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.
{{ subpage.title }}
The politics of polarization in America, with Steven Law
Public disgust with Washington is growing as the government shutdown continues, with both Democrats and Republicans seemingly unwilling to compromise. Is the American political system broken beyond repair? Former GOP fundraiser and chief of staff for Mitch McConnell, Steven Law, joins Ian Bremmer on the GZERO World Podcast to discuss the state of America’s political parties ahead of a pivotal midterm election year.
While Congress seems more polarized and divided than ever, Law believes that the American public writ large wants leaders who are constructive and unifying, even as they’re prosecuting a strong agenda. But exactly what that agenda is, is what’s unclear. According to Law, the GOP has become the party of President Trump while the Democrats are experiencing an identity crisis and period of “massive redefinition.” What should parties focus on ahead of next year’s midterms? Can either side break through the deep polarization in DC to deliver a message that resonates with voters?
“Both bases want to fight. They are mistrustful of the other side,” Law says, “There's going to be a dividend that the voters will pay to a public leader who stands up and says, we just need to turn the temperature down here.”
Subscribe to the GZERO World Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're publishedThe state of America's political parties
What is going on with the Democratic Party? President Trump says they’ve “gone crazy” and even Democratic leaders are unsure of what they do (or don’t) stand for. On Ian Explains, Ian Bremmer breaks down the current state of America’s political parties. With the midterms just about a year away, Republicans need to show voters they can overcome Washington gridlock and Democrats need to prove they are more than just the party of “anti-Trump.”
While President Trump’s approval ratings may have slipped in recent months, especially with young voters, Republicans are united behind him. Yet Democrats can’t agree on what they stand for. Should they move to the center or further to the left? Should they focus on the economy or double-down on social issues that matter to the base? If Dems can’t find a message (or understand how to deliver it), it’s going to be an uphill battle. Trump, for all his foibles, knows how to control the narrative.
GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, the award-winning weekly global affairs series, airs nationwide on US public television stations (check local listings).
New digital episodes of GZERO World are released every Monday on YouTube. Don't miss an episode: subscribe to GZERO's YouTube channel and turn on notifications (🔔). GZERO World with Ian Bremmer airs on US public television weekly - check local listings.
Palestinians inspect the destruction after Israeli airstrike hit Bank of Palestine in Gaza Strip Palestinians inspect the destruction after Israeli airstrike hit Bank of Palestine in Gaza Strip on September 24, 2025.
- IMAGO/APAimages via Reuters Connect
After peace, what next for Gaza?
Negotiations are ongoing to end the war in Gaza, with US President Donald Trump urging parties to “move fast” to reach a deal. But that outcome hinges on what comes next: how will Gaza be governed once the conflict ceases? Trump’s 20-point plan proposes to install a technocratic Palestinian authority with no involvement from Hamas, supervised by an international “Board of Peace.” What might this look like in practice, what can history teach us about its possible outcome, and will Hamas accept those terms?
Technocrats and trusteeship
Hamas had already agreed to"a national independent administration of technocrats" in September. Such a regime would be run by non-partisan experts chosen for their competence in various fields, such as infrastructure and financial management, to make and implement policy on a pragmatic, evidence-based basis.
But Hamas has not signed onto Trump’s proposed international supervisory board composed of himself as chair, together with notable public figures such as former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair. The board has been described as an “elite managed trusteeship.” Trump stated that it could entertain “many thoughtful investment proposals and exciting development ideas…crafted by well-meaning international groups.” The proposal sets neither a timeframe nor a path to self rule.
A trip back in time?
Comparisons are already being made to colonial structures imposed by European powers in the 19th and 20th centuries. Starting in 1820, the British controlled much of the region around the Persian Gulf and Red Sea through protectorates, treaty arrangements which saw London handle foreign policy and defense while local potentates ran domestic affairs. The goal was not nation-building, but commerce, to secure shipping lanes east of Suez to India.
