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 }}
Here’s what you missed while you were away
As summer winds down this weekend, here are the geopolitical stories you may have missed while your inbox was on “out of office” — the ones we expect will have the biggest impact this fall.
In Sudan, the skies have turned deadly
Drones have become the new face of modern warfare, dominating headlines as Russia and Ukraine trade near-daily aerial strikes. But unmanned aircraft vehicles (UAVs) are wreaking havoc in another of the world’s deadliest, and least covered, conflicts: Sudan.
With drones now entering the fray, the conflict risks escalating into a dangerous new phase, allowing both sides to keep inflicting damage with minimal risks to themselves.
Ever since the SAF recaptured the capital Khartoum in March, the two sides have been locked in a strategic stalemate, with drones enabling both groups to carry out precision strikes hundreds of miles behind enemy lines.
Is Sudan a sign of future of warfare? Read more here.
A surge of political violence has revived Colombia’s worst fears
When a gunman shot Colombian presidential candidate Miguel Uribe in June, it sparked memories of the deadly decades-long internal conflict from late last century when political assassination attempts were a common occurrence.
Fast forward nearly three months, Uribe is now dead, and the violence between dissidents and the military has intensified – there have been multiple reports of mass kidnappings of government soldiers. Left-wing President Gustavo Petro has pledged to clamp down on the violence, but he can’t seem to put a lid on things: the number of kidnappings and killings of human rights activists have soared over the last few years.
This will likely cost the left, politically speaking. The rising violence is prompting more and more Colombians to seek a tough-on-crime leader, damaging Petro’s hopes that a socialist candidate will win next year’s presidential election – the incumbent leader can’t run again.
The shift in Colombia’s politics is also something of a proxy for the rest of South America. Other countries with left-wing leaders, like Bolivia and Chile, have also tilted right, seeking leaders who will keep them safe. Bolivians ousted the socialists from power for the first time in decades. Chile’s elections in November will be the next test for the South American left, before Colombia’s election next May.
Will the rising violence hurt the Colombian left? Read more here.
Is MAGA bailing on Bibi?
In early July, there were some rumblings of discontent within the Trump administration at Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. An Israeli shell had struck a church in Gaza, settlers had attacked a Christian Palestinian village, and the Israeli Defense Forces had bombed the Syrian Defense Ministry in Damascus – against the White House’s wishes.
But the disquiet was only the tip of the iceberg: Trump supporters, especially younger ones, are becoming more and more critical of Israel, questioning the US’s support for the Jewish State. Though younger Republicans aren’t nearly as critical as younger Democrats, this trend is a concerning one for Israel, as the country has relied heavily on US military aid. Republicans have been particularly sympathetic toward Israel in recent history, so to lose their backing would be drastic.
Soon after the piece was published, US Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene – a MAGA firebrand – became the first House Republican to label Israel’s actions in Gaza as a “genocide,” affirming that the GOP is no longer united behind supporting Israel. Read the original GZERO report here.
Is AI why college grads can’t find jobs?
The kids are not alright. Since we opened the Pandora’s Box of chatbots, new grads have faced higher unemployment than the national average for the first time in decades. Which raises the question: are they the canaries in the coal mine that AI-driven job disruption has begun?
“It just seems like there’s not any more entry-level roles,” reports James Kettle, a 25-year-old Columbia University graduate who’s been on the job hunt since May. His experience is echoed in a new Stanford study, which found hiring in AI-exposed occupations for early-career workers is down 13%.
Even if we can’t be certain AI is totally to blame for stealing young people’s existing jobs (yet), it’s making it harder for them to get hired in the first place. Delia Thompson, a 23-year-old University of Virginia graduate who’s been on the hunt for seven months, describes the job process today as “shouting into the void,” as she and other candidates send thousands of AI-assisted resumes through LinkedIn, only for companies to use their own algorithms to sift through the pile – a loop of bots talking to bots. “It makes it feel like a total lottery,” says Thompson.
