Brian Snyder/Reuters

United States Postal Service (USPS) mailboxes are stacked in a storage lot of a sandblasting and painting company in Hartford, Wisconsin, August 16, 2020. People who live nearby said the pile had grown noticeably larger in recent weeks.

After weeks of mounting pressure, U.S. Postmaster General Louis DeJoy on Tuesday said he would postpone new cost-cutting measures that had sparked concerns many mail-in ballots would be delivered too late for November’s election. The announcement came as more than 20 states were reportedly planning to sue the United States Postal Service (USPS), and just days before Mr. DeJoy was set to testify before Congress.

“To avoid even the appearance of any impact on election mail, I am suspending these initiatives until after the election is concluded,” said Mr. DeJoy in a statement, adding that there would be no closures of mail processing facilities and overtime would be approved as needed. “The Postal Service is ready today to handle whatever volume of election mail it receives this fall.”

The brouhaha and the postmaster general’s decision to back off underscored how challenging the administration of this election is likely to be. Years of USPS financial troubles, compounded by the pandemic, are coming to a head, with Democrats in Congress seeking an emergency infusion of $3.5 billion for mail-in voting and $25 billion for the organization as a whole. Observers worry that a surge in voting by mail, together with already tight state deadlines for submitting ballot applications, could overwhelm the system.

The debate has become highly politicized, especially after President Donald Trump suggested that withholding USPS funding would prevent universal mail-in voting, which he has alleged – without providing evidence – would be fraudulent.

A failure to deliver or count mailed ballots could disproportionately disenfranchise Democrats, who favor voting by mail in higher numbers than Republicans this year, according to polls. It could potentially be enough to tip the outcome in a key swing state, or even the whole country. In the 2018 election, when about a quarter of voters submitted their ballots by mail, the top reason ballots were rejected was because they were late. As voters turned to mail in record numbers this primary season, as many as 1 in 5 of those ballots in New York City were not counted, due in part to delivery delays or envelopes not being postmarked.

“That is an enormously unacceptable disenfranchisement rate,” says Hans von Spakovsky, manager of the Election Law Reform Initiative at the conservative Heritage Foundation, who notes that turnout in primary elections is typically well below that of general elections.

Jules Struck/The Christian Science Monitor

Miriam Villanueva came to Lynn, Massachusetts, from Andover to join a ‘Protect the Post Office’ rally, Aug. 18, 2020. ‘You deserve to cast your vote,’ she said. On Tuesday, the US postmaster general said he would suspend changes that critics said could hamper mail-in voting during the November election.

Often lost in the debate is bipartisan agreement that the postal service needs reform, says Ray Smock, who formerly served as the historian of the U.S. House of Representatives.

“We are in a political situation where [parties] think success comes from winning, not from serving,” says Dr. Smock. “The essential nature of American politics, when it works, is it has to be oriented toward problem solving, not political gain.”

A massive, money-losing organization

Since Benjamin Franklin served as the first postmaster general, the USPS has grown to an organization of more than 600,000 employees that pays $2 billion in salaries and benefits every biweekly pay period. In 2019, it would have ranked as the 44^th  largest Fortune 500 company. That year, its employees traveled the equivalent of 53,640 times around Earth to deliver mail – including via a mule train to reach Havasupai tribe members at the bottom of the Grand Canyon. The carrier with the longest route travels more than 190 miles a day to bring mail to just 272 boxes in Sidney, Montana.

If all this sounds expensive, it is. From 2008 to 2018, it lost $68 billion. By the end of fiscal year 2018, it was earning less than half of what it owed each year, according to a report from the General Accounting Office, although it has been chipping away at its unfunded liabilities. Part of the burden stems from a congressional mandate to prefund its retirement health benefits, rather than pay as it goes. Those financial woes were compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic. Mr. DeJoy, who previously ran a private logistics company, was brought in to put its finances in order.