That structure changed after WWI, when the League of Nations created the mandate system, supposedly to prepare former colonies for independence, including the British Mandate for Palestine in 1922. But from the start, the mandate suffered from a legitimacy problem: rule without full sovereignty. This “supervision, not control,” as the League framed it, bred resentment and resistance in the form of the Arab Liberation Army. The mandate ended in the Arab-Israeli war, partition, and the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948.
What could this mean for the Board of Peace?
Some critics have decried Trump’s plan as imperialism and a means of commercial gain for the US. The involvement of Blair has also raised eyebrows: Mustafa Barghouti, the general secretary of the Palestinian National Initiative, commented, “We’ve been under British colonialism already.”
But the plan has support from the governments of Qatar, Jordan, UAE, Indonesia, Pakistan, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. The plan is also backed by European powers including Spain, Germany, and the UK and France, who recently recognized the State of Palestine, as well as Canada.
Engaging Middle Eastern powers to fund or staff the technocratic authority could mitigate the perception of western colonialism, but without a timetable for sovereignty could also mire regional governments in long-term management of the territory.
Is oversight necessary?
Apart from the terms of the Board of Peace, is any board required at all? Transitional governments can take many forms: Syria is currently transitioning to democracy after decades of dictatorship, starting with votes by an electoral college, but without any foreign oversight. Other nations, like East Timor, successfully transitioned from a colonial regime to self-rule in the early 2000s after a period of oversight organized by the United Nations - but remain dependent on foreign aid for infrastructure building.
Will Hamas ever accept oversight?
Hamas has accepted three points of Trump’s plan: releasing all hostages, surrendering power, and Israel withdrawing troops from Gaza. But it has so far rejected disarmament and Trump’s international board. It remains to be seen whether these are up for negotiation - or deal breakers.
Israeli protestors hold up pictures of Israeli soldiers held by Hamas in Gaza during a demonstration earlier this week following the announcement of a Gaza ceasefire proposal by US President Donald Trump and Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu.
Hard Numbers: Trump sets Hamas deadline, Venezuela vents at US, Diddy awaits fate, Church of England appoints first female leader
2200: Donald Trump has given Hamas until Sunday at 2200 GMT – which is 6pm in Washington, DC –to accept the Gaza deal that he and Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu proposed earlier this week. The framework calls for the release of Hamas-held hostages in exchange for Israeli-held Palestinian prisoners, a phased withdrawal of Israeli troops, an internationally-overseen transitional Gaza government, and amnesty for Hamas fighters who lay down arms. If the group refuses, Trump said, “all hell” will break loose.
5: Venezuela accused the US of “provocation” after detecting five US fighter jets near its Caribbean coast on Thursday. The flyover follows Trump telling Congress that the US is in an “armed conflict” and recent US strikes on alleged Venezuela-linked drug-trafficking boats. Caracas fears Washington’s real aim is to oust President Nicolás Maduro – read what that could look like here.
11: Music mogul Sean “Diddy” Combs will be sentenced Friday in Manhattan federal court after his recent conviction on charges that he transported women across state lines for prostitution. Acquitted of more serious charges, he faces a wide sentencing range: with the defense seeking no more than 14 months, while prosecutors want 11 years.
1: Dame Sarah Mullally, former chief nursing officer for England, has been appointed the first female archbishop of Canterbury to lead the Church of England. The church did not allow women to become bishops until 2014.
Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, son of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, speaks during a press conference, after Brazil's Supreme Court issued a house arrest order for his father, in Brasilia, Brazil, August 5, 2025.
Bolsonaro’s trial opens as Brazil braces for fallout
Brazil’s Supreme Court on Tuesday began the final phase of the historic trial of former president Jair Bolsonaro, who is accused of plotting a coup after losing the 2022 election. Prosecutors say he conspired with allies to overturn the result, sought military backing, and even weighed assassinating rivals. If convicted, he could face more than 40 years in prison.
The trial is expected to run about 10 days, following months of arguments and witness testimony. Bolsonaro himself skipped the opening session, with lawyers citing a debilitating bout of hiccups – a lingering complication from a 2018 stabbing.
Why it matters: For a country scarred by coups and dictatorship, prosecuting a former leader is a democratic stress test. Analysts expect a conviction, which would inflame Bolsonaro’s base and deepen political tensions.
