Latest
AI is changing the doomsday equation
19m
Humanity has lived with the threat of nuclear annihilation for decades. But artificial intelligence is adding a new variable to the doomsday equation – one without the same barriers or deterrence.
Ian Bremmer looks at recent cases in which Anthropic says its AI models were used for potentially dangerous biological research and to help track US military assets. The incidents highlight how powerful AI tools could put sophisticated capabilities within reach of more people.
The greatest danger may not be AI deciding to destroy humanity itself. It may be AI making biological weapons and other catastrophic threats easier for humans to create – while governments and tech companies struggle to build safeguards fast enough.
Fewer migrants, but deadlier journeys to Europe
2h
The number of migrants and refugees reaching the continent by sea has dropped sharply this year as many European countries tighten their immigration rules. But despite fewer crossings, more migrants have died. Nearly 2,300 people have died or gone missing in the Mediterranean and Atlantic, up from roughly 2,000 during the same period last year, as migrants are taking longer and more dangerous routes. In Greece, for example, arrivals are down, but deaths are up 47% as more are attempting the longer journey from eastern Libya to Crete rather than crossing the Aegean from Turkey after a crackdown on the route.
Saudis play telephone to stop the Houthis, South Africans protest against data centers, Australia hopes rugby can stop China in the Pacific
2h
The Saudis ask China for help
“Hi, China, it’s Saudi Arabia, could you tell Iran to ask the Houthis to chill out?” That, in so many words, is the current telephone game amid intensifying attacks by the Iran-backed Houthis on Saudi oil export routes. With the US seemingly unable to contain the regional consequences of its war on Iran, China is seizing the moment. Beijing is Iran’s largest trade partner, but it also has good ties with Riyadh — just yesterday we learned the Kingdom appears to be using China-made missiles. And back in 2023, recall, China brokered a historic rapprochement between the two cross-Gulf rivals. Beijing’s interest goes beyond mere diplomatic flex – it wants to ensure the Houthis don’t undercut its own oil imports, the largest in the world. Will China’s pressure on Iran to pressure the Houthis to stop pressuring the Saudis work? If so, China’s clout in the region is about to jump up a notch.
South Africans push back on American data center expansion
Civil rights groups in South Africa are protesting the construction of data centers and demanded this month that the government pause their expansion until it investigates their use of scarce water and electricity. South Africa already has more data centers than any other country on the continent, most of which are owned by American companies. In recent years, the government has encouraged investment to expand Africa’s data center capacity, which sits at 1% of the global total despite the continent’s booming population. But the expansion is running up against two big concerns. First, water scarcity remains a major issue in South Africa – in 2018, Cape Town narrowly avoided a “Day Zero” water crisis. Second, the country has only recently emerged from a years-long electricity crisis, and the growing demand from power-hungry data centers is raising fears about new strain on the grid.
Tackling China’s growing presence with rugby
Australia is trying out a new tactic to counter China’s growing influence in the Pacific: rugby. Australia is offering rugby-obsessed Papua New Guinea more than $400 million to help launch a professional team in the capital city, Port Moresby, that would compete in Australia’s National Rugby League (most Papua New Guineans watch the Australian league because they lack a professional domestic circuit). But the deal comes with one major condition: Papua New Guinea cannot sign a security agreement with China. Beijing has poured investment into the resource-rich but underdeveloped country in recent years as it expands its footprint across the Pacific. After the neighboring Solomon Islands signed a landmark security deal with China in 2022, Australia has been scrambling to shore up its influence in a region it has long considered its strategic backyard. For now, Papuan officials seem to be on board with the deal.
Keep reading...Show less
Russian elections: why though?
3h
Why does Vladimir Putin even bother with elections? It’s a fair question to ask as Russia goes to the polls this weekend for nationwide local and parliamentary votes in which the outcome is certain.
The ruling United Russia party, closely associated with Putin himself, polls at nearly 40%. Its closest competitors, a small handful of occasionally cantankerous but thoroughly co-opted opposition parties, trail far behind at 10% to 13%.
A recent study by VTsIOM, a government-affiliated pollster, showed that some four-fifths of Russians expect United Russia to win – a reasonable assumption given that the government has outright banned or otherwise forced out any truly independent parties or voices. Meanwhile, the only non-state election monitoring outfit was shut down last year, and no credible foreign observers will be invited in.
In fact, the outcome is such a foregone conclusion that recently, the candidates in one region near Moscow didn’t even bother to show up for a debate – twice.
