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 }}
Exclusive: Americans care most about this issue ...
Polls reflect an American electorate split over who should become the 47th president. So GZERO decided to dig deeper and partnered with Echelon Insights for some exclusive polling to find out what Americans think should be the first geopolitical priority for the next US president, regardless of who ends up in the Oval Office in January.
Our survey of 1,005 voters found that across the political spectrum, a majority of Americans believe the Israel-Gaza war is the most pressing issue for the White House, followed by the Ukraine-Russia war, US-China relations, and then climate change.
Interestingly, climate change was the second most pressing issue for Democrats, with 26% of respondents saying it should be the top priority. Meanwhile, among Republicans, only 5% of respondents answered it was the biggest issue. The Ukraine-Russia war, which Donald Trump has repeatedly vowed to end within 24 hours of taking office, came in second among Republicans’ top priorities, at 24%, compared to third for Democrats, at 18%.
This could be a reflection that Republicans share Trump’s belief that immediate action needs to be taken to end the Ukraine war (even if that comes at the expense of Ukraine), whereas Democrats are more satisfied with the continuation of the current administration’s support for Kyiv.
We also polled Americans on who they trusted more to be alone in a room with Vladimir Putin and found that the responses were almost as equally divided as the polls on who should be the next president, as you can see below:
The White House in Washington, DC.
The world is knocking on the door
It has already been a dangerous week for the world. After months of trading aerial attacks, Israel’s northern border with Lebanon has shifted from a watchpoint to the brink of a ground invasion and wider regional conflict.
As Gov. Tim Walz and Sen. JD Vance take the debate stage tonight for the only vice presidential debate of this election season, everyone from global leaders to young people is asking: What will the next US president do with the world they are inheriting?
In his final remarks before last week’s United Nations General Assembly, President Joe Biden sought to remind the international audience of his 40-year political career. Biden’s speech framed the Afghanistan withdrawal as much-needed, the global coalition in support of Ukraine a resounding success, and new partnerships like the Quad as pillars for the US’s future.
Despite the personal highlight reel, Biden’s global legacy hangs in the balance. After dropping his reelection bid, it was widely reported that Biden viewed ending the war in Gaza as the top priority for the remainder of his term. Months of negotiations and tireless trips to the region by US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, the Central Intelligence Agency’s Director Bill Burns, and others have translated into almost no tangible progress on a May 2024 US cease-fire proposal. Senior US officialsacknowledged earlier this month that a deal is neither imminent nor likely.
Instead, a second front along Israel’s north has gone from warm to blazing hot. This weekend’s assassination of longstanding Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah (reportedly without US awareness) followed by targeted Israeli strikes against Iran’s “axis of resistance” in both Syria and Yemen have sent shockwaves through the region.
When the next US president assumes office on Jan. 20, 2025, they will likely encounter a geopolitical landscape with wars in the Middle East, Ukraine, and Sudan, the threat of a nuclear Iran, US-China tech and space races flaring, and a host of other global challenges, from climate and inequities to radicalization. As we saw with last week’s UNGA, global engagement and interconnectivity may be at an all-time high. Yet, no one knows what the incoming US leadership will do about the tests ahead.
In speaking last week with leaders of the next generation across Europe and Africa as part of an election-related conversation forChatham House’s Common Futures Conversationsproject, the desire for clarity from the US is clear. There is anxiety that US voters will not reject former President Donald Trump’s America First brand of isolationism in November. Trump worried Europe earlier this year when he claimed he would encourage Russia to do whatever it wanted with any NATO member not paying their fair share of defense. Likewise, his plans to impose blanket tariffs of 20% on all imports, including those manufactured by US allies and partners, are ringing the alarm that American friendship may not be what it once was.
Alternatively, if American voters reject Trumpism, a status quo foreign policy strategy under Vice President Kamala Harris is also considered unsatisfactory. There is a sense that more unfulfilled rhetoric of democratic resilience and values will not move the needle for the next generation. There’s a nagging concern that even under a Harris administration the US may be turning inward,focusing on “American workers, innovation, and industry.” What will this mean for the future of development aid and foreign investment across Africa and elsewhere?
Instead, these young voices are hoping for new solutions – and innovation – in US foreign policy that acknowledge the attitude and norm shifts they are experiencing as well as the technological change and saturated information environment around them.
