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.
News
President Joe Biden appears to get emotional when the crowd chants ÒdonÕt give upÓ before he delivers a speech to a large crowd at Renaissance High School in Detroit on Friday, July 12, 2024.
President Joe Biden set the record for the largest act of clemency on Thursday, reducing the prison sentences of 1,500 people and pardoning 39 others. The 1,500 former prisoners were serving terms that would have been shorter if sentenced under today’s laws, and most had already been reintegrated into their communities since being relocated to home confinement during the pandemic. Most of those pardoned had committed nonviolent drug offenses in their early lives.
It is traditional for presidents to exercise their pardon power at the end of their terms. Biden has said that he will continue to do so in his remaining weeks in office, with Democratic lawmakers urging him to commute the sentences of the 40 people on death row, as well as take actions to address mass incarceration and systemic racism in sentencing disparities.
But the practice is more controversial than ever since Biden blanket-pardoned his son Hunter, who had been convicted on gun and tax charges, a move critics have called a self-interested abuse of power. Biden has also floated the idea of issuing preemptive pardons to a range of current and former officials Trump has threatened to target. Doing so may limit Democrats’ ability to credibly criticize Trump if he follows through on his plans to pardon Jan. 6 insurrectionists on his first day in office.
Hard Numbers: Pakistan indicts Imran Khan (again), India eyes one election, Australia charges big tech, Zuckerberg and Bezos make YUGE donations
Former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan pauses as he speaks with Reuters during an interview, in Lahore, Pakistan in March 2023.
200: Former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan and his wife, Bushra Bibi, were indicted on Thursday on charges of unlawfully selling state gifts, including jewelry, at undervalued prices. They pleaded not guilty the same day, calling the charges politically motivated amid nearly 200 cases Khan has faced since his 2022 ouster. Khan and Bibi received 14-year sentences before this year’s election, but those terms were suspended on appeal following a prior three-year sentence in a related case.
1: India’s cabinet has approved legislation for simultaneous national and state elections, the first step in advancing Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s “One Nation One Election” plan. Supporters say it would put a stop to India’s state of “perpetual elections,” but critics argue it would favor the national ruling party, Modi’s BJP, in local races.
160,000,000: In its latest crackdown on Big Tech, Australia will charge social media giants like Meta and Google millions if they don’t pay local media for news content. All platforms with revenue over AU$160 million will be obliged to pay up, but charges will be offset by any commercial agreements voluntarily struck between the platforms and news media businesses.
1,000,000: Nothing says sorry quite like cold hard cash. Meta announced on Wednesday that it's donating $1 million to the inaugural fund of President-elect Donald Trump, and Amazon.com, not to be outdone, plans to do the same. The moves appear to be fence-mending gestures – or, as critics are calling them, attempts to curry favor. Meta founder Mark Zuckerberg's relationship with the president-elect soured after Facebook and Instagram suspended Trump’s accounts in 2021 for his praise of the Jan. 6 Capitol rioters, and Trump has been critical of Jeff Bezos for owning the Washington Post -- and the newspaper's political coverage.
A 24-hour Yonhapnews TV broadcast at Yongsan Railway Station shows South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol delivering a speech at the Presidential Office in Seoul. South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol, defended his botched martial law declaration, as an act of governance and denied insurrection charges facing him, while vowing to fight until the last moment against whether it is impeachment or a martial law probe.
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol looks highly likely to be impeached on Saturday after the leader of his own party on Thursday told members to vote according to their “conviction and conscience.” Yoon cooked his own goose earlier in the day by delivering a fiery speech defending his decision to briefly impose martial law on Dec. 3 — and crashing behind-the-scenes efforts to allow him to resign on his own terms in the process.
“We tried to find a better way than impeachment, but that other way is invalid,” said Yoon’s party leader, Han Dong-hoon. “Suspending the president from his duties through impeachment is the only way for now, to defend democracy and the republic.”
If at least eight members from his own party vote with the opposition majority — and six have already pledged to do so — Yoon will be immediately suspended from office, with the prime minister assuming presidential responsibilities. His official removal will have to wait for the Constitutional Court to confirm the impeachment as legal, which could take weeks or months as three of the bench’s nine seats are vacant.
Eurasia Group’s Jeremy Chan says Yoon will keep fighting all the way.
