Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
China
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: Hi, everybody, Ian Bremmer here, and a Quick Take to kick off your week. I am here in Tokyo, Japan. Just got back from Beijing. Being in this part of the world has me thinking a little bit about the state of our world and leadership, or should I say, the lack thereof. Those of you following me know I talk about a G-zero world, not a G-7, not a G-20, a place where we lack global leadership, and that has been so clear, thinking about the wars that continue, between Israel and Palestine, and now Lebanon, and more broadly in the Middle East, and between Russia and Ukraine, and increasingly NATO in Europe.
I think about the fact that all over the world, everyone wants these wars to be over. They're causing enormous amounts of suffering, displacement of human beings, massive war crimes, but they persist. It's worth thinking about what that means in terms of leadership because when we talk about the Middle East, and Israel-Palestine in particular, the United States is the most powerful ally of Israel, overwhelmingly in terms of its political and diplomatic support, its economic support, technological support, its military aid and training and intelligence. And yet, over the last year, the United States has had virtually no influence in the ability to contain, constrain, or end this war, irrespective of all the suffering.
You can complain about the United States on that with good reason, but then you look at Russia-Ukraine, and you see that over the last three years, China's been, by far, the most powerful friend and supporter of Russia, massive amounts of trade only expanding and dual-use technologies and diplomatic support. Yet, despite that, China has been unwilling to use any influence on Russia to try to bring the war to the end.
Now, to be clear, both the United States and China say all the right things. In Beijing, I was hearing from the leaders that they're friends with the Ukrainians and they maintain stable relations, and of course they want the war over, and they respect Ukrainian territorial integrity. And of course, the Americans support a two-state solution for the Palestinians and want to ensure that they get humanitarian aid and want to see a ceasefire happen, but I mean, the revealed preferences of both of these countries is their willingness to do anything about it is virtually zero. The Chinese don't care about the Ukrainians ultimately. That's what we're learning over the last few years. The Americans don't care about the Palestinians ultimately. That's what we've learned over the last year.
Absent leadership from the two most powerful countries in the world, where do you think we're going to get geopolitically? The answer is, to a much more dangerous place. That's the concern. I don't see that changing, particularly whether we have a Harris or a Trump presidency. I don't see that changing whether we have a Xi or a Xi presidency in China. It's not like they're making any real choices going forward. But look, maybe I'll be surprised. And certainly, it would be nice if no matter who wins, this was a topic of conversation between the Americans and the Chinese. That, "Hey, China. If you'd be willing to do a little bit more with Russia, we'd be willing to do a little bit more with Israel." I mean, frankly, at the end of the day, that's the kind of horse-trading I think we could really use diplomatically. Right now, that's a conversation that hasn't happened yet, but maybe it will.
That's it for me, and I'll talk to y'all real soon.
Republican presidential nominee and former U.S. President Donald Trump works behind the counter during a visit to McDonalds in Feasterville-Trevose, Pennsylvania, U.S. October 20, 2024.
Donald Trump has vowed to impose tariffs on China if it blockades Taiwan. “I would say: If you go into Taiwan, I’m sorry to do this, I’m going to tax you at 150% to 200%,” he told The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board last week.
When asked whether he would use military force for Taiwan, the former president said: “I wouldn’t have to, because [Xi Jinping] respects me and he knows I’m f— crazy.” Beijing reportedly does see more upside in Kamala Harris, precisely because of Trump’s erratic behavior.
When asked about Vladimir Putin, Trump said, “I got along with him great,” but noted that he once told the Russian leader he’d hit him “right in the middle of fricking Moscow” if he invaded Ukraine.
Are Trump’s numbers fake news? Meanwhile, Trump’s campaign may not be reaching critical voters in Arizona and Nevada, where leaked data revealed nearly a quarter of door-knocks could be fraudulent. Canvassers for America Pac, a political action committee founded by Elon Musk, stand accused of falsely claiming to visit homes, potentially undermining Trump’s ground game with just 15 days to go before Election Day.
America Pac denies widespread fraud, but if true, it could be a serious setback as Trump and Kamala Harris remainneck and neck inboth states.Envisioning Europe's path forward with European Parliament President Roberta Metsola
The European Union is at a crossroads. Big issues, like Russia’s Ukraine invasion, a migrant crisis, and an economic slowdown coming out of the Covid pandemic have been major tests of the bloc’s resilience and unity. There’s a lot at stake. Can the EU’s 27 member states hold it all together? On this week’s episode of the GZERO World Podcast, Ian Bremmer sits down with the woman at the heart of Europe’s government: European Parliament President Roberta Metsola. They discuss Europe’s path forward, its role on the world stage, and how a fragmented EU avoids being squeezed by the US and China. Metsola admits that, on China policy in particular, the bloc’s “biggest problem is we have not been coherent" and says a unified EU strategy toward China has (so far) been “absent” from policy discussions. So where does Europe go from here? In a wide-ranging discussion, Bremmer and Metsola dig into the EU’s push for strategic autonomy, rising far-right nationalism in recent EU elections, and whether Ukraine will be able to join the bloc anytime soon, even as Russia’s war rages on.
Subscribe to the GZERO World Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published.Andrei Belousov, Russia's Defence Minister, attends a meeting with Zhang Youxia, Vice Chairman of China's Central Military Commission, in Beijing, China, in this still image taken from video released on October 15, 2024.
Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousovmet with China’s top civilian defense official Zhang Youxia on Tuesday in Beijing, where both sides pledged to “continue working closely” to deepen military relations. However, the “no limits” partnership Beijing and Moscow committed to two years ago is proving unworthy of the moniker.
For one, China has proven reluctant to provide Russia with the weapons and shells it wants to wage war in Ukraine. Even Beijing’s more restrained shipments of “dual use” goods — civilian items with military applications like computer chips, machine components, and navigation equipment — has attracted opprobrium from the US and Europe.
But China isn’t just losing leverage with Russia and the US: North Korea has been happy to step in and send Russia approximately half the shells it uses in Ukraine, and even reportedly deploy troops to the battlefield. Beijing isn’t willing to match Pyongyang — or, evidently, rein them in.
All eyes are now on next week’s BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, where Presidents Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin will meet. China would like to show a united front at the big international conference, but the expansion of the group’s membership to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates (and also kinda sorta Saudi Arabia) makes it hard to get on the same page about any given geopolitical issue. We’re watching how they talk about Ukraine next week.
In this photo illustration, the Saudi Arabian Airlines (Saudia) logo seen displayed on a smartphone with an Artificial intelligence (AI) chip and symbol in the background.
Sir Edward Byrne, recently named the head of King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia, or KAUST, signaled that the institution will prioritize US technology and cut off ties with China if it jeopardizes its access to chips made in the US.
Byrne, an Australian neuroscientist, served as president at King’s College London from 2014 to 2021, and he was named president of KAUST last month. KAUST’s researchers depend on high-end chips from US companies such as Nvidia and AMD to train and run powerful artificial intelligence models and applications.
Both the US and China have vied for power in the Arabian peninsula, but the US has a clear advantage with most of the top chip and AI companies in the world — as well as strict export controls for US companies shipping to China or intermediaries.
Byrne is following the lead of others in the kingdom. In May, the chief executive officer of the Saudi Public Investment Fund-backed fund Alat also said that if asked to choose between the US and China, the fund would divest from China.
At a global AI summit in Riyadh last month, the Saudi Data and Artificial Intelligence Authority recently announced a deal to buy 5,000 Nvidia graphics chips to help develop an Arabic large language model, pending US government approval. The future of Saudi tech depends on the US and, it seems, the government and its most important institutions are signaling that while they don’t want to choose sides, the answer is clear as to who would win if they did.
North Korean leader Kim Jong Un visits the National Defense University in Pyongyang, North Korea, October 7, 2024, in this photo released by North Korea's official Korean Central News Agency.
South Korea’s military announced Monday it had detected North Korea preparing to destroy roads connecting the two countries, the latest in a series of steps advancing Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un’s renunciation of peaceful reunification. Pyongyang also threatened to attack the South over alleged drone incursions this weekend and announced it would begin fortifying its side of the border last week.
Kim’s sister and close ally Kim Yo Jong also flung invective at Seoul’s troops on Monday, calling them “mongrels tamed by Yankees” and saying that their “master” — the US — must be held accountable for the alleged drone flights over the Hermit Kingdom. On Friday, South Korea’s defense minister denied responsibility for the drones, which allegedly dropped anti-regime leaflets, and later said “we cannot verify the truth behind North Korea’s claims.” It is highly likely that any drones were flown by private organizations that attempt to agitate in North Korea and have distributed leaflets by balloon in the past.
All in all, Pyongyang’s provocations — which, lest we forget, include deploying troops to fight for Russia in Ukraine — are part of a pattern of escalation dating back to at least the fall of 2023, says Eurasia Group regional analyst Jeremy Chan. Whether it continues may depend heavily on the results of the US election, as “North Korea is trying to build out leverage it could bargain away in a potential future Trump administration while retaining its nuclear deterrent,” says Chan.
Trump’s advisors have signaled an openness to accepting a freeze in North Korea’s nuclear program – rather than full denuclearization – in return for sanctions relief. “But a freeze probably isn’t going to be enough for Trump,” says Chan. “If Kim could also agree to a moratorium on developing North Korea’s nuclear-powered submarines, military spy satellites, and long-range missiles, however, that could give enough of a win to Trump to sell to the American people.”
Carl Bildt, former prime minister of Sweden and co-chair of the European Council on Foreign Relations, shares his perspective on European politics from Vienna, Austria
Is there a risk of a full-scale trade war between the European Union and China?
Hopefully not. But it was a decision, somewhat controversial, the other day by the EU to impose tariffs, not too high but still substantial, on electric vehicles coming from China. The US, of course, has done something similar but much higher tariffs and without much of a theoretical justification. I mean, the EU tried to ground its different decisions in analysis of the subsidies generated or given to the different Chinese car manufacturers. China will retaliate in one way or the other. But talks are going on and there's no interest in a trade war either from the EU side or from the Chinese side. And we should not forget, by the way, that for the moment, there are 100 times more cars sold by European companies in China than Chinese vehicles or cars exported to Europe.
Why is the deal between Italy and Albania on refugee centers so controversial?
Well it's been criticized by human rights groups, whether that is justified or not, it's difficult for me to judge. But the idea is for roughly 3,000 asylum seekers to Italy to be roughly 3,000 of them every month to be processed in two centers in Italy that are going to be run by and financed by Italy. We'll see how this would work out. They would be coming from primarily what they call "safe countries," and that means that the expectation is, of course, that the majority of them, or the vast majority of them, will have to be repatriated to their respective countries. It's part of the effort by X numbers of European governments to deal with the migration issue that is in very many of the countries the number one domestic policy concern at the moment.