There are two camps about this moment in US geopolitical history. One side draws a trendline from Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and over-reliance on tariffs and sanctions to the Biden administration’s “small yard and high fence” as the start of the US retrenchment from global leadership.Another side says the US remains the most important actor in every room it enters and will continue to set the global agenda.
We may only know in hindsight if this decade turned out to be a turning point. For now, it seems clear that the world is still knocking on the door of the White House, asking for a glimpse of the blueprint ahead.
Lindsay Newman is a geopolitical risk expert and columnist for GZERO.
Supporters hold placards as Democratic presidential nominee and US Vice President Kamala Harris visits North Western High School in Detroit, Mich., on Sept. 2, 2024.
Foreign policy tests lurk within the US election
By all accounts, the 47th president of the United States will have plenty on the domestic to-do list once they assume office on Jan. 20, 2025. The US continues to navigate a post-COVID hangover with inflation hovering higher than before the pandemic and a long-expected interest rate reduction remaining just beyond reach.
In the latest indicator of economic health, theUS Bureau of Labor Statistics revised downward its estimate of jobs created for the year ending in March 2024 to the tune of 818,000. These numbers matter to US voters, who are feeling it in their pocketbooks. Measures ofeconomic confidence have fallen through 2024, even as inflation, pricing pressures, and the economy continue to be top issues for voters.
Will isolationism win?
Yet, if the last four years have taught us anything, it is that developments abroad and the demands on US foreign policy are never dormant. Given the stakes, global leadership has been tracking former President Donald Trump’s words closely over the last year. Now, with Vice President Kamala Harris’ historically late entrance into the race, the world is left wondering if isolationism will win in November, or if something else (but what is it?) may drive the US approach to the world over the next four years.
Trump has never been one to shy away from the headlines. Earlier this year, he sent ripples across Europe when he claimed he would encourage Russia to do “whatever the hell they want” to any NATO member not paying their fair share on defense. Given prior reports that Trump contemplated pulling the US from NATO during his first administration, this warning focused the minds and dominated conversations across European security circles. His VP running-mate selection of Sen. JD Vance, an opponent of US security guarantees, has more recently exacerbated those concerns.
From promises to ending the war in Ukraine upon taking office by negotiating on favorable terms with Russia to apolicy platform that includes “building a great iron dome missile defense shield over our entire country,” Trump’s America First brand of foreign policy has become synonymous with a go-it-alone, pull-up-the-drawbridge isolationism.
With unresolved conflicts remaining (Ukraine, Israel, Sudan) and potential stressors lurking (South China Sea, the wider Middle East region, the Arctic), many allies and adversaries of the US await a Trump 2.0 with apprehension. President Joe Biden’s exit and Harris’ stepping into the 2024 campaign have represented a potential reprieve for these anxieties.
Glimpses of Harris’ vision begin to seep through
Despite plenty of reporting on the alternative, relatively little is known about what a Harris foreign policy agenda would look like. In her nomination acceptance speech at last month’s Democratic National Convention, Harris spoke at length about the US’ global role and the need to be “steadfast in advancing our security and values abroad.”
She touched on the range of ongoing territorial tensions – from China and Russia-Ukraine to the Middle East – as well as borderless challenges like artificial intelligence and space. In a particularly insightful, behind-the-scenes moment, Harris described meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky five days before Russia attacked Ukraine to warn him of the planned invasion.
While conventional wisdom suggests that Harris represents a policy continuity story for Democrats, there are early indications that as president she would chart her own course. In her DNC speech, Harris sought to associate herself with the Biden administration’s perceived successes (the global coalition for Ukraine), distance herself from its missteps (the Afghanistan withdrawal), and introduce daylight where she has apparent conviction. The clearest evidence of that daylight thus far has been on Israel, where Harris has projected a sense that she holds multiple difficult truths in parallel. In her first sit-down interview since accepting the nomination, Harris revealed little more of her plan for resolving the conflict, saying only that a deal must get done.
Perhaps the biggest indicator to follow is personal, or personnel. It has long been believed that current national security advisor Jake Sullivan would not stay on through a second Biden administration. With Harris being guided by a separate set of policy strategists, including her national security advisor Philip Gordon, the major architects of Biden’s foreign policy – Biden himself, Sullivan, Sec. of State Antony Blinken and Sec. of Defense Lloyd Austin – may all be out of the Situation Room.