“This is not an election in the strict sense,” said Lev Gudkov of the Levada Center, Russia's last independent pollster. “It’s a ritual.”
But like all rituals, there are still good reasons to go through the democratic motions even – in fact, especially – in a system as overtly undemocratic as Russia’s.
First, because it’s important to show domestic and foreign audiences that things are fine. This is especially true at a time when things are, in fact, looking less than fine. The vote this weekend will be the Duma’s first since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The war, now in its fifth year, has left at least 250,000 Russians dead. A rush of military spending, coupled with tighter Western sanctions, has stoked inflation and stifled the civilian economy. Although the Kremlin war machine continues to hold vast swathes of territory in eastern Ukraine – where the polls for this election will be held, illegally – it is running so low on drone fodder that there are rumors, which Putin has publicly denied, of a broader conscription drive coming later this fall.
What’s more, over the past year the conflict has come home in new ways, as Ukrainian drone strikes penetrate ever deeper into Russian territory, taking out not only military targets and oil refineries, but even major Moscow-area warehouses of Russia’s top e-commerce company, Wildberries, which Kyiv accuses of helping the war effort.
Polls confirm that Russians themselves are souring on the situation, if only gently. Levada’s latest numbers show that popular approval of Putin and optimism about the country’s direction remain strong, if heavily conditioned, at 74% and 52%, respectively. But those are among the lowest levels since before the invasion of Ukraine. The change in mood is palpable, Gudkov said – drone strikes and possible wider conscription are among Russians’ top recent concerns.
Against that backdrop, holding an election in which the party of power still clobbers the competition projects the message: despite all of this, things are fine.
The second, related reason to hold the election is to test the system of “managed democracy” that Putin has built and refined over nearly three decades. In Russia, where corruption is rife and meaningful political competition is extinct, officials work more strenuously for their bosses than for their constituents. Every five years, those bosses have a nationwide chance to test the system: can the local bureaucrats, governors, school teachers, and state company bosses in X-region deliver an acceptable electoral result – say, 65% turnout with a decisive victory for United Russia – that isn’t too overtly manipulated? If not, it’s time for a reshuffle – something experts will be watching closely in the coming weeks.
And third, perhaps the best reason of all to hold elections is simple: not holding them for the first time in Russia’s post-Soviet history would raise extreme alarm about the system's stability. Remember: things are fine. See #1 above.
Still, although Russia’s parliament is a rubber-stamp body that hasn’t independently passed meaningful legislation in decades, there are at least two reasons to care about who goes into the Duma, said Alexander Kolyandr, a Russia expert at Eurasia Group.
One reason is that dozens of veterans of the Ukraine war are running for office. While veterans are totems of patriotism who can get out the vote, they can also – as Russians still remember from Moscow’s failed wars in Afghanistan and Chechnya – be an unpredictable bunch with a strong populist appeal that isn’t always aligned with the Kremlin. The number of veterans who are permitted to “win” in the elections could be a proxy for the regime’s risk tolerance.
The other, Kolyandr said, is that one scenario could make even the enfeebled Duma take on real importance again. If anything were to suddenly incapacitate Putin, now 73, Duma lawmakers would, under Russia’s succession rules, suddenly have a major role to play in the transition.
But for now, the main intrigue, if any, is less about what the electoral result is than about how effectively the authorities get there.
“This election is a bit like binge drinking,” Kolyandr said, “the process is both less predictable and more important than the result.”
Keep reading...Show less
You vs. the News: A Weekly News Quiz - September 18, 2026
5h
Think you know what's going on around the world? Here's your chance to prove it
Japan hit a historic milestone this week. What was it?
- A) The country hit net-zero fuel emissions
- B) The first entirely-AI candidate won public office
- C) The number of people over the age of 100 surpassed 100,000
Take the quiz to see if you guessed correctly!
In this ‘ask ian,' Ian Bremmer explains why Canada and Europe are moving to deepen their relationship, and what it signals about trust in Washington.
Ian discusses the significance of EU chief Ursula von der Leyen's invitation for Canada to become an associate member of the EU, calling it historic and a sign that other countries, including Australia and the United Kingdom, may pursue similar realignment.
He credits President Trump's short-term, transactional approach with accelerating this shift, noting that Canadians across the political spectrum, including former conservative prime ministers, have pushed back against the administration's approach to Canada.
