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 }}
Government shutdown and trade tensions test US economy
As the US economy continues to defy expectations, Eurasia Group Managing Director of Global Macro Robert Kahn says the key question is whether a slowdown has been avoided or merely delayed. “The headline here is the impressive resilience of the US, maybe also the global economy over the last six months,” Kahn tells GZERO Media’s Tony Maciulis on the sidelines of the 2025 World Bank–IMF Annual Meetings.
He points to an AI-driven boom and tariff dynamics as major short-term supports, while warning that these trends may not be sustainable. Kahn also highlights deep uncertainty in the US–China trade relationship, describing a “fragile” moment of misunderstanding and escalation. Looking ahead, he flags the uneven nature of US growth and a prolonged government shutdown as key risks that could shift the economic outlook heading into the end of the year.
This conversation is presented by GZERO in partnership with Microsoft. The Global Stage series convenes global leaders for critical discussions on the geopolitical and technological trends shaping our world.
The rise of impunity–and its human cost
What happens when global norms collapse and no one is left to enforce them? On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, International Rescue Committee president and CEO David Miliband warns that we are living through what he calls an “Age of Impunity,” where power is exercised without accountability, and civilians in conflict zones from Syria to Ukraine to Gaza are paying the price. “The Age of Impunity is becoming the Age of Cruelty,” Miliband says, as rights guaranteed under international law are ignored and no one is holding the powerful to account.
Miliband highlights findings from the Atlas of Impunity, an annual index published by the Eurasia Group, that tracks accountability across 170 countries. The data shows not only extreme cases of impunity in war-torn regions but also surprising results in advanced democracies like Canada, the US, and Nordic countries. Still, there are some signs of progress. For Miliband, the challenge is clear: it will take a massive push from governments, civil society, brave civilians, journalists and human rights advocates to reverse the retreat of accountability and uphold basic principles of human rights.
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.
Trump and Putin's Alaska showdown is all about oil
Trump and Putin are heading to Alaska this Friday for a summit to end the war in Ukraine, but both leaders will have the price of oil very much on their minds, says Eurasia Group's Gregory Brew in the first episode of The Debrief.
- The Graphic Truth: Who bought the most Russian oil? ›
- Why is India rebuffing Trump over Russian oil? ›
- What We’re Watching: Trump to meet Putin in Alaska, Mali’s military arrests own soldiers, China arrests US-friendly diplomat ›
- Trump and Putin to meet in Alaska to discuss Ukraine ›
- In Alaska, the clock favors Putin - GZERO Media ›
US President Donald Trump is joined by Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick and Vice President JD Vance while announcing a trade agreement with the United Kingdom in the Oval Office on May 8, 2025.
Analyzing the US trade court’s ruling against Trump’s tariffs
On Wednesday evening, the US Court of International Trade came down with a seismic ruling: President Donald Trump could not impose his “reciprocal” tariffs, which include his 10% across-the-board levy and the extra duties he announced on “Liberation Day.”
What does that mean for the president’s trade agenda? For politics in Washington? And for businesses? We asked several of the best minds in the world from Eurasia group, and here’s what they had to say.
So, let’s start with the major questions for Trump: What is the impact of the ruling? What tariffs will remain in place? Will he fight back?
The ruling blocks Trump from using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to implement blanket tariffs, a reminder that the US political system still impose some restraints on the president, according to Eurasia Group’s Head of Research Jon Lieber.
- “Even though Trump continues to shatter Washington norms and is moving so fast the courts can barely keep up, there are still meaningful checks on his power that will be brought by the courts.”
The ruling does leave in place Trump’s other tariffs on specific sectors, like the ones on aluminum, auto parts, and steel, as well as the upcoming duties on pharmaceuticals. These sectoral tariffs are more complicated to implement, though, says Eurasia Group US analyst Noah Daponte-Smith.
- “Sectorals focus on specific sectors and require a full investigation beforehand. You can’t just declare them out of the blue.”
Trump will fight the court’s ruling – White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller has already decried it as “judicial coup.” A federal appeals court temporarily reinstated the tariffs on Thursday, pending the administration’s appeal. A big reason for Trump’s response is that there are many benefits to the president from introducing new tariffs via IEEPA, per Robert Kahn, Eurasia Group’s managing director of Global Macro.
- “He’s turned to it often because of the flexibility, the leverage it gives, [and the] ability to basically use it in a wide variety of circumstances.”
