Former Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack joins GZERO World to discuss the food supply chain crisis and why it's so hard to get meat processing up and running at full capacity right now. But he assures us that there won't likely be a noticeable shortage for consumers. A bigger concern, he says, is addressing growing food insecurity among the unemployed and poor families badly impacted by the pandemic. He recommends expanding access to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) for more Americans to offset the crisis, and so more unemployed workers will be able to buy food.
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. This website uses cookies. 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 (if different), and our use of cookies as described in our Cookie Policy.
Meet Alessandra Cominetti, a recipient of MIT Technology Review Magazine's Innovators Under 35 award. As a lab technician at Eni's Research Centre for Renewable Energy in Novara, Alessandra has devoted her career to finding new solutions and materials to optimize solar energy. Much like the serendipitous encounter that resulted in her employment, her eagerness and willingness to try new things allowed her to stumble upon a material for the creation of portable solar panels.
Watch her remarkable story on the latest episode of Faces of Eni.
Joe Biden has vowed to radically change the US' approach to foreign policy and international diplomacy should he win next week's election.
But a lot has happened in four years under Donald Trump that could impede Biden's ability to simply return to the status quo ante. How different would US foreign policy really be under a Biden presidency? What will the two-term former vice president likely be able to change, and what's bound to remain the same, at least for now?
<p><strong>Quick fixes.</strong> </p>
<p><strong>Climate.</strong> Biden has said from the get-go that on "<a href="https://medium.com/@JoeBiden/statement-from-vice-president-joe-biden-on-the-anniversary-of-the-paris-climate-accord-c8328db863bd" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">day one" </a>he would reenter the Paris Climate Accord that the Trump administration abandoned back in 2019, a move that left global powers scrambling as to how to tackle climate change without the world's second largest <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapier/2019/12/04/the-worlds-top-10-carbon-dioxide-emitters/#632c33872d04" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">emitter </a>of carbon and largest economy. </p>
<p>The US' official exit only occurs on November 4, a day after the US election, and therefore, Biden could readily recommit to the treaty without having to make up for much lost time (though there are some <a href="http://blogs.law.columbia.edu/climatechange/2020/03/11/returning-to-paris-the-next-u-s-ndc/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">compliance</a> issues he would need to address).</p>
<p><strong>US allies. </strong>Should he win in November, one of Biden's key policy priorities will be repairing damaged alliances, particularly with European partners. (In 2018, for example, German Chancellor Angela Merkel <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-merkel-usa/merkel-says-europe-cant-rely-on-u-s-to-impose-world-order-idUSKBN1KA1F9" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">said</a> "we can't rely on the superpower of the United States.") To do so, Biden could readily fall back on deep <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/05/us/politics/joe-biden-foreign-policy.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">relations cultivated </a>during his two terms as vice president. </p>
<p>Indeed, to counter Russian aggression, Biden says he will <a href="https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/united-states/2020-01-23/why-america-must-lead-again" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">seek</a> to bolster NATO, not only economically, but also by reinforcing the United States' commitment to its shared values. </p>
<p><strong>Iran nuclear deal. </strong>Withdrawing from the Iran nuclear deal was one of Trump's signature foreign policies. Biden, on the other hand, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/13/opinions/smarter-way-to-be-tough-on-iran-joe-biden/index.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">says </a>he will rejoin the accord and resume direct negotiations with Tehran on the condition that "Iran returns to strict compliance with the nuclear deal." </p>
<p>While notionally — with the backing of US allies like Germany and France — this process seems achievable in the near term, Biden's plan still relies on the Iranians playing ball. For its part, Iran has its own elections coming up next summer, and as journalist <a href="https://www.gzeromedia.com/us-election-seen-from-iran-a-rare-window-of-opportunity" target="_self">Negar Mortazavi recently told GZERO</a>, the future of diplomacy between the US and Iran is also largely contingent on whether Iran's (anti-American) hardliners prevail at the polls in 2021. </p>
<p><strong>Harder to shift.</strong></p>
