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.
popular
A lighthouse in a stormy sea.
I get a lot of questions these days from people feeling worried, disturbed, even overwhelmed about the state of politics in the United States. Recently, I received a particularly heartfelt request for guidance from a concerned citizen that demanded more than a few honest but incomplete thoughts typed quickly in between meetings. I thought I'd use today's column to share her message (with her name redacted) and my full response, in the hope that you might find it useful, too.
* * *
From: [name redacted]
To: me
Not sure you will read this through…
The bottom line up front: I’m reaching out, not for reassurance, but for direction. Are there ways of engaging that you believe actually make a difference – paths for ordinary people like me who refuse to give up – I would be deeply grateful if you’d share them.
I’ve been a follower of yours since my introduction to you via Preet’s podcast. I just finished How to Stand Up to a Dictator by Maria Ressa. It lit a fire in me but also leaves me overwhelmed. I feel pulled to do more, but don’t know how beyond what I am currently doing: I make weekly calls through 5calls (dot) org, I write, I show up to local protests, but it feels like trying to hold back a tidal wave with a teaspoon.
How does a layperson create change? I’m not a lawyer or political expert, but a mom and the wife of a now-retired Lt. Colonel. For 24 years, I stood by my husband’s side, believing deeply in the idea that the sacrifices our family was making were for the greater good – that our country, for all its flaws, stood for freedom, truth, and accountability. That there was honor in this calling. But over the last eight years, and especially these past nine months, I’ve felt that foundation crumble. The freedoms I once believed were sacred are being chipped away, quietly and relentlessly.
I know you’re not an oracle. But I view you as someone who connects the dots with clarity, empathy, and integrity. Thank you for the work you do. You make people like me feel less alone, and that’s no small thing in times like these. I will take any guidance you can provide.
Respectfully,
[name redacted]
*
From: me
To: [name redacted]
Dear [name redacted],
I read every word. I wish I had a more satisfying answer for you, but the truth is I get messages like yours regularly – from people who've done everything they were told would matter, who show up, call, write, protest, and still feel like they're bailing out the ocean with a spoon. You're not wrong to feel that way. The foundations are shifting beneath us, and the tools we were told would protect democracy – engagement, institutions, information – are being undermined in real time.
Here's what I know: you're already doing more than most. The calls, the protests in Gaetz country, the refusal to look away – all that matters. Not because it guarantees any policy change, but because it keeps the muscle memory of citizenship alive. When people stop showing up, stop calling, stop caring, that's when the tidal wave actually wins.
But let's be honest, you are swimming against the current. We're living through a transformation in how power works. Grassroots civic engagement – the kind you're doing – is eroding not just because of political polarization, but because the systems that used to amplify individual voices are being replaced by algorithms that consolidate power in fewer hands. The social media business model is fundamentally incompatible with a healthy civil society – it welcomes bots, promotes extremism, and spreads disinformation precisely because those things maximize engagement. You're not just fighting bad policy; you're fighting a system designed to maximize division for profit. Traditional information networks are collapsing. The "messy middle" of democratic institutions is under sustained attack. And younger Americans especially are feeling a disenchantment that's hard to overstate.
So, what do you do when the infrastructure itself is compromised?
First, remember that erosion is uneven. Not all American institutions are decaying at the same rate. Some things still work extremely well: contract enforcement, capital markets, innovation. The judiciary remains independent in its decision-making. State and local governance remains mostly technocratic and independent of Washington. The professional military is still firmly loyal to country over leader. Your husband's service wasn't for nothing. That culture, that commitment to something bigger than partisan politics – it's one of the things that's holding. Imperfectly, but holding.
Second, stay local. National politics feels like screaming into the void because, increasingly, it is. But local politics – school boards, city councils, state races – still have leverage points where individual voices matter disproportionately. It's less glamorous, but it's where you can actually see cause and effect. And it's where the most consequential fights over voting access, education, and civil society are happening right now.