Even if the ruling is upheld, though, Lieber predicts that Trump “will likely find other, narrower and more administratively burdensome ways to implement tariffs.” All to say, Trump’s trade war isn’t done yet.
How will this ruling affect bilateral trade negotiations involving the US?
Several countries have tried negotiating a trade deal with the United States since Trump announced his “reciprocal” tariffs on April 2. The United Kingdom nabbed one earlier this month.
But the court’s ruling could cut Trump’s leverage.
An interesting case in point is Japan, which has held regular talks with the US over a trade deal in recent weeks. Tokyo’s extra leverage means it will be more cautious about what it offers to Washington, according to David Boling, Eurasia Group’s director for Japan and Asian trade.
- “Japan will be more careful about making any big concessions, until the legality of IEEPA is decided. Likewise, US negotiators are likely to move cautiously, waiting for the legal clouds to clear.”
South Korea is also negotiating with the United States over a trade deal, but the talks may become less urgent, per Eurasia Group regional expert Jeremy Chan.
- “I think it will marginally decrease the pressure on South Korea to get a deal, and the urgency over a July 8 timeline is also gone, … so we can expect somewhat slower deliberations but still continued interest on both sides to agree to something (likely after Japan).”
What does the court ruling mean for businesses?
Markets edged up in response to the court ruling, on expectations that it would reduce the chances of an economically disruptive trade war. Kahn, though, remains skeptical of the long-term benefits to businesses and markets, saying the ruling “adds an additional layer of uncertainty to [investment].”
- “I don’t think there’s a clear consensus yet on what happens [next]. I do think it’s important to emphasize that the president remains committed to his tariff agenda, and we have to assume that he will fall back on the other tools in his arsenal.”
AI adoption starts in the C-suite
As artificial intelligence becomes a foundational force in global business, many companies are rushing to adopt it—but not all are ready. According to Caitlin Dean, Director and Deputy Head of Corporates at Eurasia Group, success with AI isn’t just about access to the latest tools. It depends on leadership that actually understands what those tools can do.
In this Global Stage conversation from the 2025 STI Forum at the United Nations, Dean explains that while some large tech firms are integrating AI at the core of their business models, most companies are still in the early stages—using turnkey solutions to boost productivity without a clear long-term strategy. That gap, she warns, is a leadership problem.
Dean argues that organizations need more than just engineers. They need business leaders who are AI-literate—strategists who understand the technology deeply enough to apply it in meaningful, forward-looking ways. Without that, companies risk falling behind, not just in innovation, but in relevance.
This conversation is presented by GZERO in partnership with Microsoft, from the 2025 STI Forum at the United Nations in New York. The Global Stage series convenes global leaders for critical conversations on the geopolitical and technological trends shaping our world.
See more at https://www.gzeromedia.com/global-stage/un-sti-forum/ai-trends-in-2025-that-drive-progress-on-global-goals
A voter casting a ballot in front of the Philippines flag.
Philippine midterms are next episode in Marcos-Duterte drama
The Philippines will hold midterm elections on May 12, with all 317 seats in the House of Representatives, half the 24-member Senate, and various provincial, city, and municipal positions up for grabs. The winners will take office on June 30, with terms of six years for the senators and three years for all other officeholders.
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. hopes to maintain his control of Congress as he seeks to advance his legislative agenda and expand his influence at the expense of former president Rodrigo Duterte’s political faction. In July, the new Senate will hold an impeachment trial for Vice President Sara Duterte-Carpio, who is the former president’s daughter and has repeatedly clashed with Marcos.
We asked Eurasia Group expert Peter Mumford what to watch for in this weekend’s vote.
What are the most important races?
The focus is really on the 12 Senate seats up for election; the House tends to align with the sitting president regardless of its composition. Marcos’s coalition currently consists of six parties in the Senate and nine in the House. Political parties have long been weak in the Philippines, so the concept of a “majority” is very fluid, especially in the Senate, which often acts independently of the president. Officially, the Senate is broken down into “majority bloc,” “minority bloc,” and independents – but “majority” refers to those senators who support the Senate president. This maps roughly, but not precisely, onto the coalition supporting Marcos (or not). There are members of the same party in both the majority and minority blocs, for example. It is therefore easier, but more subjective, to map out the senators who support Marcos and those who do not.
So, what are the stakes in the Senate races?