“Some analysts and political leaders hope that the trial will reduce polarization and pacify the political landscape. However, that is wishful thinking.” says Eurasia Group Managing Director and Brazil expert Chris Garman. “Keep in mind that roughly 40% of the electorate still believes that Bolsonaro won the 2022 election, and a large share of voters are still likely to see the trial as political persecution.”
What remains of Bolsonaro’s movement? Banned from seeking office until 2030, Bolsonaro has left his populist-right movement alive but adrift. Supporters are planning nationwide protests on Sept. 7, Independence Day, and Garman says that the “anti-establishment sentiment that got Bolsonaro elected in 2018 will persist.”
“Despite already being ineligible to run in 2026, several polls show Bolsonaro as the strongest candidate to challenge President Lula in 2026. That means whoever he endorses to run in his place will have a good shot of making it to a run-off against Lula.”
But no clear successor has emerged. “Pressure is high for Bolsonaro to crown São Paulo Governor Tarcisio de Freitas as his heir, instead of a family member.” says Garman. “In the coming months, all eyes will be on Bolsonaro’s decision on who to support in 2026. His martyr status will cement his “kingmaker” role in next year’s electoral cycle.”
The US angle: Bolsonaro has found an ally in US President Donald Trump, who views the trial as an anti-democratic witch hunt. His administration slapped a 50% tariff on Brazil and sanctioned a Supreme Court justice handling the case. Garman expects “the conviction will trigger more US sanctions on Brazilian individuals,” and that, “the US may also classify Brazil’s organized crime groups as terrorist organizations, increasing compliance risks for financial institutions.”
If Washington escalates, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva – who has gained some political momentum thanks to Trump’s heavy-handed interventions – may pivot harder toward China, the Middle East, and the EU, where the long-stalled trade deal between the EU and South America’s largest trading bloc, Mercosur, is finally moving forward.Pakistan needs to stand up to India, says former Foreign Minister Hina Khar
After nearly eight decades of on-again-off-again conflict, India and Pakistan neared the brink of all-out war last spring. The intense, four-day conflict was an unsettling reminder of the dangers of military escalation between two nuclear-armed adversaries. Though the ceasefire was reached and both sides claimed victory, Delhi and Islamabad are still on edge and tensions remain high. On the GZERO World Podcast, former Pakistani Foreign Minister Hina Khar joins Ian Bremmer to discuss Pakistan’s response to India’s strikes, which she believes were unjustified, and why Pakistan needs to defend itself from further aggression.
One fifth of the world’s population lives on the Indian subcontinent, and Khar says putting them at stake because of a political conflict is dangerous because “you do not know how quickly you can go up the escalation ladder.” Bremmer and Khar also discuss the US role in mediating the conflict with India, Pakistan’s domestic and economic challenges, its strategic partnership with China, and the dangers for global security if the world abandons a rules-based international order.
“As someone who was representing this country as foreign minister, I used to wonder, why were we reduced to eating grass to become a nuclear power?” Khar says, “And now, that is the only thing providing deterrence and security against a country which feels it can attack us anytime, any day.”
Subscribe to the GZERO World Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're publishedA combination picture shows Russian President Vladimir Putin during a meeting with Arkhangelsk Region Governor Alexander Tsybulsky in Severodvinsk, Arkhangelsk region, Russia July 24, 2025.
In Alaska, the clock favors Putin
In negotiations, the most desperate party rarely gets the best terms. As Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin meet in Alaska today to discuss ending the Ukraine War, their diverging timelines may shape what deals emerge – if any. Trump needs a deal fast, Ukraine needs one that lasts, and Russia can afford to wait.
Trump wants a quick foreign policy win to fulfill his overdue campaign promise of ending the war "within 24 hours." With his base growing tired of funding Ukraine and cabinet members like Vice President JD Vance pushing for foreign policy to pivot toward China,Trump may prioritize announcing any deal over negotiating a good one.
