NEW TECHNIQUE CAPTURES ACTIVITY OF AN ENTIRE BRAIN IN SNAPSHOT

This density map of the cerebral cortex of a mouse shows which neurons get activated when the animal explores of a new environment. The lit up region at the center (white and yellow) represents neurons associated with the mouse's whiskers. Credit: Laboratory of Brain Development and Repair at The Rockefeller University

When it comes to measuring brain activity, scientists have tools that can take a precise look at a small slice of the brain (less than one cubic millimeter), or a blurred look at a larger area. Now, researchers at Rockefeller University have described a new technique that combines the best of both worlds–it captures a detailed snapshot of global activity in the mouse brain.

“We wanted to develop a technique that would show you the level of activity at the precision of a single neuron, but at the scale of the whole brain,” said study author Nicolas Renier, a postdoctoral fellow in the lab of Marc Tessier-Lavigne, professor of the Laboratory of Brain Development and Repair, and president of Rockefeller University.

The new method, described online on May 26 in Cell, takes a picture of all the active neurons in the brain at a specific time. The mouse brain contains dozens of millions of neurons, and a typical image depicts the activity of approximately one million neurons, said Tessier-Lavigne. “The purpose of the technique is to accelerate our understanding of how the brain works.”

Making brains transparent

“Because of the nature of our technique, we cannot visualize live brain activity over time–we only see neurons that are active at the specific time we took the snapshot,” said Eliza Adams, a graduate student in Tessier-Lavigne’s lab and co-author of the study. “But what we gain in this trade-off is a comprehensive view of most neurons in the brain, and the ability to compare these active neuronal populations between snapshots in a robust and unbiased manner.”

Here’s how the tool works: The researchers expose a mouse to a situation that would provoke altered brain activity–such as taking an anti-psychotic drug, brushing whiskers against an object while exploring, and parenting a pup–then make the measurement after a pause. The pause is important, explained Renier, because the technique measures neuron activity indirectly, via the translation of neuronal genes into proteins, which takes about 30 minutes to occur.

The researchers then treat the brain to make it transparent–following an improved version of a protocol called iDISCO, developed by Zhuhao Wu, a postdoctoral associate in the Tessier-Lavigne lab–and visualize it using light-sheet microscopy, which takes the snapshot of all active neurons in 3D.

To determine where an active neuron is located within the brain, Christoph Kirst, a fellow in Rockefeller’s Center for Studies in Physics and Biology, developed software to detect the active neurons and to automatically map the snapshot to a 3D atlas of the mouse brain, generated by the Allen Brain Institute.

Although each snapshot of brain activity typically includes about one million active neurons, researchers can sift through that mass of data relatively quickly if they compare one snapshot to another snapshot, says Renier. By eliminating the neurons that are active in both images, researchers are left only those specific to each one, enabling them to home in on what is unique to each state.

Observing and testing how the brain works

The primary purpose of the tool, he adds, is to help researchers generate hypotheses about how the brain functions that then can be tested in other experiments. For instance, using their new techniques, the researchers, in collaboration with Catherine Dulac and other scientists at Harvard University, observed that when an adult mouse encounters a pup, a region of its brain known to be active during parenting–called the medial pre-optic nucleus, or MPO–lights up. But they also observed that, after the MPO area becomes activated, there is less activity in the cortical amygdala, an area that processes aversive responses, which they found to be directly connected to the MPO “parenting region”.

“Our hypothesis,” said Renier, “is that parenting neurons put the brake on activity in the fear region, which may suppress aversive responses the mice may have towards pups.” Indeed, mice that are being aggressive to pups tend to show more activity in the cortical amygdala.

To test this idea, the next step is to block the activity of this brain region to see if this reduces aggression in the mice, said Renier.

The technique also has broader implications than simply looking at what areas of the mouse brain are active in different situations, he adds. It could be used to map brain activity in response to any biological change, such as the spread of a drug or disease, or even to explore how the brain makes decisions. “You can use the same strategy to map anything you want in the mouse brain,” said Renier.

Read More →

OBAMA'S HIROSHIMA DEBUT DOES'NT PROHIBIT NUCLEAR WEAPONS

 

Despite President Barack Obama’s call for a “world without nuclear weapons” during his ‘historic’ visit to Hiroshima, the city where the first ever atomic bomb was dropped on August 6, 1945, causing over 140,000 casualties, the United States is nowhere close to prohibiting nuclear weapons.

This was also underlined by ‘Leaders’ Declaration’ emerging from the two-day summit of the Group of Seven (G 7) major industrial nations that concluded on May 27 on Kashiko Island located in Ise-Shima area of Mie Prefecture in Japan.

The Summit’s host, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, chose the venue for its rich culture, beautiful scenery and close proximity to one of the country’s most honoured historical sites: the Ise Jingu, or the Grand Shrine, built nearly 2,000 years ago.