There are two main implications. First, and more significant for Marcos’s agenda, is whether Marcos retains majority support in the upper house; failure to do so would make it harder to pass proposed economic legislation, including a power sector overhaul aimed at lowering high electricity prices and modest revenue-raising measures designed to trim the large budget deficit and provide more resources for social spending priorities. Second, Duterte-Carpio’s political future is at stake following her impeachment by the House earlier this year on charges of high crimes related to death threats against the president and betrayal of public trust related to alleged misuse of intelligence funds (please see more below).
What are the most important issues for voters heading into these elections?
Surveys show that cost-of-living concerns are by far the biggest issue for voters. The Philippines has been grappling with relatively high inflation in recent years, with food prices a particular concern; price rises have slowed in recent months but that has not yet translated into shifts in public opinion. According to a recent poll, 79% of Filipinos disapprove of the administration’s efforts to control inflation, with just 3% approving. After cost-of-living, voters’ main concerns are pay, corruption, crime, and poverty.
How do the candidates propose to address these concerns?
They have made generic promises about tackling poverty but offered little in terms of specific measures. Philippine elections, especially those for congress, are primarily driven by the personalities and name recognition of the candidates. Many voters will be casting their ballots on the basis of who they know and like, rather than the policy or ideological views of the candidates. It’s worth noting that six of the top 12 candidates in polls are show business personalities; another popular figure is the former boxer Manny Pacquiao, a senator who is running for reelection.
How does the feud between the Marcos and Duterte clans play into election dynamics?
The battle for influence between the country’s two most powerful political dynasties sets the backdrop for the midterms. The upcoming polls will not have an impact on how long Marcos serves as president: He is bound by a single six-year term limit and is very unlikely to be impeached or removed by a coup before his terms ends in 2028. But the outcome of the upcoming Senate poll will determine whether Duterte-Carpio is removed from office and banned from running for public office again. Duterte-Carpio is the early favorite for the 2028 presidential election and the Marcos clan likely hopes she is prevented from running, making it easier for a member of the president’s family or another ally to succeed him.
Duterte-Carpio’s Senate trial is due to begin in late July. If two-thirds (16) of the senators vote against the vice president, she will be removed from office and probably barred from holding other government offices in the future (there is some debate about whether the latter would automatically apply if she is found guilty). She needs only nine senators to vote against or abstain. In addition, the outlook is complicated by the fact that some senators counted in the “pro-Marcos” majority, as they tend to support the administration’s bills, are actually closer to the Dutertes and will likely oppose her removal. That said, the president could press allies to vote against her.
Edited by Jonathan House, Senior Editor at Eurasia Group.
Exclusive: Ian Bremmer’s Top Risks for 2025
Every January, Eurasia Group, our parent company, produces a report with its forecast for the Top 10 Risks for the world in the year ahead. Its authors are EG President Ian Bremmer and EG Chairman Cliff Kupchan.
Here are brief summaries of the most important risks that will preoccupy world leaders, business decision-makers, and the rest of us in 2025, according to Bremmer and Kupchan. You can read the full report here.
1. The G-Zero wins
A G-Zero world is an era when no one power or group of powers is both willing and able to drive a global agenda and maintain international order. We’ve been living with this lack of international leadership for nearly a decade now. But in 2025, the problem will get a lot worse.
Bremmer and Kupchan argue that we should expect new and expanding power vacuums, emboldened rogue actors, and a heightened risk of dangerous accidents, miscalculations, and conflict. The risk of a geopolitical crisis, they warn, “is higher than at any point in our lifetimes.”
Russia and China remain challengers to the Western-led security order, though in very different ways. Rising inequality, shifting demographics, and warp-speed technological change have persuaded a growing number of citizens in advanced industrial democracies that “globalism” hasn’t worked in their favor. And the world’s military superpower will again be led by the only post-World War II president who rejects the assumption that a US global leadership role serves the American people.
Bremmer and Kupchan detail three ways out of what they call a “geopolitical recession.” One, reform existing institutions like the UN, IMF, and others to operate more effectively and command broad legitimacy. Two, build replacement institutions that better reflect the underlying balance of power. Three, impose a new set of rules by force. Different actors are pursuing all three of these strategies. But in 2025, it’s the third option where challengers to the system are devoting their attention, time, and resources.
This Top Risk is not a single event, the authors suggest. It’s the cumulative impact of the intensifying G-Zero leadership deficit and the deepening geopolitical recession on the breakdown of the global order. The result is a uniquely dangerous period of world history on par with the 1930s or the early Cold War.
And just when we were celebrating the end of 2024.