Lastly, Ian says the damage to US-Canada relations is permanent but not irreversible. He expects US predictability to return after Trump leaves office, even as some structural shifts in American foreign policy persist.
Read NowShow less
Two big losses for Trump, Maldives tackling climate change with AI, Saudi Arabia potentially used Chinese missile in Yemen
September 17, 2026
This week — Independent institutions: 2, Trump: 0
The US president took two big domestic losses this week. First, the Supreme Court ruled against his demand for restrictions on mail-in voting in the upcoming midterms. The stinger? All three Trump-appointed justices sided with the decision. “These are not the people I interviewed,” he griped on social media. Two days later, his hand-picked Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh oversaw the first US interest rate hike in three years. Trump has long pressured the Fed to keep rates low, especially ahead of the midterms. But rising inflation — due in large part to soaring oil prices tied to the war in Iran — proved impossible to ignore. Afterwards, Trump blasted the Fed board, but spared Warsh himself. The lesson? Some Trump critics accuse him of being a “dictator” – but if this week is any measure, America’s independent institutions are proving otherwise.
Can AI help solve a climate issue for island nations?
The Maldives is turning to a technology often associated with accelerating climate change to help protect itself from sea level rise: artificial intelligence. A chain of hundreds of islands in the Indian Ocean, they’re the the lowest-lying nation in the world. And with 80% of its landmass sitting less than one meter above sea level, it is particularly vulnerable to rising seas. Working with a private company, the Maldives is combining satellite imagery, ocean-current data, and AI to design artificial reefs that can help rebuild eroding beaches. Placed at strategic points just offshore, the small reefs redirect currents and funnel sand toward the coastline. In early trials, some beaches have doubled in size. The UN has previously cited limited data collection and satellite imagery as major obstacles to helping island nations prepare for sea level rise. The hope is that AI could help close that gap, making it easier to model future threats and create new tools to adapt to them.
Did Saudi Arabia use a Chinese-made missile in Yemen?
Debris recovered from a recent Saudi airstrike in Yemen suggests Riyadh fired a Dongfeng-15 ballistic missile. If so, it would be the first time the Saudis have used a ballistic munition in their long-running war against the Houthi rebels. At a time when Saudi Arabia is under pressure from Iranian and Houthi attacks on its oil infrastructure and export routes, using a Dongfeng could signal that Riyadh has the capacity to escalate significantly – the missile could easily reach targets in Iran. But it may also stoke growing concerns in Washington about deepening ties between Beijing and Saudi Arabia, long a key US partner. According to leaked reports, US intelligence officials are already worried that selling advanced F-35 jets to Saudi Arabia could enable key American military technologies to make their way to China.
Read NowShow less
GZEROMEDIA
Subscribe to GZERO's daily newsletter
We often talk about how transformational artificial intelligence will be for the world. As it turns out, it’s also changing the way we speak. Merriam-Webster added words and phrases around AI, including “AGI” (artificial general intelligence), “vibe coding” (using AI to create computer code), and “uncanny valley” (the eerie feeling that something artificial looks almost, but not quite, human) to its online dictionary. They also added other terms popular online and among Gen Z, including “glow-up,” “crashout,” and “dad joke.”
In honor of dad joke, we asked ChatGPT to tell us one – about AI: “Why did the AI get kicked out of school? It kept trying to prompt the teacher.” Do you have one that you think is better? Let us know here.
WINTER IS COMING. But Fall is coming first, so be prepared with seasonal items from the Puppet Regime official store. Our top pick: the PUPPET REGIME hoodie, perfect for stormy weather, chill breezes, or clandestine machinations. Available in "can't stop, won't stop" black and "the power of YES" pink.
Never mind tariffs, we ship (just about) worldwide (sorry Iran, Russia, and North Korea)!
Browse our full collection, which also includes:
- A big, beautiful mug for drinking coffee... very strongly
- A handsome tote bag for carrying your most classified documents
- Collectible stickers for tagging the Regime's many territories.
- The original Puppet Regime t-shirt -- for those who know.
Shop now at shop.puppetregime.tv!
Geopolitics has a new frontier: outer space.
The US made this clear on Tuesday when it became the first country ever to announce that it had deployed a weapon into Earth’s orbit. Washington said the move was meant to prepare for “evolving threats,” but offered few details about the weapon’s capabilities or when it was launched.
The US is hardly alone. China is also reportedly developing out military capabilities in space, including satellites designed to pursue – and even capture – other space spacecraft systems as well as space-based weapons designed to interfere with or destroy targets.