Leaders’ journey into a spiritual land surrounding Ise Jingu seems to have sparsely influenced G7 decisions: While the Group’s three nuclear powers – USA, France and Britain – and the non-nuclear Japan, Canada, Germany and Italy vowed that “non-proliferation and disarmament issues” are among their “top priorities”, the 32-page Declaration devoted only nine lines to the issue.

The G7’s three nuclear powers possess one-third of the world’s atomic arsenal, estimated at a total number of 15,350 atomic warheads. Notwithstanding a stockpile of 5,185 weapons of mass destruction at the command of the Three nuclear haves, the Seven declared: “We reaffirm our commitment to seeking a safer world for all and to creating the conditions for a world without nuclear weapons in a way that promotes international stability.”

In this context, the ‘Leaders’ Declaration’ endorsed the G7 Foreign Ministers’ ‘Hiroshima Declaration’ on Nuclear Disarmament and Non-Proliferation and the Statement of the G7 Non-Proliferation Directors’ Group on Non-Proliferation and Disarmament.

The Hiroshima Declaration resulted from discussions at the April 10-11 meeting of Foreign Ministers in a city that along with Nagasaki suffered atomic bombings more than 70 years ago.

Japan’s Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida, who hails from Hiroshima, explained that the rift between nuclear-weapon states and non-nuclear weapon states had grown deeper and that the prevailing conditions surrounding nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation efforts had become increasingly severe.

Kishida therefore stressed the necessity at precisely such a point in time for the G7 to send a strong message from Hiroshima toward the realization of a world without nuclear weapons. Following discussions, the Ministers agreed to subsequently issue the Hiroshima Declaration.

For the first time ever, the G7 Foreign Ministers also visited the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum, laid a wreath at the Cenotaph for the atomic bomb victims, and visited the Atomic Bomb Dome, coming into contact with the realities of atomic bombings.

President Barack Obama followed suit on May 27 visiting Hiroshima as the first sitting president of the U.S. “to honour the memory of all who were lost during World War Two”.

“Seventy-one years ago on a bright cloudless morning, death fell from the sky and the world was changed,” Obama said. “The memory of the morning of Aug. 6, 1945 must never fail. Since that fateful day we have made choices that have given us hope. The United States and Japan forged not only an alliance but a friendship.”

While this gesture was appreciated by many, ICAN (International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons) said, Washington was embarking on a massive nuclear weapons modernization programme of $1 trillion – “ensuring that the the U.S. would be nuclear-armed for decades to come”, ICAN said.

In run-up to Obama’s Hiroshima visit, ICAN’s Executive Director Beatrice Fihn said: “Over the past seven years, the U.S. nuclear policy has been nothing but disappointing for those who believed that Obama could make real change on nuclear weapons – in particular its boycott of a promising new process to ban nuclear weapons.”

Obama’s call from Prague in 2009 to “put an end to the cold war thinking” and reduce the role of nuclear weapons in the U.S. and its allies’ security strategies has not been matched by action, she said. “All nuclear-armed states and states under the U.S. nuclear umbrella continue to rely heavily on nuclear weapons in their security strategies despite numerous commitments to disarm.”

In Hiroshima Obama was accompanied by Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who is also facing harsh criticism at home for his “hypocritical stance” on nuclear weapons, calling for nuclear disarmament while continuing to rely on U.S. nuclear weapons and opposing progress on a new treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons.

ICAN added: The Obama administration has failed to engage with the growing movement of non-nuclear weapon states pushing for a prohibition of nuclear weapons, the so-called Humanitarian Pledge. The U.S. in fact boycotted a UN working group set up by the UN General Assembly to discuss new legal measures for nuclear disarmament.

For its part, Japan participated in the UN talks from May 2 to 13 in Geneva, only to oppose the start of a process to negotiate a ban, claiming reliance on nuclear weapons is necessary for its national security. However, despite the boycott by the U.S. and other nuclear-armed states, ICAN insisted, the majority of states in the world are ready to start negotiations of a new treaty prohibiting nuclear weapons.

“Given their absence or negative participation in the UN talks in Geneva in May, their symbolic call for a nuclear-free world is ironical,” said Akira Kawasaki of Peace Boat. “If the two leaders are serious about nuclear disarmament, why don’t they join the global movement calling for a process to ban nuclear weapons?” he asked.

“A visit to Hiroshima is not enough. The real test to evaluate their commitment will be whether they will support a global process of negotiation for a new instrument prohibiting nuclear weapons.”

Finh said: “After the Prague speech, Obama lost a chance to lead the world towards nuclear disarmament. Despite this first visit to Hiroshima by a U.S. president, leadership on this issue is instead emerging from the broad coalition of over 120 non-nuclear weapon states that have endorsed the Humanitarian Pledge.”