His move this summer to take some mail sorting machines out of circulation in order to make room for parcel processing, along with a policy of cutting back on overtime, raised concerns that he was reducing capacity for an already strained organization. Industry partners were left scratching their heads about why the Postal Service didn’t consult with them ahead of time, as it has often done in the past, says Art Sackler, a lawyer and lobbyist on postal and other issues for many years, and the manager of the Coalition for a 21^st  Century Postal Service, an industry coalition on Capitol Hill.

After Mr. DeJoy’s announcement, Mr. Sackler said he was encouraged that the USPS would return to how it has always handled ballot mail, and concerns about timely processing and delivery could be put aside.

“USPS does need more focus on costs and efficiency, though, so turning back to potential operational changes after the election seems to make some sense,” he added. “This time we would urge the postmaster general to be more transparent and to consult with his stakeholders in advance of reimposing any of these changes or instituting new or additional ones.”

But Norman Ornstein, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute in Washington, D.C., says he had a hard time accepting Mr. DeJoy’s statement at face value – noting, for example, that he did not say he would put back all the sorting machines that had already been removed.

“There are too many other ways in which he can act to add impediments to the delivery of mail ballots,” says Dr. Ornstein, who studies politics, elections, and the U.S. Congress. “ ‘Trust, but verify’ is about as far as I would go.”

A larger concern for Democrats beyond the logistics of mail-in voting, is that Mr. Trump is laying the groundwork to claim the election was illegitimate if he loses.

“Trump and company have succeeded in getting into people’s heads serious doubts about the reliability of mailing your ballot, which in and of itself is potentially disruptive,” says Democratic Rep. Gerry Connolly of Virginia, a senior member of the House Oversight Committee, in an interview with the Monitor.

Efforts at reform

Speaker Nancy Pelosi recalled the House from its August recess for an emergency vote on a postal reform bill – which would reverse Mr. Dejoy’s recent changes, mark all mailed ballots as first class, and infuse $25 billion into the struggling agency. Many states mail ballots at a cheaper rate, which can take longer.

Mr. Dejoy has agreed to testify Friday before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which is chaired by Ron Johnson, a Wisconsin Republican and ally of the president. On Monday, he is scheduled to testify at a hearing organized by the House Oversight Committee, which is chaired by New York Democrat Carolyn Maloney, whose primary challenger, Suraj Patel, joined a lawsuit this summer after more than 12,000 absentee ballots were disqualified. As of early August, he was trailing her by 3,700 votes.

Though some Republicans have voiced frustration with the mail delays, the Democrats’ bill is expected to pass along party lines in the House and sputter in the Senate. The lack of consensus – like so much else this year – is largely a product of entrenched partisan narratives.

Democrats worry about voter suppression and view government as a service. Republicans worry about voter fraud and view government as a type of business, says Dr. Smock, the former House historian.

The USPS is the only government service mandated by the Constitution, and remains the most popular government agency, with a 91% favorability rating according to a Pew Research Center poll earlier this year. 

Yet solving the problems of the USPS is a herculean task, says Tom Davis, a former Republican congressman from Virginia who chaired the House Oversight Committee, which supervises the postal service.

Mr. Davis sponsored the last major successful USPS reform bill in 2006 and remembers the enormous number of competing interests – lobby groups, unions, parties – who wanted a say. 

“Congress only acts after the fact,” he says. “There’s no reward in tackling the problem ahead of time.”

The result of that political procrastination is a last-minute attempt to right an agency that’s been ailing for decades, just weeks before early voting begins. Congress, says Mr. Davis, is showing up years late and billions of dollars short. 

For the past 30 years, virtual communication has increased, and first-class mail – a large source of USPS revenue – has decreased. Mail volume is down 33% since 2006, with customer visits also dropping off significantly, according to a Wall Street Journal editorial that quipped, “It’s a Blockbuster service in a Netflix world.” USPS’s own board of governors requested $25 billion in relief earlier this year. 

Mr. von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation argues, however, that more money is not the answer. Rather, better management is what’s needed.