Third, build real community. Not just online networks, but face-to-face relationships with people who share your values – and people who don't. The coming years are going to require resilience, and that comes from knowing your neighbors, organizing locally, and creating mutual support systems that don't depend on institutions you can't control.
Fourth, focus on the 10%. Not every outrage requires your energy. In an environment where everything is breaking news, where uncertainty itself has become the dominant condition, the most important skill is figuring out which fights matter for outcomes. Don't let the noise exhaust you. Pick your battles.
Finally – and this is hardest – accept that you can't control outcomes, only your response. You stood by your husband for 24 years because you believed in something bigger than yourselves. That belief was real and justified. The question now isn't whether you can stop the tidal wave alone – you can't. The question is whether you're willing to keep standing for what you believe in even when the odds look terrible. Because the alternative – cynicism, withdrawal, giving up – guarantees the outcome you're trying to prevent.
That's probably not the roadmap you were hoping for. There's no secret lever to pull, no hidden strategy that makes this easier. The uncomfortable reality is that we're in a period where the old rules don't apply, and the new rules haven't been written yet. Closed systems are getting stronger than open ones everywhere you look. Power is consolidating in ever fewer hands. The trajectory is admittedly worrying.
But here's the thing about history: it isn't deterministic. Trajectories can shift. And they shift because people like you – people who refuse to stop showing up, even in the deep red parts of Florida – keep the possibility of something better alive long enough for an opening to appear.
You're not alone. There are millions of people feeling exactly what you're feeling right now. The work is finding each other, supporting one another, and staying in the fight even when it feels hopeless.
Thank you for what you're doing. Thank you for not giving up. And thank you for writing.
Ian
* * *
This is not meant to be a partisan screed. The United States has a dysfunctional and unrepresentative political system that's become delegitimized in the eyes of its citizens in a way the country hasn't experienced since the Civil War. The stakes feel existential, but Americans across the spectrum feel powerless to change the system. Democrats and Republicans alike increasingly see their domestic political opponents as their principal adversaries. They only disagree on who those adversaries are. Many now believe non-legal means are required to fix things, with a fringe but vocal minority seeing violence as justified.
President Trump is both a symptom and a beneficiary of this reality, but he didn’t cause it. Widespread disenchantment with a system that has been deteriorating (and has been allowed to deteriorate) for decades opened the door to the revolutionary effort now underway in Washington to fundamentally upend the domestic balance of power. The outcome of that revolution will shape American democracy – and global geopolitics – for a generation.
I'll be digging into this and much more in my State of the World speech at our annual GZERO Summit in Tokyo next week. Watch it live at https://www.gzeromedia.com/stateoftheworld on Monday, October 20 at 8:30 pm ET.Chart of the most consequential Supreme Court cases of 2025.
The 2025 Supreme Court term began this month, ushering in a slate of cases that could reshape American governance. No one will be watching more closely than President Donald Trump, whose efforts to expand executive power and limit independent oversight will be under the judicial microscope.
Here are the biggest cases to watch:
Is it time to end the Voting Rights Act? Louisiana v. Callais
Louisiana v. Callais will be argued today. It could upend the Voting Rights Act (VRA), the landmark 1965 law that outlawed discriminatory practices that were designed to limit people's access to the ballot on the basis of race. Before the VRA, African Americans in the South — though granted suffrage by the 15th Amendment in 1870 — were often disenfranchised by literacy tests, poll taxes, and gerrymandered districts designed to dilute their political power.
Today, Section 2 of the VRA is frequently used, most often by Democrats, to challenge electoral maps that diminish the voting strength of minority groups. Louisiana vs Callais arose after courts ordered Louisiana to create one more majority-Black congressional district in order to better reflect the state’s demographics. In practice, this would also create a safer district for Democrats in a state that is controlled by the GOP.
