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 }}
Incumbents in trouble, Putin’s bet, Conservative Canada, and more: Your questions, answered
Another heat wave, another mailbag.
Thank you to all who’ve sent questions. The response to last week’s edition was overwhelmingly positive, so please keep ‘em coming. If you want a chance to have your questions answered, shoot me an email here or follow me on Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Instagram, and Threads, and look out for future AMAs. The only questions that are off-limits are boring ones.
Looking at the elections in France, the UK, and the US, would you agree that 2024 might be shaping up to be the year of anti-incumbents?
Funny you should ask – my latest Quick Take tackles that exact question. Long story short: Yes, this is a deeply challenging time to be an incumbent, and the massively underrated reason why is that people all over the world are still reeling from the aftereffects of the pandemic.
There are, of course, plenty of local and idiosyncratic reasons why the French, the Brits, the Indians, the South Africans, and so many others were unhappy with their leadership. But the one thing incumbents everywhere had in common is voters blamed them for all the unprecedented disruption they’ve experienced since COVID-19, from lockdowns and vaccine mandates to supply chain disruptions, inflation, migration, and crime. In this environment, if the Republican candidate in the United States was anyone other than the historically unpopular Donald Trump, we’d be looking at a GOP landslide – and that’s against anyone that the Democrats put up, let alone a debate/age-diminished Joe Biden.
What US election result is Putin hoping for?
Putin clearly prefers Trump – a more transactional president who admires strongmen, shuns traditional US allies, and believes “common values” are irrelevant to international relations. Trump dislikes Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and has expressed a desire to engage with Putin directly and unilaterally to end the war on terms more favorable to Russia. Putin also benefits from more chaos in the US political system and stands to benefit from a contested US election outcome that turns Americans more inward, against each other, and away from international leadership in diplomatic, economic, and – especially – security matters.
If Trump is elected and turns his back on Ukraine, how likely is it that Western Europe will crank up its own war machine and get the job done?
They’ll certainly try to do more. That’s especially true of NATO’s frontline states: Poland, the Baltics, and the Nordics. But France, one of Europe’s leading proponents of common defense capabilities and support for Ukraine under President Emmanuel Macron, may not be in a position to do more given the result of its recent parliamentary election. Germany, the continent’s largest economy, may be reluctant to lean in given the fiscal troubles facing the government’s weak and fractious coalition. And some other countries like Viktor Orban’s Hungary and Robert Fico’s Slovakia will align themselves more with Trump, dividing what has hitherto been a strongly unified Europe on the issue.
Where do you see breaking points for the Russian and Ukrainian people in this war?
It’s much closer for Ukraine. Kyiv is running low on valuable young men who can be mobilized, trained, and sent to the front to fight. Ukrainian support for the war has eroded accordingly. That matters more than it would if the same were happening in Russia because Ukraine remains a democracy, however imperfect.
A little over a year after Yevgeny Prigozhin’s aborted coup, I don’t see any near-term breaking points for the Russian people. Though large-scale casualties are certainly making the war less popular among the population at large, the Kremlin is able to sustain its “meat grinder” campaign by drawing from a pool of disenfranchised convicts, ethnic minorities, and mercenaries. Not that “ordinary” Russians are substantially more enfranchised …
What will it take for the Chinese to give up on Putin? What can America do to hasten the process?
There’s no reason for them to do so. After all, India – a key strategic partner of the United States and the West more broadly – has also significantly increased its trade with Russia, with no adverse consequences for Delhi. If the US were to start imposing significant secondary sanctions on Chinese companies or banks over expanded dual-use exports to Russia, that’d probably get Beijing to reduce its exposure to the Kremlin’s war machine at the margins. But there’s nothing the US is likely to do in the near future (under Biden or Trump) that could completely break the China-Russia relationship.
How would a Trump presidency strengthen China?
Trump and Biden have similar China policies. The biggest difference is the extent of tariffs Trump is prepared to impose, which would have a more significant negative impact on both the Chinese and the US economy (unless Beijing was prepared to cut a significant and unexpected deal). China’s biggest strategic opportunity in that environment would be to divide and conquer: Exploit concerns from US allies that find themselves constrained or undermined by a more unilateralist Trump administration to improve its relations with them and potentially drive a wedge between them and the Americans.