“Yoon will likely contest the impeachment charges in a way that we have never seen before, arguing that declaring martial law was within his presidential powers and a legitimate action to defend against the fierce opposition to his governing that the opposition-led National Assembly presented,” says Chan. “This will be a losing argument but one that I expect Yoon to make forcefully and personally before both the Constitutional Court and his likely criminal investigation.”
We’re watching how quickly the opposition chooses to roll the process along, as the timing of the by-election to replace Yoon depends on when the court rules.
Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan poses with Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud and Ethiopian Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed following a press conference in Ankara, Turkey, December 11, 2024.
Ethiopian President Abiy Ahmed and Somali President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud announced a critical agreement to end a yearlong dispute over Ethiopia’s access to the Arabian Sea. The leaders announced the deal in Ankara after marathon talks mediated by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, whois increasingly emerging as a key player in the Horn of Africa.
What’s the conflict all about? Ethiopia has been the most populous landlocked country in the world since Eritrea broke away in 1993, and the lack of a major seaport has held back development. In January, Ethiopia signed a deal to lease a port from a breakaway region in Somalia, Somaliland, in exchange for recognizing its independence. In response, Somalia threatened to expel Ethiopian troops that are in the country to fight al-Shabab terrorists, and some feared the conflict could escalate into an echo of the devastating 1977-78 Ogaden War.
Why is Turkey involved? Ankara has deep ties to both sides in the conflict and an abiding interest in keeping the peace between them. Turkey’s largest overseas military base is in Somalia, where Turkish troops have trained thousands of their Somali peers. Turkey also backed the Ethiopian government during the 2020-22 Tigray war by providing feared Bayraktar drones.
“The agreement will help make Turkey into an even more relevant power in the region, with Ankara pitching itself as a security partner for African countries,” says Eurasia Group expert Emre Peker.
Turkish businesses have invested over $2 billion in Ethiopia as well, a figure surpassed only by China.
“Aside from expanding its diplomatic and political clout in Africa, the deal will also help Turkey build more commercial inroads in the region,” says Peker. “Ethiopian access to Somali ports could facilitate more trade, and Turkish businesses will benefit from potential preferential treatment on marquee infrastructure projects.”
What now? Representatives will meet again in February for “technical talks” that are meant to hammer out the details of port access.Press conference about Romania and Bulgaria, former Soviet Bloc countries becoming EU members.
For Romania and Bulgaria, former Soviet Bloc countries that are now EU members, the light finally changed from red to green on Thursday as EU interior ministers agreed to let the two countries fully join the border-free Schengen zone on Jan. 1.
TheSchengen area is a zone within which all are free to travel across national borders without stops or inspections. Its members include most EU countries, except for Cyprus and Ireland, as well as non-EU states Iceland, Norway, Switzerland, and Liechtenstein.
For the two incoming members, there will still be a few temporary restrictions on trucks crossing their borders, but these too will likely ease within months. The two countries had already been allowed internal air and sea borders without checks since March 2024, but this latest decision clears the way for free movement across internal land borders.
The decision is the result of a unanimous European Council vote of all member states, and it’s a big victory for Romanians and Bulgarians who favor deeper integration with Europe for either personal or commercial reasons.
For Romania, in particular, the timing carries particular symbolism. In recent days, the country’s constitutional courtinvalidated a national election following charges of election interference by Russia in favor of pro-Russian, anti-EU candidates.
U.S. President Donald Trump attends a bilateral meeting with China's President Xi Jinping during the G20 leaders summit in Osaka, Japan, June 29, 2019.
Will Xi go? Trump’s incoming press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, confirmed that Xi received his invitation shortly after the November election, and that Trump sought an“open dialogue” with both allies and adversaries. Beijing has not said whether they will accept: A visit by Xi could play poorly in China if it is seen as “kissing the ring,” particularly as Trump threatens to impose high tariffs on Chinese goods.
Who else is invited? Other foreign leaders have reportedly been invited, including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who sources say is “still considering” his attendance. Russian President Vladimir Putinhas not been invited, according to the Kremlin. Trump has also been busy meeting with heads of state, including those of Canada, Ukraine, France, and Argentina, in the lead-up to his return to power. We’re watching to see whether any of those leaders receives an invite – and if any chooses to show up.This week we rolled out GZERO’s Top 10 Political Game Changers of the Year, which you can check out here.