The Ise-Shima Declaration came two weeks after the second session of the United Nations Open Ended Working Group (OEWG) for nuclear disarmament in Geneva. While the Group’s two sessions – February 22-26 and May 2-13 – failed to agree on a draft plan, the final three-day session in August was slated to negotiate a final report with recommendations for the United Nations General Assembly.

ICAN played a decisive role galvanising the support of the civil society, including faith-based organizations. An interfaith joint statement issued on May 2 highlighted the moral and ethical imperatives for the abolition of nuclear weapons. The statement, endorsed by nearly 35 faith groups and individuals, was presented to OEWG Chair, Ambassador Thani Thongphakdi of Thailand on May 3.

Underlining the civil society’s key role, UNFOLD ZERO stated: “There is now strong momentum for the start in 2017 of multilateral negotiations for nuclear disarmament – something which has been blocked for nearly 20 years.”

UNFOLD ZERO partner organisations include Mayors for Peace, Peace Depot, Parliamentarians for Nuclear Non-proliferation and Disarmament (PNND), Basel Peace Office, International Association of Lawyers Against Nuclear Arms (IALANA) and Middle Powers Initiative mobilized critical support.

The proposal was spelt out in the OEWG working paper 34 – Perspectives from nuclear weapon free zones by a group of countries that have already prohibited nuclear weapons in their regions through nuclear-weapon-free zones (NWFZs). 115 countries are part of NWFZs covering Latin America, the South Pacific, Antarctica, South East Asia, Africa and Central Asia.

Read More →

WORLD HUMANITARIAN SUMMIT, MEETING EXPECTATIONS OR FALLING SHORT?

 

The World Humanitarian Summit held in Istanbul, Turkey on 23 and 24 May 2016 saw 9,000 delegates from governments, United Nations agencies and civil society come together to address a ‘broken humanitarian system’. Did it achieve what it set out to do?

By Alistair D. B. Cook*

The World Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul on 23-24 May 2016 achieved two notable goals despite the absence of several world leaders. The first was a ‘Grand Bargain’ to distribute humanitarian funding more equitably by 2020. The second was the formal launch of the Regional Organisations Humanitarian Action Network. However, in a side-event, a significant step forward was achieved for Southeast Asia – the launch of an ASEAN-United Nations humanitarian partnership highlighting the increasingly prominent role of regional organizations.

The absence of several world leaders, aside from the summit ending with only a general commitment to enhance compliance to humanitarian principles, however, raised questions over the progress made on the global humanitarian front.

Grand Bargain and Regional Leadership

The World Humanitarian Summit was initiated four years ago by United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon to reaffirm a global commitment to humanity and humanitarian principles; initiate actions and commitments which enable countries and communities to prepare for and respond to crises and be more resilient to shocks; and to share best practices which help save lives around the world, placing affected people at the centre of humanitarian action and alleviating suffering.

One of the recurring challenges facing the global humanitarian system is how to fund it. For too long, the vast majority of money has been spent among a small number of agencies, with less than 2% of available funds going to local NGOs. At the World Humanitarian Summit, leaders agreed to commit to increase the percentage of funds available to local NGOs from 2% to 25% by 2020.

A significant step forward in this is the commitment to greater transparency to further encourage the wider disbursement of donor funds for humanitarian projects through efficiency savings amounting to an estimated US$1 billion over the next five years. This wider distribution of humanitarian funds aims to particularly benefit local communities to take the money closer to those it is supposed to assist.

While the Summit launched the Regional Organisations Humanitarian Action Network with the aim to build the capacity of regional organisations and collaboration between them, a side-event highlighted work was already underway. A joint forum saw the launch of the ASEAN-UN Joint Strategic Plan of Action on Disaster Management that increases the collaboration between the regional and global bodies, particularly in the area of Emergency Response and Assessment Teams.

This partnership also envisions empowering local leaders in humanitarian assistance and disaster management more broadly in Southeast Asia, which is important if the humanitarian financing reforms are to be turned into action by 2020. In the middle term the development of humanitarian leadership will be central to make the region a global humanitarian leader. What is noticeable in this side-event is that it already takes a necessary step to put a key summit outcome into action.

Purpose or Progress?

These outcomes from the World Humanitarian Summit illustrate important steps forward, but will likely be overshadowed by the failure to agree concrete action on already established humanitarian principles. Just ahead of the Summit, a global humanitarian leader in the field, Medecins sans Frontiers (Doctors without Borders), decided to pull out because it saw the Summit as no more than a ‘fig leaf of good intentions that will do little to help the world’s most vulnerable or those trying to help them’.

It was a bold move that underlined a deepening tension in the humanitarian system that revolves around the inaction of states to uphold International Humanitarian Law [IHL], particularly to prevent the targeting of civilians and civilian facilities from hospitals to schools in conflict zones.