“Folks are using this COVID-19 crisis to say we need to give more money to the Postal Service,” he says. But “if they had all the money they could possibly desire … I don’t think they could handle the huge increase in volume that people are pushing for for the November election.”

Jules Struck/The Christian Science Monitor

Thomas Costin, former Lynn mayor and postmaster, speaks on the steps of the building named after him, the Thomas P. Costin Jr. Post Office Building, during a ‘Save the Post Office’ rally in Lynn, Massachusetts, Aug. 18, 2020.

A protest in Massachusetts

The Post Office controversy has struck a nerve for many citizens across the country, prompting local news coverage and protests. In Lynn, Massachusetts, a working-class city up the coast from Boston, several dozen people gathered on the steps of the Thomas P. Costin, Jr. Post Office at lunchtime on Tuesday.

Mr. Costin himself, a former mayor of Lynn and postmaster for 31 years who is now in his 90s, even made an appearance. “Without the Postal Service, we wouldn’t have the country we have today,” he said.

At one point, a counterprotester interrupted Mr. Costin’s short speech. But as other local officials spoke, including U.S. Rep. Seth Moulton, a retired Marine officer and former presidential candidate whose office organized the rally, cars drove by slowly and honked in solidarity.

“I came today because this is unacceptable,” says Shelby Jones, who has lived in Lynn all his life. By trying to block mail-in voting in the middle of a pandemic, Mr. Jones says, the president is signaling that he doesn’t care about citizens. “I don’t care if you’re Republican, Democrat, Independent – it’s an assault on the United States Postal Service. [President Trump] didn’t start this until he felt that he was getting down in the polls.”

Nicole Werth, an artist who came with her accountant husband on a lunch break, supports mail-in voting as a more accessible option. “I’ve been disappointed when we have voted in the past – I mean, how low the counts are when we go to submit our ballots,” she says. “So this would provide opportunity if you have to work, or you need child care, or whatever the case may be, that you’re able to do it on your own time.”

After several days of extreme police brutality last week, the now peaceful protests against Belarus’ longtime autocrat, Alexander Lukashenko, have become so massive and all-encompassing that his swift exit looks all but certain.

But the resolution to the political revolution sweeping the Slavic, Russian-speaking country of 9.5 million remains obscure.

A near-leaderless opposition is scrambling to capitalize on its unexpected street victory by putting forward a viable transition plan. Mr. Lukashenko, who has been thoroughly discredited but still commands the security forces, is pledging to leave, but only after a process of constitutional reform has been completed and fresh elections carried out.

All the while the Kremlin watches nervously from the sidelines, deeply concerned about the spiraling events in Russia’s close neighbor, economic dependent, and rare military ally. Belarus today sits in the eye of the political storm, and what comes next has the potential to become something much worse, but also could be a new dawning of democracy in a country that has scarcely ever known it.

“We are past the point of no return for Lukashenko,” says Yaroslav Romanchuk, a political activist who ran against Mr. Lukashenko in elections 10 years ago and now heads the Mizes Center, a liberal think tank in Minsk. “In recent days we have seen an outpouring of popular will, a consensus of Belarusian civil society – including huge numbers of workers, who have never before participated in political protests – that there needs to be basic change. Lukashenko’s use of violence against the protesters last week sealed the political and moral case that he has to go. Now we are on the wave of a revolution that is peaceful, and full of hope and joy.”

A protest without leaders

Mr. Lukashenko’s main opponent in the disputed election – which he claimed to win with 78% support – is Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, the wife of a political prisoner. She had said that she would not serve as president even if she won, but would simply prepare the ground for fresh, free, and fair elections. Ms. Tsikhanouskaya fled to Lithuania a week ago, leaving the street protests to be organized by anonymous social media channels.

One of those is Nexta Live (“nexta” means “somebody”), a Telegram channel that rocketed from about 300,000 subscribers to over 2 million in about two weeks. It has become the main focus of organizational instructions, such as where and when to gather, as well as information on the movements of the security forces and how to avoid them. It’s also a repository for testimonials, political news, and declarations, as well as photos and videos of the protests.