What’s the biggest geopolitical risk in the world today?
The biggest risk is still “the United States vs. itself”: A presidential election in the world’s most divided and dysfunctional advanced industrial democracy that will do untold damage to America’s social fabric, political institutions, and international standing no matter who wins. Have a look at the full list of Top 10 Risks we put out in January. I really wish they weren’t standing up as well as they are …
How do the leaders of other countries feel about a potential Conservative government coming to power in Canada?
At the risk of sounding harsh, most world leaders aren’t thinking about Canada at all – and for good reason. The stakes of the country’s upcoming election may feel existential to my liberal friends up north who are about to lose power after nine years in office, but the reality is that Canada’s democracy isn’t in crisis like America’s is.
Despite his right-wing populist rhetoric, when it comes to policy substance, Conservative leader and likely next prime minister Pierre Poilievre is closer to Mitch McConnell’s brand of Koch-friendly conservatism than to the nativist, authoritarian, protectionist Trumpism that ruffles feathers in foreign capitals. Sure, a Conservative government will lead to closer alignment with the US in a Trump administration, but either way it would remain a very friendly and stable relationship. It will also lower taxes, lean more strongly into energy and related infrastructure development, and promote other pro-business policies. Critically, agree or disagree with his rather conventional platform, Poilievre has done nothing to suggest he’d undermine the legitimacy of Canada’s democracy. Must be nice, eh?
Do you think the AfD will win the next German election?
No. Despite the party’s meteoric decade-long rise, Germany’s coalition politics are designed to deliver centrist outcomes at the national level, and the Alternative for Germany is still seen as way too radical, Nazi-coded, and incompetent. But it’s certainly plausible that they’ll eventually be part of a government. After all, most of the structural elements that made the AfD a force are still in place: unchecked migration, a weak economy, deep discontent in Germany’s east, and plenty of space to the right of the decidedly moderate and pro-European Christian Democratic Union, aka CDU, for them to exploit.
Can RFK Jr. win?
Win … back his reputation? It’s hard to say. He’s better known now and seems to have a fair number of committed online fans (I say “seems to” because I can’t be sure how many are real vs. bots). I could see him selling merchandise, writing a book, and going on the public speaking circuit. If you’re earnestly asking about the 2024 election, I’d say he has a better chance of winning the lottery than he does of carrying a single state.
Does either of the major US parties have a realistic plan to bring down the deficit?
No. Both presidential candidates’ platforms and track records show little concern for fiscal deficits or pro-cyclical government spending (though Trump added more to the national debt in his first term than Biden has). This is not ideal at a time when interest rates are high and debt servicing costs are rising as a share of the federal budget.
I'm not saying that all deficit spending is bad or equally bad. When we look at companies, we always consider both sides of the balance sheet: liabilities and assets. The same should be true for sovereigns. That’s why I generally support deficit spending that can reasonably be expected to lead to asymmetric increases in the nation’s long-term asset base (e.g., any positive-return investment in education, health care, infrastructure, decarbonization, etc.). Trillions of dollars on failed wars … not so much.
The circumstances and timing matter greatly, too. Fiscal stimulus – even of the not-so-productive variety – is the right thing to do during recessions, when aggregate demand needs a kick in the ass, interest rates are low, and the spending pays for itself many times over with growth. Conversely, the right time for the government to tighten its belt is during the boom … now.
How big a business is Eurasia Group? Is it relatively large, medium, or small/boutique compared to its peers?
We’re almost 250 employees – pretty small for an organization that helps people understand the world. Our principal competitive challenge is employing enough senior leadership to take on all the new opportunities we’re lucky to have. We have a lot of talent, but it’s a big world out there, and it’s not getting any less challenging.
Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky addresses Ukrainian people with Orthodox Easter message, as Russia's attack on Ukraine continues, at the Saint Sophia cathedral in Kyiv, Ukraine April 23, 2022. Picture taken April 23, 2022.
Hard Numbers: Ukraine’s bloody Easter Sunday, China on the dark side of the moon, Afghanistan loses last woman diplomat, Madonna’s massive show
3: On Sunday, Ukraine marked its third Orthodox Easter under Russian attack, as Moscow’s forces targeted villages in the East with a drone barrage that killed six people. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (of Jewish descent) asked his compatriots to be “united in one common prayer” on the steps of Kyiv’s St. Sophia Cathedral.