<p><strong>Trade.</strong> Biden has said repeatedly that Trump's erratic trade policy has disaffected <a href="https://www.gzeromedia.com/a-referendum-for-the-whole-world-global-voices-on-the-us-election" target="_self">allies like Canada, Mexico and Europe, </a>and deterred China from making concessions in general. The former VP says he will work with allies to get China in check. But as the global economy suffers its worst recession in decades — while<a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/18/economy/china-q3-gdp-intl-hnk/index.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank"> China's economy </a>continues to recover, putting it ahead of other global heavyweights— Beijing isn't likely to stop playing hardball anytime soon. At the same time, even if Biden is committed to reducing tensions with Beijing by eliminating some tariffs on Chinese goods imposed by Trump, walking back on $360 billion worth of dues is never going to be a cakewalk.</p>
<p>Meanwhile, while <a href="https://www.gzeromedia.com/bidens-trade-strategy" target="_self">Biden believes </a>in global economic integration, he has to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/28/business/economy/democrats-biden-trade.html" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">contend</a> with the Democratic party's dominant pro-labor progressive wing, which would likely complicate his administration's efforts to rejoin multinational treaties like the <a href="https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-trans-pacific-partnership-tpp" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Trans-Pacific Partnership.</a></p>
<p><strong>North Korea and arms control. </strong>While President Trump has held three face-to-face summits with Kim Jong-un in recent years, relations between Washington and Pyongyong are as tense as ever. Biden says he will rally allies — as well as China — to reengage the North in denuclearization talks. However, Kim has shown very <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/10/10/922618623/kim-jong-un-puts-new-missiles-on-display-at-military-parade-in-north-korea" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">little willingness</a> to do so, and North Korea has in fact recently <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-sanctions-un/north-korea-has-probably-developed-nuclear-devices-to-fit-ballistic-missiles-un-report-says-idUSKCN24Z2PO" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">made progress</a> in developing nuclear weapons that could strike US territory.</p>
<p>While at this stage, Biden has little leverage with the North, he can — and likely will — renew America's commitment to broader <a href="https://www.gzeromedia.com/the-start-of-the-end-for-arms-control" target="_self">arms control</a> by extending the New START treaty — a 2011 deal limiting long-range nuclear weapons between the Kremlin and the Obama administration that expires next February — <em>without preconditions.</em> (So far, the Trump administration has <a href="https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/24/trump-putin-russia-new-start-nuclear-arms-control-u-s-allies-worry-trump-administration-might-let-key-nuclear-treaty-with-russia-die/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">failed to reach an agreement</a> with Moscow on terms for the extension.) </p>
<p><strong>Bottom line:</strong> Leaders are always constrained by the actions of those who came before them. In this particularly tumultuous global moment, what Biden <em>want</em>s to do and what he actually <em>can</em> do will be divergent agendas. </p>
More
Show less
Kevin Sneader, Global Managing Partner at McKinsey & Company, provides perspective on what corporate business leaders are thinking during the global coronavirus crisis
Should big business care about small business in these times?
The answer is yes and for many reasons. First, small business is the lifeblood of our economies. 45% of employment in emerging countries and 70% in the OECD comes from small and medium enterprises. Moreover, these enterprises have been badly hit by the crisis. Surveys indicate as many as 50% of European small to medium enterprises feel they may not survive over 12 months. While SMEs are relying on government support, larger companies do have a role to play. After all, this includes prioritizing small business and procurement by locking in demand for multiple years, thus facilitating access to good credit, paying receivables to small business in time and where possible, ahead of schedule. Cash flow matters most when you're small. Looking out for small businesses that have lower resilience. For example, financial institutions can lend more and in doing so, ensure deeper customer relationships in the future.
In his latest Financial Times op-ed, Martin Wolf argues that the US global role is at stake in this election and that a Trump re-election would undo America's legacy of democratic leadership in the world. Ian Bremmer and Eurasia Group's Jeffrey Wright grabbed the Red Pen to argue that a Trump presidency exists in part because of Americans' rejection of the US's post-war leadership role, and these feelings run deeper than the article suggests.
Today, we're taking The Red Pen to a recent op-ed published in The Financial Times from my good friend, the chief economics commentator Martin Wolf. Martin argues the global role of the United States is at stake on November 3rd, and that a Trump reelection would undo America's legacy of democratic leadership in the world. There's been a lot of this sort of thing recently. I know, we did it once, but if we do it twice, it's all over and I'm not there. To be clear, we don't totally reject what Martin is presenting in this piece. Rather, we'd argue that a Trump presidency exists because there were feelings that were present in the United States before he came along and they run a lot deeper than the article suggests. In other words, it's really not all about Trump.