2. Rule of Don
Donald Trump’s second term will not be like his first, Bremmer and Kupchan predict. Emboldened by the scale of his 2024 election victory and the support of a unified Republican Party, Trump will enter office more experienced and better organized than in 2017. He will populate his administration with loyalists who now have a better understanding of how the federal government works. His consolidated control over Republicans in Congress, a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court, and a friendlier media environment will help him advance his agenda.
From this solid foundation, Trump will work to purge the federal bureaucracy of professional civil servants and replace them with political loyalists, particularly at the Justice Department and the FBI. This consolidation of power will “stretch the norms of Washington to their breaking point,” according to Bremmer and Kupchan. The erosion of independent checks on executive power and an active undermining of the rule of law, they argue, will leave more of US policy dependent on the arbitrary decisions and personal whims of one powerful man in Washington rather than on established and politically impartial legal principles.
Democracy itself, the report cautions, will not be threatened. The US isn’t Hungary. But Trump’s indifference, in some cases hostility, to longstanding American values will set dangerous new precedents in “political vandalism” for future presidents of both parties.
3. US-China breakdown
The détente established by Joe Biden and Xi Jinping at Woodside in November 2023 kept US-China tensions reasonably contained in 2024. But Trump’s return to office will unleash an “unmanaged decoupling in the world’s most important geopolitical relationship.” That, in turn, risks a major economic disruption and a broader crisis.
Trump will set new tariffs on Chinese goods to pressure Beijing for concessions on a host of issues, and China’s leaders, despite real economic weakness at home, will respond more forcefully to prove to both Trump and China’s people that they can and will fight back.
Tensions over Taiwan will likely rise, though a true crisis remains unlikely in 2025. But Trump administration actions targeting the Chinese Communist Party's legitimacy and visas for Chinese students will further inflame tensions.
Technology policy will be the true frontline in this conflict, Bremmer and Kupchan assert. China’s leaders insist that Washington wants to stunt China’s technological growth to protect the US position as world No. 1. Battles over trade and investment in everything from semiconductors to critical minerals will erupt in 2025.
4. Trumponomics
In January, Trump will inherit a robust US economy. Output has risen above pre-pandemic trends, unemployment remains near 4%, and an inflation rate nearing the Federal Reserve’s 2% target encourages investors to expect interest rate cuts. But Bremmer and Kupchan warn that Trump’s policies will bring higher inflation and lower growth in 2025.
First, Trump will significantly hike tariffs to correct “unfair” practices and reduce America’s trade deficit, which he views as intrinsically bad for the country. When US consumers face fewer affordable options on many goods, inflation will rise again, leaving interest rates higher and slowing growth. The dollar will strengthen, the report forecasts, making US exports less competitive. Some countries targeted by Trump will retaliate with measures that hurt American exporters and raise the risk of a disruptive global trade war.
Second, there is Trump’s immigration policy, which could deport up to 1 million people in 2025, Bremmer and Kupchan argue, and as many as five million over the course of his four-year term. Reduced illegal immigration and mass deportations will shrink the US workforce, drive up wages and consumer prices, and reduce the productive capacity of the economy, they insist, and legal immigration won’t fill the gap.
5. Russia still rogue
Russia is now the world’s leading rogue power by a large margin, the report’s authors argue, and Vladimir Putin will pursue more policies that undermine the US-led global order, despite a likely ceasefire in Ukraine. Russia will take hostile action against EU countries with cyber, sabotage, and other “asymmetric attacks,” and will build on its strategic military partnership with Iran and North Korea in 2025.
Donald Trump will likely achieve the ceasefire in Ukraine he has promised, and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky needs a halt to a war his country is slowly losing. Russia is advancing on the battlefield, but 600,000 Russian casualties and three years of sanctions give Putin good reason to cut a ceasefire deal with Trump. The agreement's terms, Bremmer and Kupchan predict, will freeze forces in place and leave Russia in de facto control of conquered territory. Both sides will rearm, and sporadic fighting will continue along the line of control, the report forecasts. The fragile ceasefire will probably continue through 2025, “but not much longer.”
Yet, the ceasefire itself will create new problems beyond Ukraine. The Nordics, the Baltic countries, and Poland will support a Ukrainian military buildup during the ceasefire. France, Germany, Italy, and others will likely provide security guarantees to Ukraine and bolster Ukrainian and EU defenses. EU sanctions on Russia will remain in place, giving Putin more reason to interfere in their domestic politics, just as they used cyber and other tools to interfere in Romania’s election in November 2024 and in the US too, according to US officials. Bremmer and Kupchan predict Putin will continue attempts at sabotage and even assassination in many Western countries, and continue to use Telegram to instill pro-Kremlin views in citizens of European countries.
NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said in December that Moscow was “preparing for long-term confrontation, with Ukraine and with us.” Russia will do more than any other country to subvert the global order in 2025.
For the rest of the Top Risks 2025, read the full report here.
Disclaimer: Willis Sparks has contributed to these Top Risks reports for the past 20 years.
- Ian Bremmer explains the 10 Top Risks of 2025 - GZERO Media ›
- Unpacking the biggest global threats of 2025 - GZERO Media ›
- Podcast: The Top Geopolitical Risks of 2025, a live conversation with Ian Bremmer and global experts - GZERO Media ›
- What happens when no one’s in charge - GZERO Media ›
- Top Risks 2025: America's role in the crumbling global order - GZERO Media ›
- Ian Bremmer on the forces behind the geopolitical recession - GZERO Media ›
- The rise of a leaderless world: Why 2025 marks a turning point, with Francis Fukuyama - GZERO Media ›
- The rise of global impunity in a G-Zero world - GZERO Media ›
- Francis Fukuyama on the new leaderless global order - GZERO Media ›
- Fukuyama: It’s hard to build anything in the US with so many rules - GZERO Media ›
- Ian Bremmer 2024 State of the World ›
A look back at the Top Risks of 2024
Every January, Eurasia Group, our parent company, produces a report with its forecast for the top 10 geopolitical risks for the world in the year ahead. Its authors are EG President Ian Bremmer and EG Chairman Cliff Kupchan. The 2025 report will drop on Jan. 6.
But first, let’s look back at the 2024 Top Risks report – you can read the full report here – to see where Bremmer and Kupchan hit or missed the mark.
1. The United States vs. itself
The argument: The US political system has become more dysfunctional than that of any other advanced industrial democracy. In 2024, the presidential election will deepen the country’s political divisions, testing American democracy to a degree the nation hasn’t experienced in 150 years and undermining US credibility internationally. With the election outcome close to a coin toss, the only certainty is damage to America’s social fabric, political institutions, and international standing.
The verdict: The election certainly further polarized the electorate, and President-elect Donald Trump survived two assassination attempts, the first by a frighteningly narrow margin. Fortunately, we’ll never know how chaotic and potentially violent the election season might have turned had Trump not turned his head at just the right moment during that rally in Pennsylvania. This risk might also have inflicted more damage had Trump not won by a clear enough margin that Democrats accepted the results.
2. Middle East on the brink
The argument: The fighting in Gaza will expand in 2024, with several pathways for escalation into a broader regional war. Some could draw the US and Iran more directly into the fighting. The conflict will pose risks to the global economy, widen geopolitical and political divisions, and stoke global extremism. No country involved in the Gaza conflict wants a regional conflict to erupt. But the powder is dry, and the number of players carrying matches makes the risk of escalation high.
The verdict: Here’s another risk that was dead-on but could have been much more destructive than it turned out to be. The war in Gaza expanded into the West Bank, Lebanon, and the shipping lanes of the Red Sea. Israel and Iran traded direct strikes, though Israel sustained little damage, and the US remained largely on the sidelines. Few predicted Israel would score such a decisive win over Hamas and Hezbollah in 2024, and no one foresaw the fall of Bashar Assad.
3. Partitioned Ukraine
The argument: Ukraine will be de facto partitioned this year, and Russia now has the battlefield initiative and a material advantage. 2024 is an inflection point in the war, and if Ukraine doesn't solve its manpower problems, increase weapons production, and set a realistic military strategy soon, its territorial losses could prove permanent and may well expand. Kyiv will take bigger military risks this year, including strikes on more targets inside Russia that provoke unprecedented Russian responses and could pull NATO into the conflict.
The verdict: Another strong call for Bremmer and Kupchan. The Russians still have the battlefield initiative, though it has come with an estimated 600,000 Russian casualties. And, as the report predicted, Ukraine also became more aggressive as the mood across the country soured. The report foresaw more Ukrainian strikes deeper into Russian territory, but it certainly didn’t predict a Ukrainian invasion of Russia’s Kursk region that continues to embarrass the Kremlin.
4. Ungoverned AI
The argument: Technology will outstrip AI governance in 2024 as regulatory efforts falter, tech companies remain largely unconstrained, and far more powerful AI models and tools spread beyond the control of governments.