1,500: “Pink Floyd” 用中文怎么说? China launched a mission to the literal dark side of the moon on Friday to extract surface samples in the South Pole-Aitken Basin, a vast depression over 1,500 miles wide. It is the first of three unmanned lunar launches Beijing plans for this decade, culminating in an assessment of the feasibility of a permanent lunar base.
0: Afghanistan now has no female diplomats in its foreign ministry following the resignation of Zakia Wardak, who resigned after reportedly being detained in India on gold smuggling allegations. She was appointed in 2021, before the Taliban takeover,and denies the allegations.
1.6 million: Over 1.6 million people turned out to see Madonna play in a free open-air concert on Rio’s Copacabana Beach on Saturday night. And it wasn’t just Cariocas — the city’s airport handled over 170 additional flights to accommodate pop fans from all over the world.35: Panamanians elected José Raúl Mulino, the stand-in for former President Ricardo Martinelli, to be their next leader on Sunday, with 35% of the vote. The race had been in uncertain territory until Friday morning, when the Supreme Court decided to allow Mulino to run despite not having been made a candidate through a primary election process. Read more from GZERO here.
Officials attend the opening ceremony for the North Korean Embassy in Tehran, Iran in this undated photo released on August 5, 2017 by North Korea's Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) in Pyongyang.
If North Korea and Iran hook up, will China be jealous?
Pyongyang’s Minister of External Economic Relations Yun Jong Ho became the first North Korean official to visit Iran in half a decade on Tuesday. The trip is officially about economic ties, but the US State Department said it was “incredibly concerned” about possible missile and nuclear technology cooperation.
There’s precedent: Tehran has borrowed Pyongyang’s missile designs for its own weapons and admitted to using North Korean missiles during its 1980-1988 war with Iraq. Today, North Korea has intercontinental ballistic missiles that Tehran can’t yet field.
“Given Iran's preoccupation with its strategic position, searching for increased deterrence against both Israel and the United States, the fact that it would welcome a North Korean delegation right now is significant,” said Eurasia Group Iran analyst Greg Brew. “It's also significant that this visit is taking place while Iran's national security advisor is in Moscow,” he added, noting that Russia has been the glue in ties between all three countries.
Both Iran and North Korea have shipped Moscow weapons to use in Ukraine, which Eurasia Group labeled one of its Top Risks for 2024. There’s a political benefit for North Korea on top of the aid Moscow reciprocates: attention from China. Wary of losing influence over Pyongyang, China responded to the closer Russo-Korean ties by launching its own diplomatic press, including a visit to Pyongyang from politburo member Zhao Leji this month. Pyongyang may be trying to run the same play with Tehran.
“From North Korea’s perspective, if all they have to do is bat their eyelashes at another suitor for China to roll out the diplomatic red carpet, that seems like a well they can go back to with Iran,” says Eurasia Group North Korea expert Jeremy Chan.
Are markets becoming immune to disruptive geopolitics?
There’s no escaping the intricate link between economics and geopolitics. Today, that link has become a crucial factor in investment decision-making, and who better to speak to that than Margaret Franklin, CEO of CFA Institute, a global organization of investment professionals? Franklin sat down with GZERO’s Tony Maciulis at a Global Stage event for the IMF-World Bank spring meetings this week.
Economists once predicted that sovereign debt would overwhelm global markets. But now, having been through the pandemic, the advent of AI, and wars in the Middle East and Ukraine, “there's almost a level of immunity,” she says, “to the dramatic nature of it until something really cataclysmic happens.”
And then? “The response, generally speaking, has been pretty positive,” Franklin says, with central bank intervention saving markets and building resilience.
In much the same way, the World Bank is trying to boost investor confidence by making changes that leverage private sector capital for public sector goals by better evaluating what level of risk the private sector will accept.
Individual investors should do the same, Franklin advises. “Really evaluate your risk profile … making sure you diversify,” she says, noting that fixed-income offerings have become more attractive. Younger investors, meanwhile, need to be cautious with getting their information on social media, she adds.