Greater understanding of both Harris’ foreign and domestic policy priorities will be filled in over the coming weeks, including with the first Harris-Trump debate currently set for Sept. 10. Given Trump’s warm embrace of isolationism, there is a growing sense abroad that only a Harris presidency stands between the world as it is and a very different – and more precarious – geopolitical trajectory.
Lindsay Newman is a geopolitical risk expert and columnist for GZERO.
Ian Explains: What is Kamala Harris' foreign policy?
How would a Harris-Walz administration differ from a Biden-Harris White House? While the Vice President has had an integral role in policy decisions and high-level meetings and led many foreign delegations, there are more differences between the two than you might think, especially when it comes to foreign policy. On Ian Explains, Ian Bremmer breaks down Kamala Harris’ foreign policy experience, how her worldview differs from Biden’s, and what her administration might do differently in addressing some of the world’s most urgent crises. Harris’ approach to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, China, and Israel-Palestine is informed by her experience as an attorney general. She emphasizes rule of law issues like ‘sovereignty’ over Biden’s ‘good vs evil’ framing of global politics. Harris could be vulnerable when it comes to immigration on the US southern border, a top concern for voters ahead of the US election. But polls show Harris virtually tied with Donald Trump, and four in 10 Americans say they’d trust either candidate to handle a crisis or stand up to an adversary. It’s a marked increase for Democrats since Biden dropped out of the race and a sign voters already see Kamala as a distinct candidate from her predecessor.
Watch Ian's interview with former Congresswoman Donna Edwards, Maryland's first Black woman in Congress, and Presidential Historian Douglas Brinkley on the full episode of GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, the award-winning weekly global affairs series, airing 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 (🔔).
Argentina's Milei shares strong views on China and Israel
In an exclusive interview with Ian Bremmer for the latest episode of GZERO World, Milei defines his approach to foreign policy as one of democracies vs autocracies. And he makes clear that Argentina will always side with democracies. But how does he square that vow with the reality that Chinese trade is a critical part of Argentina's (not to mention Latin America's) economy? He answers by pointing to his staunch libertarian beliefs, and his desire to stay out of the free market's way. "If I were to limit that trade, which is free, would Argentines be better off or worse off?"
Milei also makes clear that his staunch support for Israel is a defining aspect of his foreign policy approach. When Bremmer asks him about the Gaza war, his answer is simple and unwavering. "I will continue to support Israel right to the end."
Watch the full interview on GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, the award-winning weekly global affairs series, airing nationwide on US public television stations (check local listings).
New digital episodes of GZERO World are released every Monday on YouTube and on our website. Don’t miss an episode: subscribe to GZERO's YouTube channel and turn on notifications (🔔).
Argentina's radical new president, Javier Milei (Exclusive interview)
In an exclusive interview with Ian Bremmer for the latest episode of GZERO World, Argentine President Javier Milei defends his radical approach to saving Argentina’s struggling economy, his commitment to aligning with liberal democracies, and his pragmatic stance on international trade and alliances.
There's no getting around it: Argentina's new president, Javier Milei, is an odd duck. But beyond his penchant for cloned dogs, messy hair, and bombast, what’s truly radical about the South American leader is his plan to save Argentina’s economy. When he ran for office, the economics professor-turned-TV pundit-turned-presidential-candidate vowed to eliminate Argentina’s central bank and threatened to replace the Argentine peso with the American dollar. But once he came to office, a more pragmatic approach to economic reform emerged. And in just six months, his administration has managed to slow Argentina's 300% annual inflation and turn a budget deficit into a surplus. "We have actually completed the largest reform in the history of Argentina," he proudly tells Ian Bremmer in an exclusive new interview for GZERO World, highlighting the scale of his efforts to overturn what he calls "100 years of decadence."
(Note: Turn on closed captions for translation from Spanish to English or your preferred language.)
Milei's libertarian economic policies, although effective in some respects, have also led to significant hardships. "Life is going to be harder for the average Argentinian citizen," he acknowledges. Despite these challenges, Milei's popularity remains high, attributed to his honesty and transparency with the public.