Civilian life is increasingly reliant upon space, too. Satellites underpin GPS systems, mobile connectivity, and electronic banking. Then there are the resources: the moon, Mars, asteroids, and other planets in our solar system contain valuable minerals, including rare earth elements, whose mining and processing China currently dominates on Earth.
With so much at stake, dozens of other countries are keen to join the new space race. There are now 77 space agencies worldwide, although only 16 have launch capacity. Despite the rush to the stars, few international agreements govern behavior in space. One of the most important is the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, ratified by all major spacefaring nations. But it doesn’t clearly address many of today’s challenges, leaving key topics – from new weapons to competition over resources – unresolved.
“A lot of it will depend on who gets there first and how those practices are established by those who get there first,” said Almudena Azcárate Ortega, who leads space law and regulation work at the Secure World Foundation. What happens now, he explained, could determine the norms going forward.
The gaps in space (law). The 1967 treaty was clear about one thing: you can’t put nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction in space. But beyond that, many of the rules of the game are open to interpretation. The treaty was designed as a set of guiding principles for space law, according to David Koplow, a Georgetown University professor who specializes in public international law and national security law. The expectation was that subsequent treaties would fill in the details, many of which never materialized.
“There is law in outer space,” Koplow said. “[But] there’s not enough law to provide the sort of certainty that the world needs.”
One major concern is weapons. Here, the 1967 treaty distinguishes between “celestial bodies,” such as the moon, where states are forbidden from establishing military bases or even testing weapons, and the void of space, which is less strictly governed.
There, questions of defense “would be an issue under the general international law of what counts as aggression and what counts as self-defense,” said Koplow. “That’s hard to resolve on Earth. It would be just as hard to resolve on the moon.” While the US deploying a conventional weapon to space does not appear to violate the treaty, China has warned that the move could fuel a space arms race.
How countries should handle resource extraction also remains unanswered. The 1967 treaty bans anyone from “appropriating” or claiming sovereignty over outer space. That means no country can claim part of the moon as theirs, but it’s not obvious how the treaty would consider the sale or use of extracted resources.
One view is that the treaty prohibits appropriating any resources until an international agreement decides who can take what. The other view, endorsed by the US and a number of other countries, is that you can extract and claim ownership of resources from the moon without violating the treaty by claiming sovereignty over the natural satellite.
In October 2020, the US tried to get the international community on board with the Artemis Accords, which loosely set guidelines for moon exploration and resource extraction. Dozens of states joined the accords, including the UK and Canada, but the two other major spacefaring nations, China and Russia, did not sign.
Chokepoints. As more states begin to look beyond our planet, the moon could also become something all too familiar on Earth: a chokepoint. It offers one of the few jumping-off points between Earth and space – an opportunity to refuel before going deeper into the solar system and beyond in search of resources. But as the war in Iran has made clear, control over a chokepoint can let a nation punch well above its weight on the global stage.
For now, neither the US nor China has a clear advantage when it comes to the moon. In April, a 10-day manned Artemis mission flew around the moon and back, setting a record for the furthest humans have traveled in space. The US plans to send an Artemis mission to the moon’s south pole in 2028. In August, China delayed its Chang’e-7 mission to the moon’s south pole just hours before takeoff, pushing it until 2027.
Another possible set of chokepoints is called Lagrange Points: the orbital “parking spots” of space. These are locations where the gravitational pull of the two large celestial bodies creates a point of balance, allowing objects like spacecraft to stay in place – rather than in orbit – without needing much fuel to keep them there. Five such points exist between pairs of large orbiting objects, making them strategically useful for communications, observation, and future lunar operations.
“They are a limited resource,” said Koplow. “It is not yet a scarce resource, but it is potentially the sort of place where there could be competitive activity.”
In 2023, the US House Select Committee on China adopted a resolution to ensure that the US becomes the first country to permanently station assets at “all Lagrange points” to counter what it called the Chinese Communist Party’s “malign ambitions in space.” China has since condemned the US’s pursuit of what it called“space hegemony.”
Nevertheless, 71 states have now signed the Artemis Accords in an effort to establish rules before competition in space intensifies further. But China and Russia remain outside the agreement, while the 1967 treaty leaves some of the most pressing issues of space – weapons, resources, and strategic territory – unanswered. The question now is whether countries can agree on the rules – before they start fighting over it.