For more of our 2024 IMF/World Bank Spring Meetings coverage, visit Global Stage.
Everything’s political: sofa, tomato, shoe
If you’re reading this column, chances are you’ll agree that at some level everything is political, right?
All around us, the things we touch, eat, buy, and wear, the people we meet, the ways we communicate – there’s a little politics in all of it. There’s the trade policy that determines where your shirt comes from. There’s the immigration policy that shapes who your kids will befriend in kindergarten or where they’ll work when they grow up. There are the decisions about war and peace that can shape life for you or for family members thousands of miles away.
So from time to time, I want to take a look around the world closer at hand, spotting the big political stories in the small objects around us. Today we’re gonna do three quickies: a sofa, a tomato, and a shoe.
Let’s go.
Your sofa: Where’s it from? If you’re in the US, chances are that for most of the past 30 years, it’s been made in China, the major exporter of furniture to North America. But if you bought it over the past year? It just might be from somewhere closer to home.
That’s because just this week México officially passed China as the US’ largest annual trade partner, taking the top spot for the first time.
That’s a big deal. China has ruled the roost for most of the past 30 years on the strength of its business-minded dictatorship and its vast, relatively cheap labor force. But in recent years, two things started to change all that. First, Donald Trump uncorked a banger of a trade war against Beijing. Then, pandemic-related lockdowns shut much of China’s economy and choked off supply chains around the world.
Companies got spooked. Investors who once prized low costs over everything began to prioritize safer shores. They began scrambling to find places not named "China" to make things to sell to the vast American market: Vietnam, Thailand, and Cambodia. They all boomed.
But México was the big winner. After all, it’s right next to the world’s largest consumer market and has a free trade agreement with Uncle Sam (renegotiated by Trump himself, no less.)
Nowadays, the industry-heavy states of northern México are practically choking on incoming investment. The catch? A lot of it is coming from … China, as companies like, say, Man Wah – one of the world’s leading manufacturers of sofas – pile into Mexico to keep a foot in the American market.
So while you sprawl out on that sofa, ponder this: the 1990s and 2000s world of peak globalization, when companies scoured the planet for the lowest cost production, is over. We now live in a world where proximity and security matter more than cost. Get close to someone on that couch!
Tomato: Speaking of México, consider one of that country’s greatest gifts to the world: the tomato.
The once-feared fruit* didn’t make it widely to Europe until about 250 years ago – no penne al pomodoro or pan con tomate until then – but at the moment it’s a little political grenade on the continent: France and Spain have gotten into it over tomatoes in recent days.
First France said the Spanish ones were “false organic” frauds. Spain shot back that France’s were “inedible.” French farmers roughed up a Spanish tomato truck.
The issue? Paris says Spanish tomato farmers are shirking the EU’s strict rules on pesticides to flood France with cheaper produce. Spain says its own campesinos are fully following the rules and points to massive imports of cheaper Moroccan tomatoes to France as the culprit.
This is more than just a tú dices “tomate,” je dis “tomate” dispute. It echoes the larger wave of farmer protests that is roiling Europe. Across the EU, farmers are raising pitchforks against Brussels, mad about climate-conscious fuel subsidy cuts that are hurting their bottom lines at a time when their costs (for fuel and fertilizer) are already up because of the Ukraine war. Meanwhile, they’re also getting squeezed by cheaper competition from abroad.
Critics of the protests point out that European agriculture has been protected by massive subsidies for decades, and that it’s a shrinking sector of small farms and old farmers that has resisted modernization.
That may be, but no sane politician in Europe wants to be seen ignoring granddad the farmer, so governments across the continent have been rolling back subsidy cuts and icing new trade deals.
Lastly, look at your shoe. And while you’re looking at it, consider the Houthis, the Iran-backed rebel group that controls Yemen.
What could these two things possibly have to do with each other?
The answer is floating in the Red Sea, where, as you probably have heard, the Houthis have been raining drones and missiles down on commercial ships as an act of solidarity with the Palestinians under Israeli assault in Gaza. As a result, shipping companies that move goods through the Red Sea and onto the Suez Canal are rerouting around the Horn of Africa. What’s this got to do with shoes?
As my colleague John found earlier this week, fully HALF of all shoes that go to Europe travel through the Red Sea. And about 40% of all clothing. So if you see a European friend walking around with two left shoes or one bare foot – you know who to blame.