“The protests had no leaders. At the beginning, whoever got noticed trying to lead got arrested,” says Svetlana Kalinkina, deputy chair of the independent Belarusian Association of Journalists. “The authorities tried shutting down the internet, arresting people they thought were associated with Telegram, but none of it worked. Telegram and other social nets have just kept growing.”

But the anonymity of the organizing force also poses a conundrum when it comes to negotiating with the authorities.

“There is an impasse, where the police have stopped beating people, and protesters are not crossing the line,” says Andrey Suzdaltsev, a Belarusian political expert at Moscow’s Higher School of Economics. “Unfortunately, the regime Lukashenko built did not cultivate capable people who might step in. The opposition is divided, and there is squabbling in its ranks. The people are ungovernable. There is no one to negotiate with. It’s like the Arab Spring, but under Belarusian conditions.”

Not Ukraine 2.0

For Russian President Vladimir Putin, the crisis presents several tough challenges, but also an unparalleled opportunity. On Tuesday Mr. Putin held a series of phone calls with European leaders, including those of France and Germany, clearly trying to find common ground on the way forward.

Moscow’s key concern will be the status of Belarus as a Russian-allied “buffer state” between Russia and NATO. Any threat to that could lead to concerted Russian action – as happened in Ukraine in 2014. Then, after a disorderly change of power in Kyiv brought pro-Western actors to power, Moscow intervened by seizing the Russian-populated territory of Crimea and fomenting a still-ongoing civil war in Ukraine’s largely pro-Russian Donbass region.

Vasily Fedosenko/Reuters

Belarusian united opposition candidate Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, shown here holding her ballot at a polling station in Minsk, Belarus, on Aug. 9, 2020, was forced to flee the country soon after dubious results were announced in favor of President Alexander Lukashenko.

But, as Mr. Romanchuk explains, Belarus is very different from Ukraine. It is not ethnically or linguistically divided, has no reservoir of anti-Russian sentiment similar to that in western Ukraine, and is fully dependent on Russia for its economic needs.

“I’ve been out with the protesters all these days, and I have not heard a single pro-NATO or anti-Russia slogan voiced. Nothing at all about geopolitics. This is just about Lukashenko,” he says. “This is not like Ukraine. Ninety-eight percent of people here speak Russian. There is no doubt that Russia is going to be a major player here. We have 100% energy dependence on Russia, and almost half our exports go there. We want to be an independent country, but of course we’re going to be friendly to Russia.”

Russian analysts say the crisis blindsided the Kremlin, which had expected things to turn out much as they have several times in the past. Mr. Lukashenko won his only free and fair election back in 1994, and has rigged the results in presidential polls at five-year intervals ever since. In each case, Belarus’ educated and professional communities have protested loudly. But they have not succeeded in convincing other groups, such as industrial workers and the very large rural population – who benefit from Mr. Lukashenko’s Soviet-like centrally planned economics – to join them. This time looks very different.

“A difficult partner for the Kremlin”

“Despite a lot of assumptions in the West, Putin and Lukashenko are not really friends. He’s always been a difficult partner for the Kremlin, uneasy and unpredictable,” says Andrei Kortunov, director of the Russian International Affairs Council, which is affiliated with the Foreign Ministry. “It’s hard to say how this is going to play out. For Putin, I guess the ideal outcome would be to see a weakened Lukashenko with some sort of transition to rule by someone within the current elite, perhaps someone more cooperative and less volatile.”

For over 20 years Russia and Belarus have inhabited a largely theoretical “union state.” But its realization has been largely thwarted by Mr. Lukashenko’s tendency to take Russian subsidies and energy privileges, while refusing to follow through on things Moscow wants, such as openings for Russian investment in Belarus’ economy.