<p>First, Martin writes about America's long history as a leading model of functioning democracy, a leader among nations that share its values and essential player in resolving big global challenges. To quote, "The reelection of Mr. Trump would signify a rejection of all three roles by the American people," he writes. Let's bring out that red pen, this misses a larger point. Many Americans have already rejected those roles. Two decades of wars, trade agreements that have left working people behind and a feeling that other nations were just freeloading and letting the US be the world's policemen. That didn't start with Trump.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://www.gzeromedia.com/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY0MTU4Mi9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYwNjQ1MTc0NH0.9r89L4P0xE8sLduHap1rJ1_y9fGwQfWGbDN2YUjvjY8/image.png?width=980" id="89573" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b5fb34573503d49113a864623ee13199" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt=""The re-election of Mr. Trump would signify a rejection of all three roles by the American people:" Trump exploited that reality. He didn't create it." />
</p><p>Irrespective of whether you agree with the perspective or not, it's been growing any United States with massive levels of inequality and large numbers of Americans that feel like the system doesn't work for them, and that includes first and foremost, how America has projected its power internationally. Don't you remember on the other side of this equation just how many US allies were saying that the Obama-Biden team were leading from behind? Again, didn't start with Trump. Martin sees the president as a threat to US leadership in the world. But a lot of Trump's supporters think he's just standing up for them and not letting other countries take advantage of the United States.<br/></p><p>Next, is Trump's goal to do whatever he likes, laws be damned? Martin writes, "He wants to be an autocrat. If he wins again, he may largely achieve his aim." Disagree. Trump wanting to be an autocrat and Trump actually having that capacity, not to mention competence, are two radically different things. Trump focuses more on tweeting and petty grievances than actually consolidating power. Heck. Remember, when the biggest crisis of not only his administration, but my lifetime came, coronavirus, that would have given any president the chance to consolidate power, emergency rule, really take control in the United States, President Trump wanted none of it. He said, "Not my responsibility. The states are in charge." That isn't someone who's about to become an autocrat.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://www.gzeromedia.com/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY0MTYyMC9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NjkxMTkzOH0.JtAxwdmF0BQhnaun9P4XLUIU4iLFpBAm59sB2gXk4mw/image.png?width=980" id="b889e" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="699c5d59475c61d50a58ac7d2c3ce5f7" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt=""He wants to be an autocrat." Trump's more focused on tweeting and petty grievance than consolidating power." />
</p><p>Many American political institutions have eroded not only under Trump, but over the past 30 years. Congress, the executive, the bureaucracy, the mass media, and indeed American elections. I'd argue the American judiciary and the military largely are as strong as they have been, and that process has indeed sped up under four years of Trump. It's been a long time since the United States has truly led by example. Other countries don't look at the US today and say, "We want our government to run like that," and that's also true of the United Kingdom, by the way. I mean, we aren't Canada, we're not Germany, we're not the Nordics, and it's true that we will slip further away faster under a potential second Trump term. But autocracy is not a potential outcome of this election.<br/></p><p>Finally, Martin writes that Trump is indifferent to pass promises, rejects multilateralism and happily pulls out of commitments, such as the Paris Climate Accord. Sure. Trump has been louder and prouder about this. It's true, though, you can't exactly say that the Iraq War was a group effort. Look, to that larger point, I think that Martin paints an overly rosy picture of American democracy of yore. FDR gets credit for saving democracy globally as the article points out, but systemic racism abounded in the US and still has a ways to go today. During World War II, Japanese Americans were held in prison camps.</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-rebelmouse-image">
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://www.gzeromedia.com/media-library/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY0MTYyMy9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxODI0Mjk5NH0.zJu8-31tOyFfHq6qayJafQq-WQ7BsJGixbTt7Fa9q30/image.png?width=980" id="1d1f0" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b437dc11c6c9a92e2fb818f8c0c1f809" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
</p><p>Look, a Biden presidency will end up being a lot more similar to Trump on foreign policy than the establishment thinks, both because he'll be in part more aligned than they think, and in part, because he'll be more constrained than they think, and that's in part because the world has changed and in part because the United States has.<br/></p><p>Speaking of that, be sure to vote if you haven't already. That's your Red Pen for this week. Stay safe and avoid people.</p>
More
Show less
"The top priority will be to announce to the world that the United States they've known for decades is back." Former top Obama diplomat and current CEO of the think tank New America Anne-Marie slaughter predicts an American revival on the global stage if Joe Biden wins the presidency. But at a time when the United States has never been more divided, can any nation, even the world's most powerful, be a global leader if it cannot even keep its own house in order? Ian Bremmer's conversation with Slaughter is part of a new episode of GZERO World.
Watch the episode: How a "President Biden" could reshape US foreign policy
Today In 60 Seconds
GZEROMEDIA
Subscribe to GZERO Media's Newsletter: Signal
Latest
Anne-Marie Slaughter on a Biden administration’s top foreign policy priorities
GZERO World Clips
October 30, 2020
"American exceptionalism" has outlived its usefulness: Anne-Marie Slaughter
GZERO World Clips
28 October