Featured Post from University of Rochester

How the Black Sea ceasefire could backfire for Ukraine

University of Rochester’s Hein Goemans says the deal suggests Russia is “playing” the United States.

Apr 4, 2025

1 min

Hein Goemans

Washington is touting the proposed Black Sea ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia, but there are signs that Russia could emerge from the deal with the upper hand.


CaptionResizeWrap TextRemove


Hein Goemans, a political science professor at the University of Rochester whose research focuses on territorial disputes and what starts and ends wars, says the agreement “doesn’t really mean much.”


“What matters is territorial divisions,” Goemans says. “I see this ceasefire deal as Russia trying to play the United States.”


Goemans says the deal would be reasonable if the U.S. were willing to enforce it with sanctions if, or when, Russia reneges.


“Ukraine should not believe this deal is in any way credible if the U.S. is not willing to commit to sanctions if Russia reneges, which it will,” Goemans says.


He adds that the deal also favors Russia if other parts of it, like the repatriation of Ukrainian children, are not effected.


“The chance that Russia would effectively help with the repatriation of Ukrainian abducted children is zero,” Goemans says. “It appears Russia has not compromised on any dimension.”


Goemans recently shared similar thoughts with Newsweek, and is regularly tapped by news outlets around the world for his insights on the war in Ukraine and territorial disputes in hotspots across the globe. Reach Goemans by clicking on his profile.


Connect with:
Hein Goemans

Hein Goemans

Professor of Political Science

Goemans is an expert on international conflict and war termination

UkraineInternational Conflict War terminationInternational RelationsWar and Conflict

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from University of Rochester

2 min

Taking the Reins of Holiday Stress

Ho-ho-ho and a bottle of Tums? From feeding a crowd to juggling travel and schedules and managing finances during a challenging economic time, the holidays can feel like a pressure cooker. But University of Rochester psychologist Jeremy Jamieson, one of the country’s leading researchers on stress, says the pressures of the season of giving (and giving and giving and giving some more) can be mitigated by mentally reframing the stress we feel. In other words, what matters is how we interpret our stress. Jamieson’s Social Stress Lab studies a technique called "stress reappraisal": the practice of reframing stress responses as helpful rather than harmful. According to researchers, people can learn to treat their signs of stress — the racing heart, the sweaty palms, the mental sense of urgency — as tools that prepare them to meet a challenge rather than a sign that they’re falling apart. “Stress reappraisal isn’t about calming down or shutting stress off,” Jamieson says. “It’s about changing the meaning of your stress response. If you view the demands as something you can handle, your body shifts into a challenge state, which is a more adaptive, productive kind of stress.” The research behind this approach has grown considerably. In one of Jamieson’s studies, published in Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, the Social Stress Lab trained community college students to reinterpret stress as a resource. The results were striking: students experienced less anxiety, performed better on exams, procrastinated less, were more likely to stay enrolled, and approached academic challenges with healthier physiological responses. Newer findings from the lab also suggest that stress reframing can support people facing workplace pressures, caregiving responsibilities, and major life transitions. In short, stress isn’t the enemy of our well-being during the holidays. The real culprit is believing stress is dangerous. Jamieson is available for interviews and can explain how people can use stress reappraisal strategies to navigate holiday pressures — and other high-demand moments — with more confidence, better health, and better outcomes. Click on his profile to connect with him.

2 min

Adam Frank: New Peer-reviewed Studies Change the Conversation on UFOs

For decades, talk of UFOs has thrived on fuzzy photos and personal anecdotes—never the kind of hard data scientists can actually test. But new peer-reviewed studies have changed the conversation, says Adam Frank, a University of Rochester astrophysicist who studies life in the universe and the nature of scientific discovery. Two recent papers, published in reputable astronomy journals, claim to have found evidence of “non-terrestrial artifacts” in astronomical photographs from the 1950s — objects that appear to be  orbiting Earth before the Space Age began. “That’s an extraordinary claim,” Frank says, “and, as Carl Sagan famously said, 'Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.' “The good news is that, finally, there’s something associated with UFOs that science can work with.” Led by astronomer Beatriz Villarroel and her VASCO project (Vanishing and Appearing Sources during a Century of Observations), the studies passed the first test of scientific credibility: rigorous peer review. Now, Frank says, comes the harder part — the “call-and-response” that defines real science. “Getting a paper published doesn’t make the claim right,” he explains. “It just means the debate can begin. Other scientists will now dig into the data, test the methods, and try to tear the claim apart. That’s how science works.” Frank is a frequent on-air commentator for live interviews and segments in national media outlets and the author of The Little Book of Aliens (Harper Collins, 2023). He also regularly contributes to written publications, including The Washington Post, The Atlantic, The New York Times, and Scientific American. In 2021 he received the Carl Sagan Medal, which recognizes and honors outstanding communication by an active planetary scientist to the general public. It is awarded to scientists whose efforts have significantly contributed to a public understanding of, and enthusiasm for, planetary science. Connect with him by clicking on his profile. 

1 min

'Brain-on-a-chip': Engineering tomorrow’s breakthroughs today

A “brain-on-a-chip” technology might sound like science fiction, but it’s real-world hope. James McGrath, a biomedical engineer at the University of Rochester, leads a team that develops micro-scale tissue chips to study diseases in lieu of conducting animal experiments. The team’s “brain-on-a-chip” model replicates the blood-brain barrier — the critical membrane separating the brain from the bloodstream — to mimic how the barrier functions under healthy conditions and the duress of infections, toxins, and immune responses that can weaken it. Recent findings from McGrath’s team show how systemic inflammation, such as that caused by sepsis, can compromise the barrier and harm brain cells. The researchers also demonstrated how pericytes — supportive vascular cells — can help repair barrier damage, an insight that could guide new therapies for Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. The research culminated in a pair of recent studies published in Advanced Science and Materials Today Bio. “We hope that by building these tissue models in chip format, we can arrange many brain models in a high-density array to screen candidates for neuroprotective drugs and develop brain models with diverse genetic backgrounds,” McGrath says. McGrath aims to transform how scientists test drugs and predict neurological side effects before they occur — helping rewrite how we study, and one day safeguard, the brain. Contact McGrath by clicking on his profile

View all posts
Powered by