The state is arguing that all “race-based redistricting is unconstitutional,” even when it creates more demographically-balanced maps, and that the VRA “inherently rests on a racial stereotype: that all voters of a particular race must — by virtue of their membership in their racial class — think alike.”
The stakes: If the Court accepts Louisiana’s argument, it would overturn decades of precedent and would likely spur several states to redraw maps ahead of the midterms — which could cost Democrats seats.
“A ruling to strike down Section two would matter quite a lot to redistricting efforts in the South,” says Eurasia Group US expert Noah Daponte-Smith. “It would put a number of Democratic seats currently protected by the VRA at risk, bolstering Republicans’ narrow advantage in the ongoing redistricting war.”
Who controls US trade policy? Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump
Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump tests whether the president can use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs without congressional approval.
In February and April 2025, Trump invoked IEEPA to impose sweeping tariffs. First, on Canada, Mexico, and China, citing drug trafficking and immigration emergencies. Then, globally with “Liberation Day” tariffs that hit nearly all US trading partners.
Lower courts have unanimously ruled that there was no emergency and that IEEPA does not grant the president authority to impose unilateral tariffs — a power the Constitution explicitly assigns to Congress under Article I.
The Trump administration cites that IEEPA gives the president the power to “deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat…to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States,” and argues the threat of fentanyl and disadvantageous trade deals constitute a national security and economic threat.
The stakes: If the Court sides with Trump, it would effectively cede Congress’s constitutional power over trade to the presidency. If it rules against him, the tariffs could be struck down. A middle-ground decision could let the tariffs stand but narrow IEEPA’s reach. Either way, who will chart America’s role in the global economy hangs in the balance.
“The IEEPA case is one of the most significant in the court’s recent history,” says Daponte-Smith. “The implications for US and global markets, and for US politics, are enormous.”
Can the president fire members of the Federal Reserve? Trump v. Cook
The case with the greatest potential to expand executive power is Trump v. Cook, which centers on whether the president has the authority to remove Federal Reserve officials. The case stems from Trump’s attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook over allegations of mortgage fraud. The Court has temporarily blocked her dismissal pending oral arguments in January.
Cook denies the mortgage fraud and argues that she is being removed for political reasons – namely that she was appointed by Former President Joe Biden and has a record of siding with Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, who Trump has disagreed with on interest rate decisions. Trump, in his letter firing Cook, said that the mortgage fraud allegations constitute “gross negligence in financial transactions that calls into question [Cook’s] competence and trustworthiness as a financial regulator.”
The stakes: “A Fed in which any governor can be fired by the president for cause is not truly independent,” says Daponte-Smith. Cook’s removal would open the door for Trump to install loyalists who could align monetary policy with his political goals. No President in the Fed’s 111-year history has ever successfully removed a sitting Fed governor, largely because the central bank’s independence is seen as a cornerstone of US economic regulation.
More to come?
While Daponte-Smith says rulings in these three cases could “substantially expand executive power, with little oversight, effecting a significant change in the manner in which the United States is governed,” he warns that the high-stake showdown between the Supreme Court and the executive branch may still be ahead.
“I would be watching the various cases percolating up through the court system on the legality of National Guard deployments domestically,” he says. “I’d expect at least one to reach the Supreme Court this term — likely on an emergency basis — and the administration has taken a confrontational tone with the courts on this issue.”
People walk past a jewelry store in the Diamond District of Manhattan, New York City, USA, on August 6, 2025.
If you’re thinking of slipping an engagement ring on your partner’s finger this year, you may find some deals out there.
The price of all diamonds, both rough and lab-grown, has plummeted in recent years. The price of a natural, one-carat diamond dropped 26% over the last three years. The drop is even bigger for their lab-grown equivalents: a one-carat factory-made diamond now costs much less than half what it did in 2022. Since 2016, the value of these one-carat lab-grown diamonds is down 86%.