While participants at the Summit reiterated the need to uphold IHL, recognised the ‘denial of humanitarian access deprives people of human dignity,’ as well as a proposal to raise awareness of healthcare personnel, and a proposal to adopt a declaration to spare medical facilities from military use, these amounted to little that will satisfy the humanitarian community in providing for and protecting vulnerable communities and those that help them.

Falling Short Except in the Regions

Ultimately the draft outcome document of the World Humanitarian Summit outlines a series of areas that will create positive change if implemented. However, it falls short of what many wanted to achieve, and global summits often do. What the World Humanitarian Summit does offer are some concrete proposals for collaboration in less controversial areas.

It highlighted the importance of a fairer humanitarian financing system and the continued rise of regions as a site for leadership and action, to turn words into deeds. As seen at the World Humanitarian Summit, ASEAN-UN activity on the summit side-lines will ultimately have greater impact on the development of a humanitarian system in this region.

It also once again illustrates that ASEAN is a first-mover in disaster management. The World Humanitarian Summit may have brought 9,000 delegates together but many might have left without the summit making the desired impact.

Read More →

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU DON'T DRINK ENOUGH WATER

Besides the fact that you'd literally die without it, there are many, MANY imperative reasons to drink water frequently, every single day. It starts out pretty mild - you might feel thirsty and have a dry mouth. But the long-term effects of not drinking enough water not only have an effect on your weight (in a bad way), but they're also extremely dangerous and life-threatening. Here's what happens to your body.

Milder Symptoms

Even mild dehydration has strong effects. Here's how you'll feel with a lack of H2O (hint: it's really not fun).

• Fatigue, tiredness, sleepiness
• Headache
• Constipation
• Dizziness
• Mood change, irritability, increased anxiety
• Sunken eyes
• Shriveled skin
• Muscle cramps
• Joint aches

Severe Symptoms

If things get worse, so do your symptoms. These are the "go to the hospital" signs.

• Low blood pressure, with a rapid heartbeat
• Fever
• Delirium, unconsciousness
• Severe diarrhea and/or vomiting
• Inability to keep fluids down

Latent Effects

Consistently not drinking enough water for an extended period of time has its effect as well. Although you may brush off the milder side effects, your body is still suffering - and several of these have a significant bearing on weight gain.

• Low water, slow metabolism. Your body's ability to remove waste and detoxify is inhibited. In addition, your metabolism is slower without water. One study found that drinking 16 ounces of water daily increases your metabolic rate by 30 percent. Guys. That's literally ONE standard-size water bottle. JUST DRINK IT.
• Increased hunger. When you're somewhat dehydrated, your body confuses it for hunger, causing you to eat when you don't need to. Read: weight gain.
• Slowed circulation, irregular temperature. Your CV system suffers, and your equilibrium is totally out of whack.
• Digestion problems. That constipation we talked about becomes a regular thing. Not fun. Also not great for weight loss.
• General fatigue. Same goes for your energy levels. You'll constantly feel tired, unable (or unwilling) to exercise, and unable to concentrate.
• Increased blood sugar. Your body needs water to break down sugar. If you're diabetic, this is especially dangerous.

Severe Long-Term Effects

Now for the worst of it. Yes, it's terrible that dehydration can make you gain weight (or keep you from losing it), but there are some bigger issues at hand. If you're truly neglecting your water intake, this should likely help you get on track. Here's what happens to your body when you don't get enough water.

• Heat injury
• Brain swelling
• Seizures
• Hypovolemic shock
• Kidney failure
• Coma and death

Now go get yourself a water bottle and FILL. IT. UP.

Read More →

THE GROWTH OF NUCLEAR ENERGY: ISSUES IN SAFETY, SAFEGUARD AND SECURITY

Nuclear energy is seeing a revival post-Fukushima, with interest shifting away from Europe to Asia. As nuclear power use grows, so must the international community bear in mind the 3S – safety, safeguards and security.

By Olli Heinonen*

Latest projections show that global nuclear electricity generation is expected to almost double by 2040. While renewable energy sources are projected to be the world’s fastest growing energy source for electricity production between 2012 and 2040, nuclear energy is projected to become the third fastest growing sector after natural gas.

Its share of total primary energy over this period will increase from four percent to six percent. According to the United States Department of Energy’s Energy Information Administration, concerns over energy security and greenhouse gas emissions support the development of new nuclear generating capacity.

Big Shift from Europe to Asia

There is now a significant shift from Europe to Asia in nuclear energy generation. Asia is now the main region where nuclear generating capacity is growing significantly, driven by China’s nuclear power projects. Specifically in Southeast Asia, Vietnam is set to commission its first nuclear reactor by 2025 while Indonesia and Malaysia have long been preparing for possible nuclear power generation.