Mr. Lukashenko has played on Russian fears that Belarus might drift westward – as he did in a weekend phone conversation with Mr. Putin, warning that the protests might open the door to NATO aggression against Belarus. But analysts say his credibility with Mr. Putin is at low ebb after he arrested 33 Russians last month and accused them of trying to destabilize Belarus.

As long as Belarusian membership in the Collective Security Treaty Organization military alliance, and the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Community are not threatened, it seems unlikely the Kremlin will intervene to prop up Mr. Lukashenko with security assistance. In two phone calls between Mr. Putin and Mr. Lukashenko in recent days, Russian security help was apparently offered, but Russian analysts insist that only meant military help if Belarusian borders were threatened by NATO. Mr. Putin’s flurry of phone calls with Western leaders this week was probably aimed at clarifying that issue.

A similar “color revolution” in Armenia two years ago did not raise the Kremlin’s hackles because it did not bring any threat of Armenia changing its pro-Russian geopolitical alignment. Russia has since gotten along fine with Armenia’s new leader.

An example for Russia?

But Russia’s anti-Kremlin opposition is watching events in Belarus very closely and taking notes. Mr. Putin runs a personal regime that has some similarities to the one Mr. Lukashenko has operated in Belarus for 26 years, but it also has critical differences. His base of support is much broader, his public popularity remains high, and his electoral victories have been much more convincing. Russian institutions are stronger and more diverse, and there is a wide array of permitted opposition and even independent media in Russia.

“Putin will see what’s happening in Belarus as a very bad example for Russian civil society,” says Andrei Kolesnikov, an analyst with the Carnegie Moscow Center. “This summer, there have been very similar protests in Russia’s far east, in Khabarovsk and Bashkortistan, where protesters are using Telegram channels to coordinate their actions in the same way it’s happening in Minsk. The Kremlin will definitely be concerned about this in the long term.”

But in the shorter run, the Kremlin has been careful not to alienate protesting Belarusians – much of the Russian media has been openly sympathetic to the protesters – and may be positioning itself to mediate a political settlement in its close neighbor.

“Russia has a lot of links within the Belarusian elite, and the Kremlin is surely trying to pinpoint people inside the regime who are not tainted with the recent police violence, but would be constructive actors from Moscow’s point of view,” says Sergei Strokan, international affairs columnist with the Moscow liberal daily Kommersant.

“The opposition may have the support of the people in the street at the moment, but they do not have the managerial experience or expertise to govern. So, some kind of reconciliation government is needed, that will allow members of the old elite to join, but also bring in fresh faces,” Mr. Strokan says. “Russia has a lot of cards to play, if they are played wisely, to help bring this about.”

Daniel Cole/AP

People dine outside at a restaurant in Marseille's Old Port in southern France on July 25, 2020. Smoking is only permitted outside in France, which means cigarette butts are a major cleanliness issue at urban eateries like this.

Set along the Marseille coastline is Vallon des Auffes, a quaint, old fishing harbor and much-loved summer aperitif spot. Even during a pandemic, groups converge here to watch the sunset, sometimes over a plate of chickpea fritters known as panisse.

But despite the picturesque surroundings, a common sight at the few eateries here, as well as across the city, is cigarette butts.

The abundance of used cigarettes and other litter that gets strewn about – either by its famous mistral wind or carelessness – has given Marseille the reputation as France’s dirtiest city. It’s a constant battle to stop waste from ending up on the ground and in the nearby Mediterranean. 

“Cigarette litter is a big problem,” says Jonathan Luciani, the manager of Chez Jeannot, a Marseille institution in Vallon des Auffes that is famed for its pizzas. “Having a clean terrace is a huge advantage, but we also want to show we are sensitive to [environmental] issues. Many of the Marseillais are not yet so aware.” 

Chez Jeannot is one of 40 establishments and counting to join the Ma Terrasse Propre (My Clean Patio) initiative, launched by local nongovernmental organization Recyclop in 2018, to reduce cigarette waste and educate smokers about how they can decrease their environmental impact. It joins the Clean My Calanques (Clean My Inlets) challenge, which saw volunteers collect more than a ton of waste, including millions of cigarette butts, from Marseille’s beloved rocky coast at the end of July.