This is reshaping their political views and how many young people are viewing AI overall. Read more here.
The Caryn influencer artificial intelligence AI page is seen in this illustration photo taken in Warsaw, Poland on 05 December, 2023.
The geopolitics of on-device AI
Since its inception, generative AI such as ChatGPT has run primarily in the cloud: large data centers run by large companies. In that home, AI is reliant on electricity-hungry computers, robust internet connections, and centralized data. But now AI is beginning to move directly onto devices themselves, encouraged by advances in AI models, user-friendly tools, and ideological factors. This transformation has broad implications for the geopolitics of AI.
Whether for corporate or personal use, on-device AI is fundamentally different from cloud-based AI. When running on your own device, AI no longer requires racks of electricity-hungry computers, a reliable internet connection, or particularly custom hardware to operate. From a user’s point of view, one can more safely and privately give on-device AI access to all data on the device — including messages, photos, and real-time location — without risking privacy leakages. The on-device AI could control apps on the user’s behalf, and their apps could also efficiently use the on-device AI. All for free, with no usage limits.
Of course, the largest and most advanced AI models may never fit on a standard laptop; scientific labs might always need cloud-based AI. But as laptops and mobile devices continue to improve — and AI models continue to be miniaturized — an ever-higher percent of AI use cases will become viable on-device.
Geopolitically, on-device AI will scramble much of the current calculus.
As AI moves from clouds to devices, national AI infrastructure may play a less central role. There are already some reports of AI overcapacity in China; President Xi has publicly warned about it. Conversely, the global south might have an opportunity to leapfrog: just as some nations skipped landline internet and went directly to mobile connections, so too may developing countries skip expensive AI data centers and simply rely on AI-capable devices.
Though cloud operators may matter less, device creators will matter more. Globally, America is currently overrepresented, with Apple, Google, Microsoft, HP, and a range of other relevant device creators. China has historically been less relevant: only Xiaomi commands international attention, with less than 12% of the global mobile market. That said, a variety of companies are building next-gen AI devices. If any get traction (with its AI perhaps powered by connected phones), the countries that invent winning AI devices will stake their claim to global AI leadership.
Most countries are not competing for global AI device leadership, though, and most AI devices will likely come from only a few places. For middle powers looking to exercise national agency, new approaches are likely to emerge.
One possibility could grow out of system prompts: short, written instructions given to AI models to guide their behavior and tone. All AIs use system prompts; they are currently written by the companies that make the AIs. Perhaps there might be national system prompts in the future — in the same way that every smart device currently follows the time zone settings of the user’s current location, one could also imagine every AI device following a system prompt settings of the user’s current location.
Imagine, for example, that you visit a foreign country. Now — unless you override the default system prompt, as you can today for the time zone — your on-device AI might skew its default advice to follow local cultural norms and values, thanks to a simple extra section of text loaded into its invisible system prompt. Governments could write those short statements as distillations of national norms and values, and provide them to major on-device-AI makers in a standardized format.
On a social level, the makers of on-device AI have different incentives than the makers of cloud-based AI. In particular, cloud-based AI providers may be tuning their systems to encourage users down rabbit holes of higher usage, following the same financial incentives as social media providers. Conversely, on-device AI is incentivized to add more value to the customer’s purchase of the device, but the device maker isn't likely to earn extra revenue for every hour of incremental usage. So there’s grounds for cautious optimism: on-device AI may be better aligned with the user’s best self, rather than their most-frequently-using self.
The full secondary and tertiary consequences of on-device AI will take decades to fully appreciate. And the transition itself, while visible in the near horizon, will not happen overnight. Yet on-device AI is coming, and the geopolitics of AI will evolve with it.
Ian Bremmer delivers the 2025 Tulane School of Liberal Arts commencement speech
Ian Bremmer returned to his alma mater to deliver the commencement address and receive the school’s Distinguished Alumni Award. Laying out the complexities of the world that the class of 2025 is facing – and drawing on his own experience at Tulane – Ian reminded the graduates that their education prepared them for this moment in history. He challenged them to stay curious, lead with ethics, and reject the false clarity of algorithms to shape a better future.