In the context of Asia and Southeast Asian nations, observing transparency and strict monitoring of states’ compliance to global nuclear 3S (safety, safeguards and security) regulations are becoming more important as more Asian states are planning to go nuclear. The region still has significant regional concerns over nuclear safety and security. For instance, there is still a tremendous need to educate more young professionals in the nuclear field, particularly nuclear safety and security.

Nuclear energy users – from electricity generators to companies desalinating water to establishments using radioisotopes – must demonstrate that nuclear energy is safe, secure and do not contribute to nuclear proliferation. An important basic step is for states to adhere to the latest legal instruments on nuclear safety, security, and safeguards, as well as publicly demonstrate their full compliance with its requirements.

At the same time, nuclear vigilance and maintaining nuclear order goes far beyond signing on to international conventions. The nuclear disaster at Fukushima in March 2011 demonstrated the limitations of international safety monitoring mechanisms. One resulting lesson is the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) on-going efforts to enhance Safety and Security Standards.

Nuclear Safety Post-Fukushima

The Action Plan on Nuclear Safety that the IAEA crafted in 2011 after the Fukushima disaster was another important mark. But much work remains to be done at nuclear installations and to ensure well functioning nuclear regulatory bodies. In the area of nuclear security, a more transparent international monitoring mechanism needs to be developed, even as the entering into force the amendment of the Convention of on the Physical Protection of Nuclear Material (CPPNM) is a welcome step forward. In the field of nuclear terrorism, the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts of Nuclear Terrorism (ICSANT) and the CPPNM are yet to be universally adopted and implemented.

Beyond international conventions and efforts made to secure them as basic compliant standards, the ultimate responsibility for nuclear safety and security continues to rest with individual states. Nuclear safety and security issues continue to paint a mixed picture. While progress and attention has been made to better address vulnerabilities and threats, the 2016 Nuclear Threat Initiative Security Index concludes, inter alia, that the current global nuclear security system still lacks a common set of international standards and best practices. Furthermore, there remains no mechanism for holding states with lax security accountable.

Nuclear use also means adhering to safeguards that ensures a purely peaceful application of nuclear energy. The IAEA, which holds the sole international responsibility to apply safeguards, has upgraded its safeguards approach as well as verification methods over the years. The Agency also publishes an annual Safeguards Implementation Report (SIR) that evaluates the performance of its member states and makes recommendations for improvement. The latest SIR has called for the enhancement of national nuclear regulatory bodies that are often found to lack adequate resources or authorities in carrying out its safeguards obligations.

Different But Mutually Reinforcing Roles

While safety, security and safeguards have different roles, they also co-exist and are mutually reinforcing in many ways. Nuclear safety, security and safeguards are close ‘triplets’ that have synergetic effects on one another, and contribute to the efficiency and effectiveness of the overall nuclear order.

For instance, near real-time nuclear material accountancy, together with monitoring systems, provide valuable information about the location and status of nuclear material. This in turn is useful for nuclear security measures. Similarly, such information serves to benefit nuclear safety by contributing as input to criticality controls and locations of nuclear materials.

Currently, information on states’ undertakings on nuclear safety, safeguards and security are scattered within various IAEA and other UN documents, including records of review meetings and the UN Security Council resolution 1540 committee. Such information is not only unthreaded, thereby making it more difficult to present a holistic picture, but data provided is also often lacking in public assessments on the effectiveness and efficiency of those measures.

Need for Implementation Report on 3S

States can also further opt to make public their nuclear safety, safeguards and security regulations as well as other relevant information to build further confidence that the basic legal and regulatory framework for nuclear safety, safeguards and security is in place. This is particularly useful for states and region that are freshly embarking on nuclear power.

The IAEA already supports its member states by conducting voluntary peer reviews on various aspects of safety, safeguards, and security. Such reviews are helpful tools to both improve states’ performance and also build confidence in a state’s commitment to continuously meet its obligations under the various conventions and treaties. Stepping up this platform by publishing the results of such international reviews on a regular basis will help move up the transparency needle.

Strengthening the nuclear 3S should be pursued as a work in progress that is seen to benefit the industry, nuclear users as well as its non-users. Nuclear incidents can range from accidents with localised radiological impact to large-scale nuclear terrorist attacks with transnational spillovers that jolt national and regional economy, security and psychology in ways that extend far beyond the mere physical fallout.

To provide the international community with a full picture on the global status of nuclear safety, safeguards and security, the IAEA should be tasked to provide a biannual implementation report. Such a report would assess the effectiveness of states undertakings on the ground to ensure nuclear energy is used in a safe, secure and peaceful manner. The report should indicate where enhancements are required and suggest improvements taken by individual states or by the international community.

*Olli Heinonen PhD was an RSIS Distinguished Visiting Fellow and a speaker at the RSIS Roundtable during the Singapore International Energy Week in October 2015. He is currently Senior Fellow at the Belfer Centre for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University. He contributed this specially to RSIS Commentary.