There has been a renewed interest in such environmental initiatives in France since the country came out of its lockdown on May 11. The drop in air pollution, closure of recycling centers, and spring cleaning en masse during confinement have pushed pollution and ecological solutions to the forefront of public concern. 

This month, Marseille banned smoking at four of its beaches, and in early June, the French government announced that it was upping the fine for littering – including cigarette butts and disposable face masks – from €68 to €135 ($80 to $160). A controversial law looks to outlaw outdoor terrace heaters at bars and restaurants across the country next year. 

Now, as France cautiously reopens its cafes and restaurants, with most favoring outdoor seating, there is a desire to get off to a fresh start and lead by example. But as eateries work to tackle their level of waste as well as look ahead to measures that discourage smokers and those who cater to them, owners of food and drink establishments must balance respecting personal freedoms with reducing their environmental footprint.

“A very interesting consequence of the pandemic has been an awareness about how we must dedicate ourselves to preserving the planet in the long term,” says Josette Halégoi, a psychosociologist and author. “Cafes play an extremely important role in French society ... so they really need to move towards sustainable measures like using bulk items or less plastic, ways of life that individuals have already adopted.”

“Once a cigarette hits the ground, that’s everyone’s problem”

Cigarette litter is hardly a new phenomenon, nor is it unique to Marseille. Despite a recent tax hike on cigarettes in France that has pushed some packs over €10 each, and the mass distribution of pocket ashtrays, littering cigarettes on the ground remains habitual. Last summer, a group of youth collected 10,000 butts in one hour on the lawn next to the Eiffel Tower. 

Since France’s indoor smoking ban came into effect in 2007, cafes, bars, and restaurants have had to find ways of disposing of cigarette waste. Recyclop founder Abdès Bengorine says that cafes get the largest concentration of cigarette butts in his city. One butt can pollute 500 liters (132 gallons) of water, making the issue especially pertinent for port cities like Marseille.

“If we can stop them ending up on the ground at cafes,” says Mr. Bengorine, “we will have accomplished a lot.”

Participating establishments in Ma Terrasse Propre receive a receptacle capable of holding 10,000 cigarette butts. When it reaches its limit, the butts are sent to a local company specializing in the disposal of toxic waste. There, the butts are incinerated, turned into water vapor, and transformed into electricity via a turbo-generator. 

The goal of such a system, per Recyclop, is to recycle waste without creating new waste, such as plastic. Since its launch, the organization has aimed to not just create new environmentally friendly solutions but educate smokers on their personal responsibility. 

“We’re not trying to take the moral high ground about whether you should smoke or not,” says Mr. Bengorine. “If you want to smoke, that’s your problem. But once your cigarette touches the ground, that’s everyone’s problem.”

A new urgency to cleaning up France

Still, it has been a balancing act for lawmakers to find a happy medium between driving environmental change and keeping the economy afloat. The French government recently unveiled a plan to ban outdoor terrace heaters starting in early 2021, directly impacting cafes and restaurants that have relied on them since the indoor smoking ban went into effect. Mr. Luciani of Chez Jeannot says it will be especially hard for establishments with a small interior, where their turnover could be cut by 80% during the winter months. 

But France has been forced to improve its sustainability efforts when it comes to cigarette butts and litter in general. If not only to compete with neighboring recycling leaders Austria and Germany, then to address growing calls within local and national agendas. 

At the end of June, the French government accepted nearly all of the 149 ecological solutions proposed by a 150-strong citizen climate group. And in the recent local elections, many towns committed to developing waste management and recycling initiatives.

“We were in a period of time in France where the citizen climate assembly, the local elections, and the pandemic coincided unexpectedly,” says Michel Cruciani, an associate research fellow at the Center for Energy & Climate at the Paris-based think tank Ifri. “These events all contributed to an overall greater awareness.”