Read NowShow less
When iconic art from America’s history needs preserving, we are there.
AI will kill us all. Or it won’t. Depends on who you ask. (And when you ask them.)
September 16, 2026
Last week, Anthropic engineer Jacob Coxon sent the internet into a firestorm after publicly resigning on X due to his belief that AI companies are "racing straight to self-improving superintelligence and gambling with our lives." This was followed by a post from Evan Hubinger, Alignment Science Lead at Anthropic, agreeing with his former coworker, finding that there's somewhere around a 10% chance of AI killing us all in the next decade. Then, over the weekend, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei released an essay calling for new safeguards on AI development, including "embedded third-party evaluators" and pacing the rate of development in both the US and China (while acknowledging the difficulty in accomplishing the latter). Fellow AI CEOs Sam Altman (OpenAI) and Elon Musk (SpaceXAI) quickly voiced support for the proposal. But President Trump immediately shot down the idea due to the risk that it might forfeit the American AI lead to China.
So, what does this all mean? Are the doomsayers right that AI could kill us all? What's driving AI executives to make statements that their technology might be as dangerous as nuclear weapons? And is there any hope for regulations to make AI development safer? (The answers: Not really, but it's sure to do some real damage; some legitimate concern but also financial self-interest; and not much, which is a problem.)
On apocalypse-watch, you should continue saving for retirement—despite what some AI doomsayers might tell you. First, the argument for how AI is going to destroy the world is. . .vague. Despite OpenAI attempting to claim that it has reached artificial general intelligence (AGI), the reality is that we do not yet have AI systems that are better than most humans at most tasks. And no one entirely agrees on the criteria for achieving AGI, including Sam Altman who recently derided it as an "irrelevant marketing term." So, on the notion that a godlike computer stands poised to take us out…color me skeptical.
That's part of why when Coxon was challenged to get specific about how AI will end humanity, the answer wasn't very clear: "the classic example is, like, synthesizing a new virus or taking down critical infrastructure by doing some sort of hacking spree. . ." The p(doom) crowd needs a new parenthetical. We should be worried about the dangers of AI without guardrails. Just in recent weeks, Anthropic has disclosed that Iran used its AI to attack American ships, China used it to surveil its persecuted Uyghur minority, and military researchers have tried to use it to create bioweapons. And that's just the tip of the iceberg for our vulnerabilities: we're at the precipice of a potential "cyberpocalypse," as AI makes it easier than ever for hackers to exploit weaknesses in aging code for websites across the web.
But these are crisis risks—events that could cause panic, even loss of life, but not the end of civilization. What we're talking about is bad actors using AI for bad purposes or a smaller version of the "paperclip problem," in which an LLM goes rogue and causes unexpected mischief. Not Skynet launching the nukes. This should prompt anxiety and regulation—not bunkers.
Second, it is in the interest of AI companies to hype their new models as all-powerful. Anthropic and OpenAI are moving towards initial public offerings (IPOs) while burning through massive amounts of cash (much of it borrowed) to fund the data center buildout that next generation LLMs require. Meanwhile, backlash against data centers is growing across the country. It's good business for AI companies to: 1) build excitement for their products ahead of a potential IPO frenzy and 2) encourage slowing the pace of development as they face significant bottlenecks when it comes to the financing and construction of data centers.
The historical track record of tech panics is not encouraging. Angry mobs of scribes destroyed early printing presses, incensed by fears of job loss. Newspapers once reported on the dangers of radio broadcasts on children because it was perilous for them to "be kept up at the jazz rate forever." Television was supposed to rot our brains. (And that's still a legitimate risk for every TV show with the unique exception of "GZERO World," available on your local PBS affiliate in the US and on YouTube.) With nearly every great innovation comes a great panic. . . And much like its technological ancestors, AI does offer reason for worry. This will likely be the most transformational technology of our era. It will cause unforeseeable problems. It should not cause panic.
As a consequence, the rhetoric of AI leaders is exaggerated—in some cases subconsciously and in others strategically—even if the underlying risks are real. That's why it's essential that we develop a cohesive international system to govern AI, something akin to a global central bank: an independent organization designed to combat the systemic risks of AI, as central banks do for the financial system. But there are two obstacles: Trump and China.