In a wide-ranging interview with Bremmer, Milei also explains that his approach to foreign policy is marked by a mix of ideological commitment and pragmatic flexibility. He champions free trade and economic liberalization while acknowledging the complexities of dealing with autocratic regimes. "The world should be separated between liberal democracies and autocracies," Milei asserts. Yet, he does not shy away from engaging with China, recognizing the economic benefits such relationships can bring. "If I were to limit that trade, which is free, would Argentines be better off or worse off?" he asks Bremmer, advocating for a balanced approach that prioritizes Argentina's well-being.
Milei's staunch support for Israel is another defining aspect of his foreign policy. When Ian asks him about the Gaza war, his answer is simple and unwavering. "I will continue to support Israel right to the end."
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 (🔔).
FILE PHOTO: U.S. President Joe Biden is welcomed by Israeli Prime Minster Benjamin Netanyahu, as he visits Israel amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, in Tel Aviv, Israel, October 18, 2023.
Biden’s out, Bibi’s still in
How will Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s upcoming visit to Washington, DC, unfold now that US President Joe Biden has called off his 2024 reelection campaign?
As late as Sunday morning,media outlets were reporting that Biden didn’t want to give Netanyahu “the satisfaction” of bowing out before the trip, due to their recent disagreements over the Israel-Hamas war. Netanyahu was originally scheduled to meet Biden, but that’s in limbo given Biden’s COVID-19 diagnosis.
Now that Biden has announced he will step down, will Vice President Kamala Harris step up? She was already scheduled to meet with the Israeli PM, and all eyes will be on what message she delivers – and how she delivers it, considering it’s her first high-profile foreign policy gig.
Then again, it might not. Netanyahu hopes to have a tete-a-tete with Republican nominee Donald Trump,though no meeting has been confirmed. Republicans have invited the Israeli leader to address a joint session of the US Congress on Wednesday –a speech several Democrats plan to boycott, as 60 of them did during Netanyahu’s lastaddress to Congress in 2015, when he attempted to disrupt the Iran nuclear deal. We’ll be watching who comes out and who stays home this time.Hold us accountable: Our biggest calls for 2023
Every year, Eurasia Group releases its Top 10 geopolitical risks for the year ahead. You’ll see the 2024 edition next Monday. But an honest analyst looks back at past forecasts to see (and acknowledge) what he got right and wrong, and I’m going to do that here and now.
Here’s the 2023 full report. To remind you, our Top 10 risks for 2023 were:
- Rogue Russia
- Maximum Xi
- Weapons of Mass Disruption
- Inflation shockwaves
- Iran in a corner
- Energy crunch
- Arrested global development
- Divided States of America
- TikTok boom
- Water stress
Let’s take these one at a time …
1. Rogue Russia
Our top risk last year was that the war between Russia and Ukraine would be no closer to resolution and that Russia would be on track to become the world’s most dangerous rogue state.
Check and check.
Another year of brutal fighting brought hundreds of thousands of casualties – and barely budged the war’s frontlines. Russia, still led by a president considered a war criminal in the West, now faces even more sanctions, and it has therefore drawn closer to Iran and North Korea to procure much-needed military supplies from both.
Russia has also picked up the pace of cyberattacks on Ukrainian targets and continues to target cities across the country with airstrikes. Putin has kept Russia’s asymmetrical attacks incremental to avoid escalation and exacerbating divisions in the West, but Russian disinformation attacks are picking up in support of Kremlin-friendly politicians and political parties inside NATO countries.
For 2024, Putin will have new options. More on that next week.
2. Maximum Xi
This call fared well too. We expected Xi Jinping’s consolidation of political power to create big economic and policy challenges through increasingly arbitrary and capricious central decision-making. We saw that most dramatically early in 2023 when a sudden U-turn from the world’s tightest zero-COVID policies produced a bad hangover for the Chinese economy.
Making matters worse, the expected economic bounce-back hasn’t materialized, and the unpredictability of government decision-making led to growing capital flight and a sharp turnaround in foreign direct investment, weakening the economy further.
In fairness, Xi Jinping responded to the economic weakness later in the year with a friendlier and more open foreign policy than we feared. Relations with the United States and Europe have been far better managed in recent months.
Do we expect that trend to last in 2024? We’ll tell you much more about that next week too.
3. Weapons of Mass Disruption
Here’s where I think we were furthest ahead of the curve. A year ago, very, very few political leaders were actively thinking about the disruptive power of artificial intelligence. Now, the hopes and fears are front and center in every region of the world – but especially for decision-makers in America, China, and Europe. The UN is on the case now too.