It’s certainly been the case in Marseille, where the recent election of Mayor Michèle Rubirola has raised the hopes of Marseillais environmentalists, given her history of activism on green issues in the city. It’s a break away from the city’s poor record – from air and sea pollution to the scourge of cigarette butts – under the previous mayor who stayed in place for 25 years. 

“There’s a new optimism here,” says François, a customer at Chez Jeannot, as the sun dips below the Mediterranean. “Marseille might finally get cleaned up.”

Editor’s note: As a public service, we have removed our paywall for all pandemic-related stories.

It’s lunchtime at Unity Farm Sanctuary, and all the residents are munching away. In the “Forever Friends” pen, Audrey and Pal gently jostle heads to share the trough. When Pal nudges Audrey’s face out of her way, she stops and licks his ear and his neck as if to say, ‘That’s OK. I still love you,’ before placing her head back in the haystack.

That may seem strange – especially when social distancing is the behavior du jour – but Audrey and Pal are cattle. And the licking is a way of showing affection and bonding among bovine.

Research published earlier this month in the journal Frontiers in Veterinary Science found that such grooming actually reinforces social relationships among cows in a herd. That’s right: Cow herds have complex social dynamics. Cattle may seem mindless, munching on grass and feed all day, but the inner lives of bovine are far more meaningful and complex than they may seem. And the more scientists study their social interactions, the more it seems that cattle, like humans, need to feel connected to others.

“It’s an adjustment of how to think about them as a species,” says Gustavo Monti, study lead author and a professor at the Institute of Veterinary Preventive Medicine at the Austral University of Chile. “They have their own lives, they have complexities, and there are relationships between animals.”

A complex network

Some 8,000 to 10,000 years ago, cattle lived in mostly female family groups made up of grandmothers, mothers, and their offspring, and bulls would come in to breed, explains Trevor DeVries, Canada research chair in dairy cattle behavior and welfare and a professor at the University of Guelph. The social structure of the herd would depend largely on the maternal lineages in the group and age of the different cows.

Today, domesticated cattle mostly live in much larger groups, typically separated by age, and are shuffled around among herds and even farms based on breeding and milk production patterns. But the sociality of cows doesn’t seem to have eroded. Rather, researchers say the cows build a different kind of social network, and it’s more complex and nuanced than a simple biological family structure.

Instead of being based on a lineage, cattle grouped together on a farm tend to establish a hierarchy of sorts that may have more to do with the size of the animal or temperament, says Dr. DeVries, who was not involved in the new study. But it’s not a simple, linear hierarchy. Cow A, for example, might be dominant to Cow B, and Cow B to Cow C, but that doesn’t mean that Cow C is submissive to Cow A. The setting might matter, too. Different cows with different temperaments might be more assertive around food than around places to lie down, for example.

“You see black-and-white cows, and you think, ‘OK, they are pretty similar,’ but that is really not the case. They have their personalities, they have their characters, and this is really reflected in their social interactions,” says Borbala Foris, a postdoctoral researcher in the Animal Welfare Program at the University of British Columbia. “There are ones that are more connected to the group, more sociable, in the middle, and there are more isolated ones.”

Most of this research has been done on dairy cows – and thus all-female herds. But at Unity Farm Sanctuary, Audrey and Pal seem to exhibit similar dynamics with their paddock-mate Elliot (Audrey is a heifer and Pal and Elliot are both steers). Elliot is the biggest and the other two move away when he moves toward his preferred lunch pail. 

Lick-minded friends

But it’s not all about food – or dominance. Researchers are increasingly discovering how cattle form particularly strong social bonds and rely on each other for support when things get stressful. 

Licking one another, a behavior known as allogrooming, seems to reinforce those social connections. The new study found that there was a mutualism to the behavior. Cows tended to groom other cows that had previously groomed them, perhaps strengthening a sort of friendship among individuals. What’s more, the cows that did not focus their allogrooming on specific individuals actually received less attention themselves over time.