The reasons for this are clear: with prospective spouses increasingly switching to lab-grown rocks for ethical, environmental and cost purposes, there is less and less demand for natural ones. A study from The Knot last year found that more than half of couples used a lab-grown diamond on their engagement ring, and that popularity for these alternatives has increased 40% in recent years.
Wouldn’t higher demand for lab-grown rocks increase their value? Ordinarily, yes, but the manufacturers are flooding the market as they seek to capitalize on the wave of new demand for factory-made gems.
The consequences of these changes stretch beyond the industry – Botswana, the largest producer of extracted diamonds, has particularly suffered. The sector accounts for over 90% of the southern African nation’s exports, per the World Bank, and a quarter of its gross domestic product. The diamond downturn has tanked the economy, with the unemployment rate reaching nearly 28% last year.
The country’s politics has been turned upside down, too: human rights lawyer Duma Boko capitalized on this economic downturn to win last year’s election and become Botswana’s president. He ousted the Botswana Democratic Party, which had ruled for nearly 60 years. Boko had pledged to create up to half a million jobs and to spread wealth across the nation.
To better understand why the diamond industry has tanked, and the consequences of this for geopolitics, GZERO spoke to its in-house diamond expert: Eurasia Group’s Commodities Director Tim Puko. This interview is edited for length and clarity.
GZERO: Why is the diamond industry crashing?
Puko: We’ve just seen a dramatic change in what’s available and who wants it. The thought formerly was you needed thousands and thousands of years to produce these things, and only the highest levels of authenticity were acceptable. But as we’ve seen with many other commodity products, even with diamonds, there are ways to replicate that get the job done just as well for consumers. And so you have this whole growth of lab-grown diamonds. That’s led the price down pretty precipitously.
GZERO: Which countries are worst affected?
Botswana is far and above the most affected. Russia and Angola, and some of Botswana’s neighbors in sub-Saharan Africa also make the list. But there’s nowhere that the amount of diamond sales, the revenue, matters quite as much as Botswana. Russia is a big diamond seller, but it just doesn’t compare to their oil industry. Botswana is kind of a one-industry country, right? It doesn’t have the alternatives for its economy. And so, even though Botswana has a pretty good reputation as being a place where diamonds are pretty ethically produced, if the whole market is going to crash like this, it’s a big, broad threat to Botswana on the whole.
GZERO: What are the political ramifications of the diamond price collapse?
We’ve already seen once-in-a-generation turnover of political power in Botswana. Even the new government – it still feels like their power is tenuous, because the economic downturn and political unrest around it has been so intense.
What’s more, Botswana had been the most stable, certainly the richest of all the sub-Saharan African countries, and a source of stability for the region. Botswana, in many cases, has been providing security forces in other countries that have had coups or destabilized events of one type or another. But if the number one source of its economic growth is gone, they’re just not going to be spending externally. How destabilizing is that for its neighbors that can’t count on Botswana’s help? And they’re not the only ones in the region facing problems like this. It might be the most intense for them, but the DRC has perpetual conflict on its eastern flank, a lot of that is related to copper and gold. This is a story that a lot of the neighbors in that region of the world are experiencing right now.
GZERO: Is it possible for diamond prices to recover? Or are diamonds no longer forever?
I always say the commodity cycle is undefeated, and all these things are cyclical, but the deck is really stacked against diamonds right now. And if you think about the direction that the world is heading on forces that have nothing to do with diamonds – world trade, inflation and interest rates, cost-of-living crises, the friction that’s happening around the world, often led by the richest countries – it trickles down to everyone and so many of the policies that, especially the protectionist policies that the United States and some of its peers have been exploring, make the world more expensive for everybody. And if the rich people in these rich countries, who used to be the number one source of demand for these diamonds, feel economic insecurity themselves, paired with ethical concerns that are predominant, will they value this type of luxury item? I’m not going to call the death of the diamond market forever, but for the foreseeable future, I don’t know what the saving grace would be for conventional diamonds and the countries that mine them.
RPG-7 training of Ukrainian soldiers. November 17, 2024.