Read More →

THE LIST OF 10 MOST CORRUPT COUNTRIES IN THE WORLD

Corruption and economic turmoil often go hand-in-hand. In western nations like the United States and many European countries, we often see corruption come to light as the result of whistleblowers or journalistic efforts. But in many other areas of the world, however, corruption plays a major role in fostering staggering poverty and broken economic systems in a much more blatant way.

Oftentimes, specific power structures and government architectures provide an easier means for corrupt politicians, businessmen, or military officials to exploit the system. Many governments have their roots in constitutions from generations ago, and have outgrown their current systems. Many other countries are ruled by a variety of independent tribal leaders and often lack a centralized power structure with any meaningful sway.

Transparency International developed a comprehensive list of the world’s most corrupt nations last year, and the countries that top the list probably won’t come as much of a surprise to many. The study ranks countries on a scale from 0 to 100, with zero being the most corrupt, and 100 being the least.

Of course, corruption comes in a variety of forms, so getting a precise gauge is difficult. But perception itself is a very strong tool, and can have a big effect on its own. If the study reveals anything, it’s that the world overall has a huge issue in terms of corrupt officials. By looking at the Corruptions Perception Index, along with the existing power structures and economic systems within each country, the picture does become a bit clearer. That’s why we dug a little deeper, examining the rankings for ourselves.

Although not among the top ten, we’ve included the United States on the list to give perspective as to where America ranks internationally in terms of corruption and economic strife. By Transparency International’s calculations and scale, the U.S. is sitting fairly pretty, although it’s common knowledge that there are definitely issues with how things are run in Washington. Other countries you might expect to see like Russia, Mexico, or Venezuela all have their places as well, and the full list of 177 nations can be viewed straight at the source from Transparency International.

Here are the most corrupt nations in the world, as ranked by Transparency International, with additional insight into the issues and factors plaguing each one.

10. Eritrea

• Corruption score: 18
• Power structure: Single-Party Presidential Democracy

An Eritrean demonstrator waves his national flag whist taking part in a demonstration – Source: Dan Kitwood/Getty Images

Eritrea is a new entrant onto the list this year, having vaulted from number 25 to number 10 in 2014. Many people may have never even heard of Eritrea, let alone be aware of the corruption issues the country faces. Eritrea is located in Africa, bordering the Red Sea directly across from Saudi Arabia, bordering Djibouti to the south and Sudan to the north. Eritrea is a small and relatively poor country, with a GDP of only $3.44 billion, and a population of 6.3 million.

The situation in Eritrea is clearly in flux. After years of relative self-imposed isolation, Eritrea has begun opening its borders to foreign business and investment, along with privatizing state-owned assets. That has allowed for some government officials, and others in power, to take advantage of their positions for personal profit. With undeveloped legal, economic, and political framework, the country has had a lot of trouble finding a stable foothold in the international community.

Until Eritrea can sort out its internal problems, it’s likely that the country’s numerous issues will continue. Due to rule by a single party — despite being a democracy — a suitable minority party that can successfully challenge for power is likely what is needed. The economy is expected to continue to stagnate, and the prospect of war in the region spilling over into the country’s borders are also concerns for foreign investors.

9. Libya

• Corruption score: 18
• Power structure: Transitional

Libyan protestors hold placards as they demonstrate – Source: Mahmud Turkia/AFP/Getty Images

Few nations have experienced as much turmoil over the past few years as Libya. The country’s government saw its downfall during a mass uprising and protest, which ultimately led to protestors parading around with the body of former president Muammar Gaddafi on the streets. The country’s fall was a part of the ‘Arab Spring’, which also saw mass protests in Syria, Egypt and Bahrain, among others.

Now, Libya is still embroiled in turmoil. No formal government has taken root, and fighting between rebels and those loyal to the old administration is still taking place. Due to the high levels of uncertainty, the country’s GDP contracted 9.4 percent during 2013, according to The World Bank. The power vacuum has left open a great opportunity for arms dealers and corrupt military higher-ups to take charge and make profits by pitting citizens against each other.

Libya currently operates under a transitional government, and both its administrative and judicial systems are vulnerable to a wide variety of outside interference. It’s economy is almost entirely based on energy, which supplies 95 percent of export earnings and 80 percent of the nation’s GDP, per the CIA. Until a new, permanent government can be established, Libya will most likely remain a hotbed of political and economic instability.

8. Uzbekistan

• Corruption score: 18
• Power structure: Republic

Uzbekistan fans hold up their national flag as they watch their national team play against Qatar – Karim Jaafar/AFP/Getty Images

One of the lesser-traveled nations in the world, Uzbekistan finds itself as one of the world’s messiest countries. From an economic standpoint, things appear to be going alright with 8% growth in GDP during 2013. In fact,information from The World Bank indicates the economy of Uzbekistan has remained more or less the same through the financial crisis which has crippled systems in Europe and North America.

