicia Y Paz (Security, Justice, and Peace), who made their rankings based on statistics of homicides per 100,000 residents.

They are:

#13 St Louis

#21 Baltimore

#32 San Juan

#41 New Orleans

#42 Detroit

For those who are interested in preparedness, the collapse of these cities is something to watch. Note how the increase of violence in many cases ties in with a lack of confidence in local law enforcement officers. A failing economy is another factor, as increased desperation leads to increased crime.

The newspaper's probe alleges that social workers were aware of the abuse in the 1990s, but that it took police a decade to  launch Operation Chalice, an inquiry into child prostitution in the Telford area in which seven men were jailed.

It is also claimed that abused and trafficked children were considered "prostitutes" by council staff, that authorities did not keep details of abusers from Asian communities for fear of being accused of "racism" and that police failed to investigate one recent case five times until an MP intervened.

From the moment he extended an apparent olive branch to the South in his new year message to the cordial delegations to Pyeongchang for the Winter Olympics, it became clear that Kim Jong-un had mastered the most sophisticated crafts of propaganda.

Some will view his personal invitation to Mr Trump to hold talks with him - as well as the commitment to freeze further nuclear tests - as the real diplomatic masterstroke after a year that was unprecedented for the level of naked hostility the US and the North bared toward one another.

But the risk here belongs to both Moon Jae-in and Donald Trump. In a situation where neither can claim sole mastery of the narrative, without a clear exit strategy, and when there are so many definitions for both success and failure, a lot is at stake.

These talks are a huge gamble with a communist state which is hard to read. But if, just if, he helps pull it off it may reduce the threat of nuclear war and he could win himself a Nobel peace prize. If all fails, it is back to brinkmanship.