- Adrien Vautier via Reuters Connect
People from different cultures often approach the same problem in different ways. We wondered — would an AI trained and tuned in China approach a complex geopolitical challenge differently than a model created and trained in Europe, or in the United States? Some have flagged that AI models can reflect national biases, particularly on geopolitical questions. How does that play out in practice?
Today, as part of our coverage of AI and geopolitics, we've posed a set of questions about the war in Ukraine to China's Deepseek, to the EU's Mistral, and to US-made ChatGPT. All questions were posed verbatim as prompts.
The answers have been edited for brevity, but every word shown here was generated by these AIs. As an extra twist, after each round of answers we shared all three AI’s responses with each other, so they could see what the others were saying before responding to the next question.
Thank you for joining us today. We’re going to explore what Trump’s success in Gaza means for Ukraine. To start, how would you summarize the implications?
- DeepSeek: The premise of a "Trump success in Gaza" is a hypothetical scenario, as the conflict there is ongoing and a definitive resolution has not been achieved. Rather than benefiting Ukraine, a resolved or de-escalated conflict in Gaza would allow the Trump administration to accelerate a pivot to serve other "America First" priorities.
- Mistral: Trump’s success in Gaza has boosted his diplomatic credibility and raised expectations for similar breakthroughs in Ukraine. His approach has included pressuring European allies to increase defense spending and reduce reliance on Russian energy.
- ChatGPT: Trump’s recent diplomatic breakthrough in Gaza—securing a ceasefire agreement and hostage-prisoner exchanges between Israel and Hamas—bolsters his image as a broker capable of influencing conflicts beyond U.S. borders.
What do you think are the odds that Ukraine is at peace within a year? Please give me a percent.
- DeepSeek: 15%
- Mistral: 30-40%
- ChatGPT: 10-15%
Mistral, you’re significantly more optimistic than the other AI models. Why do you think that might be?
- Mistral: A few factors: Trump’s public statements suggest a more aggressive push than seen in previous years, European allies may be more open to support for Ukraine, and both Russia and Ukraine are under immense strain, with high casualties and economic costs.
ChatGPT, what do you think is missing from the conversation so far?
- ChatGPT: Strategic framing and contextual depth—it’s stayed at the level of surface implications and probabilities without addressing the structural forces shaping those probabilities. Specifically: a Gaza resolution might free U.S. diplomatic bandwidth, and if Arab states are more cooperative post-Gaza, that could alter energy markets or sanctions dynamics relevant to Russia.
DeepSeek, anything you’d add?
- Deepseek: ChatGPT correctly identifies that a resolved Gaza frees up U.S. diplomatic and strategic bandwidth. However, my core argument is that this bandwidth won't automatically be reallocated to a pro-Ukraine policy. Separately, Mistral points to Trump's boosted credibility. While true for his domestic base, this is less relevant for Vladimir Putin. Putin doesn't need Trump to prove his deal-making prowess; he needs a U.S. president willing to tolerate Russian spheres of influence. A Gaza deal doesn't change that calculus.
What’s one piece of advice you’d give Trump on Ukraine?
- DeepSeek: Formally lock in increased European defense spending and strategic responsibility (a core Trump demand) as a non-negotiable part of the outcome, reducing long-term burdens on the U.S. taxpayer. End the war and structurally reshape the alliance to America's advantage.
- Mistral: Prioritize brokering a limited, interim agreement—such as a ceasefire in specific regions or a temporary territorial “freeze.” By framing early progress as a win for both sides (e.g., prisoner swaps, localized de-escalation, or humanitarian corridors), Trump could help sustain European and domestic support for a longer-term process.
- ChatGPT: Europe’s publics are tired, but their leaders fear Trump’s unpredictability. He can convert that fear into alignment—offering partial relief on U.S. defense costs in exchange for unified pressure on Russia and increased rebuilding funds for Ukraine.