Does Trump's campus crackdown violate the First Amendment?
The Trump administration says it's defending free speech by confronting liberal bias on college campuses—but is it doing the opposite? On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters explains how the administration’s focus on elite universities has led to sweeping actions that may ultimately restrict speech, especially for foreign-born students. “These are not students who smashed windows or assaulted security guards,” Peters says. “It’s pretty hard to see how the administration can make the case that these people are national security threats.”
And the impact is already being felt. Peters points to advice from university officials telling students to avoid posting on social media out of fear that political expression might jeopardize their legal status. In Trump’s America, he argues, the First Amendment is being selectively applied—and for some communities, the price of speaking out may be higher than ever.
Watch full episode: The battle for free speech in Donald Trump's America
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.
The battle for free speech in Donald Trump's America
In the United States, the right to free speech is enshrined in the Constitution, but that doesn’t mean everyone agrees on what it looks like in practice. On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer opens with a landmark case: when neo-Nazis won the right to march through a Holocaust survivor community in Skokie, Illinois. The decision was controversial but helped define modern free speech as “ugly, uncomfortable, and messy,” yet fundamental to American democracy. Today, that foundational idea is once again being tested—on college campuses, in immigration courts, and in the rhetoric of both political parties.
Conservative legal scholar Ilya Shapiro argues that institutions once devoted to open inquiry are increasingly undermining that mission. “Universities have forgotten their basic responsibilities,” he says, citing unequal rule enforcement and what he calls an “illiberalism” that predates Trump but has intensified with political polarization. Shapiro supports the Trump administration’s aggressive scrutiny of elite universities but warns that some immigration-related free speech crackdowns risk overreach: “I'd prefer the administration go after clear immigration violations, not rely on vague designations like ‘harmful to foreign policy.’”
Meanwhile, New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters warns that the Trump administration’s tactics may do more harm than good. “Rather than executing clean policies that defend free speech,” he says, “they’re using blunt force to try to deport people who didn’t do anything terribly wrong.” Peters points to a growing “chilling effect,” especially among international students, who are now being advised to self-censor for fear of legal consequences. Both guests agree that university culture has played a role in the current crisis, but they differ sharply on whether the government’s response is upholding or threatening the First Amendment.
In America’s culture wars, free speech is no longer just a right—it’s a weapon, and both sides are wielding it.
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.
Free speech in Trump's America with NYT journalist Jeremy Peters and conservative scholar Ilya Shapiro
Listen: Free speech has become one of the most contentious issues in American politics, but what does it actually mean today? On the GZERO World podcast, Ian Bremmer sits down with conservative legal scholar Ilya Shapiro of the Manhattan Institute and New York Times free speech reporter Jeremy Peters. They discuss how free expression is being defined—and challenged—on university campuses and by the Trump administration, particularly when it comes to national immigration policy. “The dynamic of ‘free speech for me but not for thee’ is prevalent,” Shapiro warns, pointing to inconsistent enforcement of campus speech rules and a broader “illiberalism” taking hold in higher education.
The conversation turns to the Trump administration’s aggressive response to Israel/Gaza protests, including efforts to penalize non-citizen students for their political speech. Peters cautions that this approach may violate the very rights the administration claims to defend. “Rather than execute a clean policy to support free speech,” he says, “they’re using blunt force to try to deport people who didn’t do anything terribly wrong.” The potential legal battles ahead could determine how far the government can go in defining speech as a national security issue, especially for non-citizens.
Both guests acknowledge that antisemitism on campus has become a flashpoint, but differ on how it’s being addressed. Shapiro argues that while not all anti-Israel sentiment is antisemitic, many protesters are crossing that line: “It’s possible to be anti-Zionist without being antisemitic, but it’s very rare in my experience.” Peters agrees the issue is complex and evolving, noting that universities “seem much more focused on preventing antisemitism than they were just a year ago.” Together, the guests raise urgent questions about the balance between expression, identity, and institutional responsibility in a sharply divided political landscape.