The verdict: We did see AI distort politics in places like Romania, South Korea, and Pakistan this year, but these technologies remain in their infancy, and far greater disruptions are surely still ahead of us. The extraordinary influence on Donald Trump of Elon Musk, who owns his own AI company, makes that even more likely.
5. Axis of rogues (and America’s dangerous friends)
The argument: In 2024, Russia, North Korea, and Iran will boost one another’s capabilities and act in increasingly coordinated and disruptive ways on the global stage. Meanwhile, even Washington’s friends — the leaders of Ukraine, Israel, and (potentially) Taiwan — will pull the US into confrontations it wants to avoid.
The verdict: This was another solid prediction, though the report may have overestimated the impact of Iran, which now finds itself backed into a corner by Israel with its most important proxies – Hezbollah, Hamas, and Yemen’s Houthi rebels – reeling and Syria’s ousted president Bashar Assad now sharing a small one-bedroom apartment in Moscow with former Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych (kidding). The report underestimated North Korea’s willingness to support Russia, including by sending un-battle-tested NK troops to the Ukraine war’s front lines.
6. No China recovery
The argument: Absent an unlikely loosening of President Xi Jinping’s grip on power or a radical pivot toward large-scale consumer stimulus and structural reform, China’s economy will underperform throughout 2024. Beijing’s failure to reform the country’s sputtering economic growth model, the country’s financial fragilities, and a crisis of public confidence will expose gaps in the Chinese Communist Party’s leadership capabilities and increase the risk of social instability.
The verdict: As predicted, China’s stagnant economy had both political and economic impacts in 2024. Politically, it revealed once again that Xi is not Vladimir Putin, a leader who responds to his country’s weakness by becoming more belligerent. Instead, China mainly kept to pragmatically managed relations with the US this year and worked to solidify and extend relations with Europe, India, and others. Economically, China’s slow recovery kept global growth below hoped-for, post-COVID benchmarks. Given its importance for other risks, this one could have been #4 on the list rather than #6.
7. The fight for critical minerals
The argument: In 2024, governments around the world will intensify their use of industrial policies and trade restrictions that disrupt the flow of critical minerals, crucial components in virtually every sector that will drive growth, innovation, and national security in the 21st century, from clean energy to advanced computing, biotechnology, transportation, and defense.
The verdict: Politically motivated restrictions on trade in critical minerals among the US, China, and Europe were certainly on the rise in 2024, but this risk is much more likely to deserve mention in a Top 10 report over the next two to three years, particularly as Trump’s aggressive approach toward China removes some of the relationship’s guardrails.
8. No room for error
The argument: The global inflation shock that began in 2021 will continue to exert an economic and political drag in 2024. High interest rates caused by stubborn inflation will slow growth around the world, and governments will have little scope to stimulate growth or respond to shocks, heightening the risk of financial stress, social unrest, and political instability.
The verdict: Stubbornly high prices and slow growth certainly played a featured role in anti-incumbent election results in India, South Africa, France, the UK, Japan, and the US. Bremmer and Kupchan were wise to keep this risk low on this year’s list given that we didn’t see the developing world debt defaults — or the large-scale social unrest in multiple countries that would surely have followed.
9. El Nino is back
The argument: After a four-year absence, a powerful El Nino climate pattern will peak in the first half of this year, bringing extreme weather events that trigger food insecurity, increase water stress, disrupt logistics, spread disease, and foment migration and political instability.
The verdict: El Nino did help the planet set a heat record in 2024. It also triggered severe droughts, water shortages, and crop failures with predictable economic fallout. But the worst of the damage was limited to southern Africa, helping to avert much broader disruption in Asia and the Americas.
10. Risky business
The argument: Customers, employees, and investors — mostly on the progressive side — have brought the US culture wars to corporate offices, and now courts, state legislatures, governors, and activist groups — mostly conservative ones — will hit back. Companies caught in the political and legal crossfire will face higher uncertainty and costs.
The verdict: Given the Trump victory in the US, American companies generally fared poorly with diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives; environmental, social, and governance standards; and other “woke” corporate messaging. But this risk could be even higher in 2025 as more companies find themselves caught between a Trump-inspired re-evaluation of the commercial impact of these campaigns and the inevitable anti-Trump backlash among his critics on the left. #FirstDoNoPolitics
Disclaimer: Willis Sparks has contributed to these Eurasia Group Top Risks reports for the past 20 years.