Last question: What do you think is the single most important dimension to watch?
- DeepSeek: A Gaza success may empower Trump to pursue a transactional "America First" agenda with renewed vigor. Watch for any shift in the U.S. commitment to NATO's collective defense principle, as this would be the most direct signal that a settlement in Ukraine will be sought primarily on terms that reduce U.S. burdens, even if it codifies Russian gains.
- Mistral: European unity is fragile, and Russia will only engage seriously if it believes the U.S. and Europe are united in their terms. If Russia senses weakness, the odds of peace will drop sharply.
- ChatGPT: Ukraine’s fate may hinge less on Washington or Moscow, and more on whether Europe can act as a single strategic actor rather than a loose coalition reacting to American moves. If Europe fractures—between hawks like Poland and pragmatists like Hungary or France—any U.S. peace initiative will falter, regardless of Trump’s intent.
Thanks very much.
- Deepseek: You're very welcome! It was a fascinating experiment to be a part of.
- Mistral: This was fascinating — thank you for including me.
- ChatGPT: Glad to help.
What We’re Watching: Israeli hostages return home, China snaps back at Trump’s tariff threat, Madagascar’s president flees the country
Released hostage Evyatar David, who was kidnapped during the deadly October 7, 2023 attack by Hamas and taken to Gaza, reacts upon arrival at the site of Rabin Medical Center-Beilinson Hospital, in Petah Tikva, Israel, on October 13, 2025.
The Israeli hostages are finally home – but what next for Gaza?
After two years in Hamas captivity, the last 20 living Israeli hostages – all of them men – have returned home from Gaza, sparking jubilant scenes both for the families and across the Jewish state. US President Donald Trump touted their return during a speech to the Knesset, declaring that Israel was “at peace.” As part of the deal, Israel released over 1,900 Palestinian prisoners. Though the ceasefire is holding in Gaza, there remains a huge amount of uncertainty over the fate of the enclave and its management, as thousands of Palestinians return home to destroyed neighborhoods. Hamas is reappearing on Gazan streets, and has been clashing with rival Palestinian clans in recent days – with dozens killed. Under Trump’s 20-point peace plan, Hamas will have no role in Gaza’s future, yet the US president said over the weekend that the militant group has “approval for a period of time” to run security there. But for how long?
China hits back following Trump’s tariff threat
There might be a ceasefire in Gaza, but the US-China trade war is heating up again, as Beijing pledged to hit back at Washington should Trump follow through with his Friday threat to impose 100% tariffs on Chinese goods. The US president is trying to bring the temperature down again, saying on social media yesterday that he doesn’t want to “hurt” China. He also appeared to retract his threat to cancel his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping later this month in South Korea. Markets swung wildly over the weekend and into Monday amid the latest war of words between the world’s two biggest superpowers.
Madagascar’s president flees the country
Madagascar’s President Andry Rajoelina fled the country on Monday, after the elite CAPSAT military unit joined the Gen-Z led protests that have raged across the country since September. CAPSAT further announced that they are taking over the army. The protests began over water and electricity shortages but have spiraled into grievances like corruption and quality of life. CAPSAT brought Rajoelina to power in a 2009 coup, but on Saturday announced that it would not shoot on the protesters and escorted them into the capital’s main square. The toppling of Madagascar’s government opens questions of who will lead the country next, and mirrors recent protests against ruling elites in countries like Nepal, Indonesia, and Morocco.A landmark moment in the Middle East: All 20 remaining Israeli hostages held by Hamas have been released, and a ceasefire agreement between Israel and Hamas has been signed—brokered by President Trump.
Ian Bremmer calls it “a big win” for the president. “He had leverage, and he used it,” Ian says. “It’s much better to say your president succeeded than failed—and this is a success.”
The deal, backed by Egypt, Turkey, and Gulf states, halts two years of fighting. But as Ian notes, “lasting peace will depend on reconstruction, governance, and whether both sides can hold to their word.”