In a recent Truth Social post on the subject, Trump claimed that all "AI needs is a STRONG AND SMART (High IQ!) President," and decried the "SICK conspiracy going on against AI and Data Centers." He went on to claim that proposals by "Conspiracy Theorists, Treasonists, Traitors, and Leakers" to regulate AI favor China in a dynamic where, "WHOEVER WINS AI, WINS!" Excessive use of capital letters aside, this is an accurate encapsulation of the Trump administration's approach to AI development: relentlessly move forward, without any serious (and potentially slowing) regulatory burden, to beat China. In addition, the administration's Pax Silica framework seeks to ensure that the US has strategic autonomy over the AI supply chain—even if that means fracturing any potential international collaboration on AI.
Meanwhile, China has made US-critical statements ("Fearmongering, confrontation and vicious competition will only disrupt the process of global AI governance. . .") while simultaneously pressing forward on its open-source models, which might pose even greater risks given the lack of a "kill-switch" in their operation. To the extent that China is concerned about AI, their fears are not framed around doomsday scenarios but rather around the ways in which the technology might undermine the Communist Party's grip on the country and be used by foreign foes for espionage, as head of the Ministry of State Security Chen Yixin recently wrote in an essay. In a world where the American and Chinese governments are focused on winning AI supremacy, rather than protecting against disaster outcomes, there is not much room for a bilateral deal on a research slowdown, even with Xi and Trump set to discuss AI in their upcoming summit.
So, we are staring down the barrel of a dangerous future due to unregulated AI development: one that is sure to include crises created by rogue AIs and rogue actors using AI. When one of those crises strikes, hopefully it will be competently managed and serve as a catalyst for urgently needed regulations and negotiations between the US and China. In the meantime, the p(doom) crowd would be better served warning of the many real threats AI poses, from bioweapons to cybersecurity, rather than claiming that the apocalypse is around the corner.
Read NowShow less
Canada and EU move toward closer ties, US wants to send $2.8 billion worth of weapons to Israel, Georgia’s ruling party wants to ban all opposition parties
September 16, 2026
EU to create an “associate” program for Canada
The bloc is looking to deepen ties with the Great White North as both sides adjust to unprecedented hostility from their traditional main ally, the US. The Trump administration has threatened Canada’s sovereignty, pulled back support for NATO, demanded control of Greenland, and waged trade wars against both Ottawa and Brussels. Canada’s PM, Mark Carney, has taken a pugnacious “elbows up” approach to dealing with Trump, and called on the world’s “middle powers” to unite. Canadians overwhelmingly support closer ties with Europe, and both sides are looking for a long-term hedge against a suddenly unreliable US. But Brussels will need to tread carefully: offering too many benefits to Canada could dilute the meaning of real EU membership, rankle other European candidates waiting to formally join the bloc, or provoke Trump into even more antagonistic actions.
US plans to send more weapons to Israel
The US announced plans on Tuesday to sell $2.8 billion worth of new weapons to Israel, including over 20,000 powerful MK-84 missiles, which Israel has been criticized for using around civilian areas during strikes in Gaza. The move demonstrates the Trump administration’s willingness to buck growing pressure from lawmakers and some voters to cut back support for Israel. The deal has been informally communicated to congressional committees that review major arms sales, but still needs to be officially voted on. That creates an interesting moment for Democrats: more than 100 House Democrats, including many former staunch allies of Israel like Rep. Nancy Pelosi, voted in July to end US aid to Israel – a position that’s gained traction among voters on the left. The proposed sale could be a preview of what Democrats’ foreign policy on Israel might look like if they win control of the chamber in November.
Georgia’s ruling party tries to ban opposition
Georgia’s ruling party, Georgian Dream, has asked the Constitutional Court to ban all parliamentary opposition parties, deepening the country's political crisis. Georgian Dream argues that opposition parties have failed to “uphold constitutional order” and engaged in “destructive behavior” in parliament, while critics say the effort aims to consolidate the ruling party’s grip on power. Georgian PM Irakli Kobakhidze, the party’s leader, has faced accusations of drawing the country closer to Russia and away from potential EU membership, which it applied for in 2022. Widespread protests gripped Georgia in 2024 after parliament passed a Georgian Dream-proposed “foreign agent” law that requires NGOs and media organizations receiving more than 20% of their funding from abroad to register as organizations “pursuing the interests of a foreign power.” After Georgian Dream won a parliamentary majority in the disputed 2024 elections, opposition parties rejected the results and boycotted their participation.
Read NowShow less
Most Popular Videos
Aliens invade the Regime!
11 August
Merz confronts Putin over drone plot
08 September