The nation’s government is set up as a republic with an authoritative presidential figure in Islam Karimov. The vast majority of the country’s power resides within the executive branch, making it ripe for corruption. Karimov has been president since Uzbekistan actually became a country after the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, winning three straight terms of between five and seven years. Like many other Middle-Eastern authority figures, he has apparently not grown tired of ruling the country.

Much of the Uzbek economy relies on agriculture for subsistence, as the entire country is landlocked and experiences a very dry climate. Many multinational corporations have experienced run-ins with the country’s government, having been accused of not following local laws and customs. That hasn’t stopped the administration from trying to attract more business, however, through tax incentives and sometimes even bribery.

7. Turkmenistan

• Corruption score: 17
• Power structure: Presidential Democracy/Authoritarian

Soldiers raise the national flag during a military parade marking Turkmenistan’s Independence Day – Source: AFP/Getty Images

Turkmenistan resides in a dangerous neighborhood, to say the least. Bordered by Iran, Afghanistan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan to the north, the country lies in a virtual hotbed of corrupt states. With the constant turmoil all over the Middle East, it’s been very easy for the country to fall into corrupt affairs, especially concentrated at the top from the authoritarian presidential figure, Gurbanguly Berdimuhamedow.

The CIA’s file says that Turkmenistan likes to describe itself as a secular democracy and presidential republic, while in practice, its government more closely resembles an authoritarian dictatorship. The country itself was founded as a result of the Soviet Union’s collapse, as so many others in the region, and the resulting power struggle has left the nation highly corrupt and vulnerable to tomfoolery.

Also like many other countries in its region, Turkmenistan’s economy is largely based on agriculture and energy. The country is fortunate to have vast reserves of crude oil and natural gas to supplement the economy, although they are controlled by the government. Misuse of the state’s revenues have driven many investors away and led to high levels of corruption.

6. Iraq

• Corruption score: 16
• Power structure: Federal Parliamentary Constitutional Republic (ostensibly)

Iraqi tribesmen carry their weapons as they gather to show their willingness to join Iraqi security forces – Source: STR/AFP/Getty Images

Many people may be surprised that Iraq isn’t higher on the list of the world’s most corrupt countries, but its certainly up there. It’s no secret the current state of affairs in Iraq is a total mess. After the second American invasion in 15 years, the pullout of U.S. forces has left Iraq a virtual power vacuum, with several different sects fighting for power over the embattled nation. Fighting is mostly concentrated between the Kurds, the Shiites and the Sunnis, but the arrival of ISIS from Syria has added additional issues.

The CIA lists Iraq’s government as a parliamentary democracy, but the legitimacy of the government is definitely up for debate. And there’s definitely little debate as to whether or not corruption has taken hold in the country, as Iraq’s vast wealth and natural resources have made it a target for all kinds of industry and war profiteers.

Iraq has actually seen some economic growth as the country rebuilds itself, but there is also a lot of outside interference from American and European contracting companies, hired to rebuild infrastructure and tap into the country’s oil reserves. The future of Iraq is probably as uncertain as any country in the world. It’s very possible that the nation will dissolve and turn into three distinct countries, as it was before Europeans entered the fray in the early 20th century. As for now, incredible instability — along with the arrival of ISIL (or ISIS) from the north — will keep the country in a state of flux.

5. South Sudan

• Corruption score: 15
• Power structure: Republic

South Sudanese migrants wave their national flag – Source: Oren Ziv/AFP/Getty Images

One of the world’s youngest countries, South Sudan officially declared independence in 2011, following long-standing conflicts with its parent country, Sudan, which gained its independence in 1956. Between the mid-1950s and now, conflicts in the region have resulted in the deaths of as many as 2.5 million people, or so the CIA contends. South Sudan now stands as an independent republic, composed of 10 states.

A nation still in its infancy, South Sudan does not have the traditional long-standing government structures in place that many others do. This has led to ripe opportunities for corrupt politicians to step in, and as a result, the country has remained mostly undeveloped, and its citizens participate in a largely subsistence-based economic system. One other issue is the lack of a sense of nationhood among the 200 or so ethnic groups occupying the country.

According to The World Bank, the vast majority of South Sudan’s GDP — around 80% — is derived from oil exports. This has been a major problem, as international oil companies have been able to take advantage of the nation’s weak governmental structures and regulatory policies, turning huge profits at the expense of the citizens. In fact, 85% of the country’s workforce is engaged in non-paid labor. More than half live below the poverty line as well.

4. Afghanistan

• Corruption score: 12
• Power structure: Islamic Republic

An old Afghanistan flag flies – Source: Marty Melville/AFP/Getty Images

Afghanistan has an incredibly difficult history to try and condense. The area has been inhabited for a very long time — and its geographic location has also put it in the middle of many conflicts over hundreds, if not thousands of years. There’s a reason the country has been stuck with the nickname ‘the graveyard of empires’, as it is incredibly difficult to not only conquer, but to keep under control.