We learned this year that new AI tools represent a unique technological breakthrough with implications for every sector of the economy. They’re already driving a new phase of globalization. But they’re also creating serious risks because AI will enable disinformation on a massive scale, fuel public mistrust in governing institutions, and empower demagogues and autocrats in both politics and the private sector. More on that next week too.
4. Inflation shockwaves
Here our forecast mainly missed the mark. We expected that inflation at levels not seen in generations would lead to a restrictive policy stance by major central banks, reducing global demand and causing financial stress and social and political instability. We were thinking mainly of countries already under pressure, but we considered the United States vulnerable too.
The US did experience a banking crisis of confidence following the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and First Republic in 2023, but stronger-than-expected growth and continued low unemployment helped contain the fallout.
The global impact was less than we expected. Yes, China underperformed, but Europe absorbed the shocks created by the transition away from imports of Russian energy, and overall US performance stuck close to the “Goldilocks” scenario of slow economic cooling while avoiding recession. The risk of a major financial crisis was avoided.
With hindsight, inflation deserved to be on the list, but not at #4.
5. Iran in a corner
This one cut both ways in 2023. On the one hand, as we expected, there was no breakthrough with the Biden administration to restore the Iran nuclear deal, and that led Tehran to step up uranium enrichment and stockpiling. It also upped its military cooperation with the Kremlin, particularly with drone transfers that boosted Russia on the battlefield in Ukraine.
We also finished the year with serious concerns about an expansion of the regional war between Israel and Hamas, a conflict in which Iran would be a key player. Their various proxies in the region were already stepping up attacks on Israel and US forces in the region as 2023 came to an end.
But the positive surprise was a breakthrough we didn’t foresee — brokered by China — between Iran and Saudi Arabia. That diplomatic opening has facilitated better economic relations, and following the outbreak of war, leaders of the two countries have been in regular communication, helping to stabilize the region for now.
6. Energy crunch
This was the biggest miss in our 2023 top risks report. We forecast that supply-limiting geopolitical challenges coupled with higher global energy demand would push oil prices beyond $100 a barrel by the end of the year. But there was no energy crunch in 2023 because the wars and the best efforts of OPEC+ to bolster prices couldn’t outweigh reduced demand from sluggish economic growth in China or a dramatic expansion of US oil production despite its commitment to a faster and more expansive energy transition. Oil topped out just under $95 and quickly backed down. Despite the entirely unexpected risks in the Middle East, the price has lately bounced between $75-$80 per barrel.
7. Arrested global development
Though the pandemic is over, human development indicators overall continue to suffer, thanks to the Russia-Ukraine war, global inflation, climate change, the Israel-Hamas war, and a number of other military coups and conflicts in places like Haiti, Sudan, Ethiopia, and Armenia-Azerbaijan that receive very little attention from Western media.
The result is lower levels of economic and political security for most of the world’s population. This should have come higher on our list.
8. Divided States of America
Given the structural political dysfunction (ask former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy and the parade of his hapless would-be replacements) and the continued erosion of public confidence in US political institutions, this deserved to be on the list. Given the trajectory, we should have had it a little higher.
The 2024 election season is now in full swing, and in many ways, it is more problematic than in 2020. The international impact has so far been limited, and other governments are only just starting to grapple with the post-November uncertainties in US policymaking. More on that next week.
9. TikTok boom
Gen Z certainly became a bigger player in 2023, and not just on climate or issues of equality and identity politics. The Israel-Hamas war has created early challenges for the Biden reelection campaign, with both support for Palestinians and anger at the Israeli government becoming more intense as 2024 begins.
10. Water Stress
Water stress became more of an issue in 2023. Record rains made a big positive difference in the United States, facilitating a political deal for water-sharing in western US states and giving farmers a medium-term lease on life.
But other water-stressed parts of the world have experienced more pain. Northern Mexico remains in serious trouble. Agriculture and overall fiscal strain across Europe will require new political thinking. Sub-Saharan Africa now faces more starvation, especially in the Sahel and the Horn of Africa, adding to forced migration trends. Too many governments are focused only on crises, leaving longer-term plans for new institutions capable of marshaling long-term resources on the drawing board.
So, that’s my look back at 2023. Beginning next Monday, you’ll be reading much more about our expectations for a historically turbulent 2024.