Researchers previously posited that younger, more submissive cows likely groomed older ones to reinforce dominance, but, to Dr. Monti’s surprise, the research team found that it was the older members of the group that tended to groom more cows.

“Our results indicate that licking behavior is important to make friends and to maintain harmony in the herd. That older cows groom more individuals suggests that they take the role of ‘peacemakers’ in the herd,” Dr. Monti said in a press release. 

Scientists also thought that allogrooming was a way that cattle calmed one another when stressed. But researchers observed more licking behavior when the cows were at ease, suggesting that it’s more about building friendships and social cohesion in a settled group. 

That’s not to say that cattle don’t comfort one another. The animals do seem to gravitate together or exhibit signs of mutual stress when one is upset or ill. Often cows will lie near a stressed herdmate, particularly if it’s a friend.

At Unity Farm Sanctuary, Audrey, Elliot, and Pal have a neighbor in the next pen over – Dudley, a Scottish Highland bull. Dudley is in his own pen because of his massive horns, so the humans at the sanctuary worry about accidents if he were to play with his hornless bovine buddies. But they still find a way to connect through the fence. When Dudley was thought to be ill last year, says Marla Andrews, humane education director at Unity Farm Sanctuary, Audrey would lie by the fence between the pens to offer him company. 

The cows are also offering solace to sanctuary co-founder and facilities manager John Halamka during the pandemic. Dr. Halamka is the president of the Mayo Clinic Platform, a digital health care initiative, and he says that after a long day of virtual meetings, spending time with the animals is calming. 

“In the time of COVID there’s a lot of conflict. There’s worry about resources, there’s worry about societal stability, there’s lots of tension,” he says. “There’s no question that in a time of uncertainty, coming together human-to-human, or human-to-animal, is therapeutic to everyone.”

AP

Former Belarusian paratroopers with a banner that reads "Airborne forces with the people!" speaks to a crowd in Minsk, Belarus, Aug. 16.

One of the inspiring images from the ongoing revolution in Belarus shows police officers discarding their uniforms. Rather than follow the orders of the country’s dictator to keep attacking peaceful protesters after a rigged election on Aug. 9, they have defected to the pro-democracy side.

“17 years of service are over ... my conscience is clear ... police with the people,” wrote one police captain, Yeghor Yemelyanov, on his Instagram account.

It is these quiet acts of mental freedom by an unknown number of security forces in Belarus that could soon provide the tipping point for an end to the 26-year rule of strongman Alexander Lukashenko. Some police have clearly broken ranks after seeing at least 6,700 people arrested and two killed. Others have retreated from the streets rather than use force on unarmed civilians.

Their courage must be giving pause to Mr. Lukashenko about continuing the violence and further opening cracks in his security force, which is estimated to be more than 120,000.

Both Russia and the European Union are trying to influence events in Belarus. The small country of 9.5 million is a remnant of the former Soviet empire and a geopolitical pawn. Yet its future may be determined by those with guns and badges admitting to themselves that Mr. Lukashenko actually lost the election. His claim to power is a lie.

The election’s presumed winner, schoolteacher Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, has offered to forgive officers if they disobey orders to shoot. She says Belarusians are proving to the world “that the truth is not on the side of force and weapons, but instead the truth is on the side of the strength of mind, honesty, decency, and courage.”

Police are not the only defectors. Several anchors at Belarus’ state TV stations have quit. Workers at many state factories have gone on strike. Some prison officials have released hundreds of political prisoners. Belarusians, says Ms. Tsikhanouskaya, “are capable of self-organizing, making the right decisions, and standing up for themselves and their nearest.”

Democratic revolutions happen one person at a time, each recognizing the sanctity of innocent life, the necessity of individual liberty, and the equality embedded in universal rights. To show their intentions, many protesters in Belarus wear white and hold their hands in the form of a heart. These symbols have touched the conscience of many in the security forces. And they are helping turn a revolution toward a peaceful resolution.