The country has been loosely held together by a central government that largely lacks power, and has been carved up by a myriad of local tribal leaders and warlords, as we’ve seen first-hand with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. The country’s now-former president Hamid Karzai was notoriously corrupt — he’s been recently busted for taking bagfuls of money from the American military, among other things. Afghanistan is also home to an enormous amount of the world’s heroin production, which has brought lots of wealth to a lucky few.

The country’s economy has remained in a state of flux for some time now, although the fall of the Taliban has helped — as has a flood of international aid. But it still faces major issues going forward. As the CIA puts it, “Criminality, insecurity, weak governance, lack of infrastructure, and the Afghan Government’s difficulty in extending rule of law to all parts of the country pose challenges to future economic growth.”

3. Sudan

• Corruption score: 11
• Power structure: Federal Republic

Sudanese wave national flags as they gather outside the Defence Ministry in the capital Khartoum – Source: Ashraf Shazly/AFP/Getty Images

One country that has been wrapped thoroughly in the grasp of war for many years is the African nation of Sudan. Long-standing conflicts between competing factions and ethnic groups have destabilized the country’s ability to efficiently operate from an economic standpoint, and the result has been devastating to many of the country’s citizens. South Sudan has also recently broken-off from the rest of the country, taking with it vast oil reserves. CNNreports that Sudan’s GDP was expected to contract by a fair amount due to South Sudan’s departure.

The country’s government is listed as a federal republic, which is ruled by the National Congress Party,according to the CIA. The NCP came to power after a coup d’etat in 1989, and has not been able to successfully repair the nation’s issues. As a result of the prolonged instability, Sudan’s GDP has tanked since spiking in 2006, much of which has to do with the situation in South Sudan.

64.5% of Sudan’s citizens live under the poverty line, by The World Bank’s calculations. The nation’s GDP stands at $66.55 billion as well. Both of these statistics would likely see improvement if not for some of the draconian and growth-inhibiting policies of the NCP. Also, if Sudan can find a way to rid itself of some of its corrupt officials, many violent conflicts could possibly see resolution as well.

Tie – 1. North Korea

• Corruption score: 8
• Power structure: Dictatorship

Propaganda mural painting is seen outside People’s Palace of Culture – Source: Feng Li/Getty Images

The world’s biggest wildcard is North Korea. There is little doubt in anyone’s mind that the country is immensely corrupt, having been effectively run into the ground over the past half-century by Kim Jong Sun, Kim Jong Il and now Kim Jung Un, all of whom the country’s citizens affectionately have referred to as ‘Supreme Leader’. The CIA lists North Korea’s government as a ‘communist state one-man dictatorship’, with an estimated GDP of $28 billion as of 2009.

Notorious for having very little electricity and sending its citizens to prison camps, North Korea’s government and economy are effectively shrouded in mystery. While it does receive aid from countries like China, North Korea obviously has had problems producing enough fuel and food to properly care for its citizens. Military spending far outweighs spending on social programs and aid, mostly to put on appearances for the rest of the world in their famous outbursts of saber-rattling, and to keep citizens in line.

The country’s major issues can be traced back to a number of natural disasters and the collapse of the Soviet Union, as the land, people and equipment have all been ‘worn out’ over the years, according to a CNN report. With little hope for change in the near future, North Korea is destined to remain one of the planet’s most corrupt and destitute nations.

Tie – 1. Somalia

• Corruption score: 8
• Power structure: Almost none; “in the process of building a federal parliamentary republic” – CIA

A pirate stands on a rocky outcrop on the coast in Hobyo, central Somalia – Source: Roberto Schmidt/AFP/Getty Images

Somalia may just be the most unstable country on the entire planet. The country has become infamous in the United States as being the setting for the Blackhawk Down incident, as well as the country’s pirates who are known to take over passing ships in the Gulf of Aden and Indian Ocean. The country is barely held together by an incredibly loose central government, and is more accurately being run by a number of competing clans and warlords, creating lots of hostility and division.

Life in Somalia is notoriously tough. On the economic front, many people make a living from raising livestock or farming, and others from fishing. Of course, with things remaining such a mess at the top of the power structure, any long-term planning for social programs and infrastructure is difficult. According to The World Bank, only 29% of the country’s population has been enrolled in school, and life expectancy is only 55 years. Both of these numbers rank well-below most other countries, and provide some insight into the internal strife the country is experiencing.

Beyond these things, information on the inner workings of Somalia’s government and its economic system are scarce. That alone is rather telling, as corrupt officials may not want outsiders seeing the true picture of what’s going on inside the country’s borders.

Read More →