Inside Geneva cover art

Inside Geneva

Inside Geneva

By: SWI swissinfo.ch
Listen for free

Inside Geneva is a podcast about global politics, humanitarian issues, and international aid, hosted by journalist Imogen Foulkes. It is produced by SWI swissinfo.ch, a multilingual international public service media company from Switzerland.

© 2026 Inside Geneva
Political Science Politics & Government Science Social Sciences
Episodes
  • Books to make you think
    Jun 23 2026

    Send us Fan Mail

    This week, Inside Geneva presents the newest instalment of our “Books to make you think” series.

    We talk to an author who had a ringside seat as the US development agency USAID was being destroyed.

    “The people who so recklessly tore down the agency [...] are still sitting in high government positions and have not been held accountable for their actions, so I intentionally named names in the book and explained exactly who was responsible and why,” says Nicholas Enrich, author of Into the Wood Chipper.

    “USAID was destroyed by people who really had no idea what they were doing, and because of the vindictive ego of Elon Musk,” continues Enrich.

    And we hear about a forensic analysis of the language used by US media to report the war in Gaza.

    The New York Times referred to the killing of Israelis on October 7 as a ‘massacre’ 124 times, and a ‘slaughter’ 53 times. In the same time frame, they used similar language zero times to describe the killing of Palestinians, despite the fact that, in the first 100 days, the death toll was seven or eight times higher than on October 7. Zero, not once, did they describe anything Israel did to the Palestinians in that period as a massacre or a slaughter,” says Adam H. Johnson, author of How to Sell a Genocide.

    Did the mainstream media sanitise war crimes?

    “Do you think that it is possible Israel killed 20,000 children at least – that’s the official number that no one disputes – over two years and never once committed a massacre or a slaughter? Does that feel statistically likely to you? I think the answer is, on its face, ‘no’,” says Johnson.

    Join host Imogen Foulkes on Inside Geneva.

    Get in touch!

    • Email us at insidegeneva@swissinfo.ch
    • Twitter: @ImogenFoulkes and @swissinfo_en

    Thank you for listening! If you like what we do, please leave a review or subscribe to our newsletter.

    For more stories on the international Geneva please visit www.swissinfo.ch/

    Host: Imogen Foulkes
    Production assitant: Claire-Marie Germain
    Distribution: Sara Pasino
    Marketing: Xin Zhang

    Show More Show Less
    30 mins
  • What’s the point of foreign aid?
    Jun 9 2026

    Send us Fan Mail

    On our Inside Geneva podcast this week, we host a debate on a key question: what’s the point of foreign aid?

    “What’s the point of mobilising taxpayers’ money and sending it to faraway countries to assist vulnerable people? And how do you sell that to your own taxpayers?” says Gilles Carbonnier, former Vice-President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

    There are more conflicts and greater needs, yet donor countries want to spend less.

    “What’s the point of mobilising taxpayers’ money and sending it to faraway countries to assist vulnerable people? And how do you sell that to your own taxpayers?” says Gilles Carbonnier, former Vice-President of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC).

    There are more conflicts and greater needs, yet donor countries want to spend less.

    Do we think some people’s tragedies are less important than others?

    If a child is in pain in Khartoum, that’s exactly the same as a child being in pain in New York or London. If a mother is grieving in Gaza, that’s exactly the same as a mother grieving in Geneva,” says Chris Lockyear, former Secretary General of Médecins Sans Frontières/Doctors Without Borders (MSF).

    How can aid agencies better explain what they do?

    “What defines us is humanity, and humanity means we cannot stay idle when we see others suffering. We have to act and do something to try to protect them, assist them and prevent suffering, regardless of where this happens,” says Carbonnier.

    Listen to the full episode on Inside Geneva.

    Get in touch!

    • Email us at insidegeneva@swissinfo.ch
    • Twitter: @ImogenFoulkes and @swissinfo_en

    Thank you for listening! If you like what we do, please leave a review or subscribe to our newsletter.

    For more stories on the international Geneva please visit www.swissinfo.ch/

    Host: Imogen Foulkes
    Production assitant: Claire-Marie Germain
    Distribution: Sara Pasino
    Marketing: Xin Zhang

    Show More Show Less
    59 mins
  • Is aid failing?
    May 26 2026

    Send us Fan Mail

    On this week's Inside Geneva podcast episode, we take stock of aid cuts and what they mean for new crises such as Ebola.

    “It is a catastrophe. It is not an opportunity. But now we have an obligation to transform the system: there’s no other way the humanitarian system can survive this crisis without any change,” says Professor Karl Blanchet from the University of Geneva.

    A new report says aid delivery must change, but huge cuts are not the way.

    “The suspension of funding by major donors, not only the United States but also the UK, Germany and others, [means that] there are going to be excess deaths. Millions of people are going to die who should not have died because of these funding cuts,” says Professor Esperanza Martinez from the Australian National University.

    What happens in a crisis like Ebola if aid funding is driven by ‘anti-diversity’ ideology?

    “Every process in society follows a gendered pattern, so it is often going to be women who are the caretakers of the sick. It is going to be women who are washing the bodies of the dead and preparing them for burial,” says Hannah Reinl from the Geneva Gender Champions organisation.

    Who stands to lose the most from the world’s only superpower withdrawing from aid organisations such as the World Health Organization (WHO)?

    “If the US had not withdrawn from the WHO, then we would have been part of the WHO’s response. Which means that when the WHO learned about this, the US government would have learned about it as well. Instead, [US Secretary of State] Marco Rubio is saying that he did not find out about this until ten days later. Well, maybe we should not have pulled out of the WHO, and we would have found out about it earlier,” says Nicholas Enrich, a former USAID official and author of Into the Wood Chipper.

    Join Imogen Foulkes on Inside Geneva to listen to the full interviews.

    Get in touch!

    • Email us at insidegeneva@swissinfo.ch
    • Twitter: @ImogenFoulkes and @swissinfo_en

    Thank you for listening! If you like what we do, please leave a review or subscribe to our newsletter.

    For more stories on the international Geneva please visit www.swissinfo.ch/

    Host: Imogen Foulkes
    Production assitant: Claire-Marie Germain
    Distribution: Sara Pasino
    Marketing: Xin Zhang

    Show More Show Less
    36 mins
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
No reviews yet