Just hours ago, we named Donald Trump our No. 1 political game changer of the year. Elon Musk, whose net worth just topped a record-breaking $400 billion, is No. 2.
Let’s do a quick detour on that just to get some sense of proportionality: How much is $400 billion? It’s bigger than the nominal GDP of Musk’s birth country, South Africa, as well as countries like Belgium, Portugal, New Zealand, and Qatar (net worth and nominal GDP, of course, are not directly comparable measures but are used here to illustrated the scale of Musk’s wealth).In fact, his net worth is higher than the nominal GDP of all but about 40 countries in the world, but that’s not even why we chose him as a top game changer of the year. Musk’s crucial help in electing Trump, the influence of his social media platform, X, in the culture and political wars around the world, and his breathtaking innovations in space, electric cars, tech, and AI were all factors.
But something both Trump and Musk said this week about foreign aid merits inclusion in our game-changer discussions.
As the Assad regime dramatically fell this week, President-elect Trump declared, “THIS IS NOT OUR FIGHT.” An aversion to foreign intervention and an America-first isolationism is not a surprising stance from Trump, and it’s one many Americans support. But Musk, who Trump tapped to lead the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, went even further: He expressed support for former Rep. Ron Paul’s desire to eliminate all US foreign aid. “Here’s an easy one for @DOGE !” Paul posted on X. “ELIMINATE foreign aid!”
Musk posted a reply: “Ron is not wrong.”
Musk’s partner in DOGE, Vivek Ramaswamy, picked up the baton, saying: “It’s an oxymoron that represents a waste of taxpayer dollars, but the real problem runs deeper: Americans deserve transparency on opaque foreign aid.”
There is a big difference between transparency in foreign aid and the elimination of it.
Transparency on all government spending is a net good, especially when it comes to foreign aid, so no issue there. But would eliminating foreign aid really save US taxpayers a material amount of money and make the world a safer place?
Again, some proportionality is in order.
The US budget in 2024 was about $6.75 trillion — roughly $1.8 trillion more than it collected in revenue, which is why there is such a structural deficit problem. But how much does foreign aid contribute to that? Only about $70 billion. That is less than 1% of the budget.
Some more perspective. After World War II, the US spent about 3% on the Marshall Plan to help rebuild Europe, which led to the longest era of peace and prosperity in world history.
That’s important because Musk and Ramaswamy are playing off the perception that foreign aid is a major drain on the US taxpayer. The truth is, if you run the newly minted DOGE and are looking for savings, foreign aid amounts to the old pennies you find between your couch cushions.
Where does US foreign aid money go?
According to a Brookings report, the US spends about 25% on humanitarian aid, like helping countries during earthquakes and disasters, and 65% on development aid, like food, education, and medical programs to stop the spread of disease. The smallest part is spent on security and helping governments in allied countries stay stable. It is one of the United States’ most fundamental expressions of soft power, and in a global world where viruses, climate change, and migration issues are all serious cross-border threats, this is a low-cost insurance policy.
Foreign aid is distributed mainly to US government agencies and nonprofit organizations. About 20% goes to multilateral organizations like, say, the UN. Some does go to foreign governments like Ukraine, and there is waste and some corruption, but overall, it is highly regulated, especially when dealing with a country with high levels of corruption.
“Accountability of U.S. economic assistance is high — the U.S. imposes stringent, some would say onerous, reporting and accounting requirements on recipients of U.S. assistance, and the General Accounting Office and agency inspector generals investigate possible misuse,” according to the Brookings Institution.
What harm could cutting it cause?
Eliminating foreign aid will produce negligible economic savings for the US economy but consequential negative results on US public safety.
Power abhors a vacuum, and if the US does not support governments or areas that are in crisis — like Syria — someone else will, like Russia, China, or Islamic State.
Closing your eyes to the global neighborhood won’t make global troubles go away. It simply limits Washington’s ability to prevent them from growing into genuine threats that will have to be dealt with one way or another. And worse, it cedes global influence to bad actors that will, eventually, also threaten US and Western stability.
A dramatic turn to US isolationism in a world of crisis would be a troubling, game-changing trend that would only make the US more vulnerable.
Elon Musk is the richest man in history and he’s in charge of government efficiency. He may cut many parts of government, but foreign aid is not the place to be penny-wise and policy-foolish.