How did 'free speech' become a partisan weapon in America?
In the United States today, the right to free speech is enshrined in the Constitution, but that doesn’t mean everyone agrees on what it looks like in practice. On Ian Explains, Ian Bremmer opens with a landmark case: when neo-Nazis won the right to march through a Holocaust survivor community in Skokie, Illinois. The decision was controversial but helped define modern free speech as “ugly, uncomfortable, and messy,” yet fundamental to American democracy. Today, that foundational idea is once again being tested—on college campuses, in immigration courts, and in the rhetoric of both political parties.
Republicans have embraced free speech as a culture war rallying cry, using it to combat what they see as liberal censorship on college campuses and social media. Donald Trump even signed an executive order on his first day back in office aimed at curbing government interference in free speech. But Democrats argue that the same administration is now weaponizing federal power, targeting foreign students, threatening university funding, and punishing dissenting voices in ways that undermine the very freedoms it claims to defend.
Both parties claim to be protecting free speech, just not the same kind.
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.
Vietnam War, 50 years on
Fifty years ago today, North Vietnamese troops seized Saigon, and ended the Vietnam war with a communist victory. GZERO writers and producers have taken a deep dive into the history behind this solemn occasion, exploring life in Saigon during the war, the emotional and chaotic scenes that unfolded as thousands fled, the life Vietnamese-Americans built from scratch in their new homes, and asking whether we have learned the lessons of the war.
50 Years on, have we learned the Vietnam War's lessons?
Fifty years after the fall of Saigon (or its liberation, depending on whom you ask), Vietnam has transformed from a war-torn battleground to one of Asia’s fastest-growing economies — and now finds itself caught between two superpowers. Ian Bremmer breaks down how Vietnam went from devastation in the wake of the Vietnam War to become a regional economic powerhouse.
Saigon’s Last Day: The fall, the flight, and the aftermath of the Vietnam War
Don Shearer, US Defense Department via National Archives
Saigon, April 29, 1975. For six weeks, South Vietnamese forces have been falling back in the face of a determined communist offensive. American troops have been gone for two years. The feeble government is in disarray. The people are traumatized by three decades of war and three million deaths.
Bing Crosby’s “White Christmas” begins playing on radios across the capital.
Some Saigonese know it’s a sign: It is time to run.
Lien-Hang T. Nguyen, now a Columbia University history professor, was just five months old, the youngest of nine children. After a failed first escape attempt by helicopter, her family heard about an uncle with access to an oil transport boat. More than 100 refugees crammed aboard the small vessel, where they waited for hours to set sail. Nguyen’s father nearly became separated when he dashed back into the city in a futile attempt to find more relatives.
At nightfall, they finally departed, crossing enemy-controlled territory under cover of darkness before being ordered onto an ammunition barge floating off the coast, bursting with over 1,000 refugees.
“When the sun rose the next day, April 30, we realized Saigon had fallen,” says Nguyen.
Read more about the amazing stories of survival, and just what happened to Vietnam after the war here.
PODCAST: Revisiting the Vietnam War 50 years later, with authors Viet Thanh Nguyen and Mai Elliott
On the GZERO World Podcast, two authors with personal ties to the Vietnam War reflect on its enduring legacy and Vietnam’s remarkable rise as a modern geopolitical player.
Life in Saigon during the Vietnam War
On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, author Mai Elliott recalls how witnessing the human toll of the Vietnam War firsthand changed her views — and forced her to keep a life-altering secret from her own family.
Growing up as a Vietnamese refugee in 1980s America
On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, Pulitzer Prize-winning author Viet Thanh Nguyen shares what it was like growing up as a Vietnamese refugee in the US — and how the Americans around him often misunderstood the emotional toll of displacement.