US Leverage: Trump wields two powerful tools to force a deal. Against Russia, he could impose secondary sanctions on China's purchases of Russian energy — potentially dealing a devastating blow to Moscow's oil-dependent economy. Against Ukraine, he holds the extreme option of suspending intelligence sharing. While European allies could provide weapons in America's absence, they lack the intel that powers Ukraine’s precision drone strikes.
"Trump may be keen to chase speed over substance," warns Eurasia Group analyst Dani Podgoretskaya, who fears this could produce "a terrible, terrible deal" for Ukraine. However, she says that in meetings this week with EU leaders Trump “supported several Ukrainian demands, including for security guarantees and, most importantly, involving Ukraine in future meetings,” making the scenario of Trump inking a unilateral deal with Putin unlikely.
Meanwhile, Ukraine wants a ceasefire, but only if it lasts. Ukraine’s red lines remain firm: no foreign policy subordination to Russia, no permanent NATO exclusion, and no territorial concessions without "ironclad" security guarantees from the west. While Kyiv is running short on manpower and would potentially even accept a ceasefire that freezes current front lines, analysts say it won't make territorial concessions without meaningful security guarantees — fearing Russia will simply rebuild and invade again.
"The overarching goal for Ukraine is to survive an unprovoked attack on its statehood and prevent Russia from ever coming back," explains Podgoretskaya.
Current map of war in Ukraine
Ukraine's Leverage: Ukraine's greatest strength lies in its ability to refuse. No peace agreement works without Ukrainian consent — Kyiv will simply keep fighting.
If Trump traded territory without Ukrainians at the table and Zelensky capitulated, it would trigger political collapse and potentially spark military rebellion in Ukraine."It would be impossible for [Zelensky] to sell that back home," says Eurasia Group expert Tinatin Japaridze. "Territorial concessions remain a top-of-mind risk for all Ukrainians, and to this end, Kyiv’s capitulation is highly unlikely, though of course Putin will continue to push for this."
Ukraine also retains European backing and could sustain operations for perhaps up to a year without American support. However, a critical vulnerability lurks in Ukraine's defense infrastructure: "A lot of the components they're using for drones come from China," Podgoretskaya warns. "That is potentially a bottleneck, a very dangerous one."
Finally, Russia enters Alaska aiming to buy time and avoid new US sanctions while maintaining maximalist demands: annexation of five Ukrainian regions, permanent NATO exclusion for Ukraine, and strict limits on Ukrainian military forces. Putin may offer Trump small concessions — such as a temporary halt to aerial bombardments — while highlighting potential future US-Russia business opportunities, keeping the door open for future talks without committing to a full ceasefire.
Russia's Leverage: Despite economic damage from sanctions, "Russia can keep going at the expense of long-term growth,” says Podgoretskaya, “They can make sacrifices to keep the war alive until they get what they want." Moscow maintains battlefield superiority in Donbas after 17 months of grinding down Ukrainian defenses, and experts predict these gains will accelerate if fighting continues – with Russia potentially controlling the whole region by the end of the year.
Putin also has domestic incentives to prolong the war. "The economy is now very dependent on military spending. When that is cut, the economy is going to suffer quite dramatically," Podgoretskaya explains. To justify the pain of the war, Putin needs a substantial military victory.
“The Russians are not going to Alaska to make a deal,” says Japaridze. “They’re there to win some time and show both domestically and abroad that Putin is playing the long game.”
The US, Ukraine, and Russia will all attempt to pursue their goals with their leverage. Like many of you, we’ll be watching this afternoon to see what happens next.
Graphic Truth: India dismisses Trump’s threats on Russian oil
India has said it will continue purchasing Russian oil, despite US President Donald Trump announcing a 25% tariff and threatening an “unspecified penalty” for doing so last week. New Delhi has ramped up its purchases of discounted Russian crude since US and European sanctions against Moscow took effect in 2022 over the Kremlin’s invasion of Ukraine. But those imports are now in Washington’s crosshairs as Putin continues to ignore Donald Trump’s demands for peace talks with Kyiv. Officials in Delhi defended their position – citing the country’s energy needs – but White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller accused India of “financing” Russia’s war in Ukraine. Here’s a look at how important India’s purchases of Russian oil are for both countries.