*Yes, the tomato is a fruit. Don’t shoot the messenger. If you can’t handle that, don’t let me be the one to tell you that a strawberry isn’t a berry, but an eggplant is.
How Russia, North Korea, and Iran will sow chaos in 2024
Russia, North Korea, and Iran are the world’s most powerful rogue states. They have been working to strengthen their cooperation since Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, united by the draconian sanctions levied against them, their shared hatred of the US, and their willingness to violate international law to disrupt a global status quo they believe serves Western interests at their expense. These rogues are agents of chaos in today’s geopolitical order, bent on undermining existing institutions and the governments and principles that uphold them.
Once seen by Russia as a nuisance at best and a liability at worst, North Korea has become an essential resource for Vladimir Putin’s war effort in Ukraine thanks to its pariah status, militarized economy, and large stocks of Soviet-standard artillery ammunition. Meeting in Russia’s Far East in September 2023, Kim Jong Un and Putin struck a deal that sends North Korean artillery shells, rockets, and ballistic missiles to Russia in exchange for Russian food, energy, and – most importantly – technological assistance, especially on satellite development and deployment.
Russia and Iran, longtime partners in a bid to protect Bashar Assad’s regime in Syria, have also upgraded their relationship from a limited tactical alliance to a more comprehensive and strategic military and economic partnership. Tehran has supplied Moscow with kamikaze drones to terrorize Ukrainian cities – now also being built in Russia – and has drawn on its decades of experience to help Moscow evade Western sanctions. For its part, Russia has become Iran’s chief external weapons supplier, its top source of foreign investment, and a key trading partner. Moscow also provides diplomatic cover for Tehran’s nuclear program at the UN Security Council and has developed warm relations with Iranian proxies at war with the United States and Israel in the Middle East.
While less prominent than Russia’s bilateral ties within the axis, North Korea and Iran have a decades-long history of cooperation on nuclear and ballistic missile development. This cooperation has reportedly extended to North Korea supplying weapons and missile designs to Hamas, the Houthis, and other Iranian-backed militant groups.
In 2024, coordination among these rogue states will increase. Deepening alignment and mutual support will pose a growing threat to geopolitical stability as they boost one another’s capabilities and act in increasingly disruptive ways on the global stage.
Russia will be the primary actor here, seeking to bolster its warfighting capabilities in Ukraine while working to deflect Western attention elsewhere. In exchange for North Korean artillery shells and rockets to sustain its war of attrition, Moscow will provide Pyongyang with technologies and know-how to advance its missile, submarine, and satellite programs, with major repercussions for Northeast Asian security. And in exchange for stepped-up provision of Iranian drones, munitions, sanctions relief, and ballistic missiles with which to strike Ukrainian cities, Moscow will supply Tehran with fighter jets and advanced weapons technology. Along with growing Russian support for Iran’s proxies, this will alter the regional balance of power in Iran’s favor at a time when Tehran and its proxies represent a much more direct security challenge to the West. Both bilateral deals will strengthen Russia’s hand in Ukraine and increase that war’s damage and costs.
The severity of existing Western sanctions against all three rogue states and the close cooperation among them means they will not be deterred by fear of further sanctions and isolation. This will unleash them to wage asymmetric warfare (short of direct military attacks) on the US and Europe, including via cyberattacks, support for terrorism, and disinformation campaigns designed to disrupt elections and sow chaos. More generally, the axis’s coordinated sanctions-busting and rule-breaking will undermine the compellent and deterrent power of Western sanctions, emboldening other would-be rogues.
It bears noting that China is not a member of the axis of rogues. Beijing did not openly condemn Russian aggression in Ukraine, but neither did it endorse the invasion or do much to help Putin’s war effort beyond purchasing discounted oil and allowing flows of dual-use goods to continue. (If India and the UAE were less friendly to the United States, analysts would be likening their Russia policies to China’s.) Beijing has looked on warily at the deepening security cooperation between Moscow and Pyongyang – in fact, Chinese officials didn’t know Kim was going to Russia until after it was publicly announced … and they were piqued by it. And while it has ramped up oil imports from and diplomatic support for Tehran, Beijing has no desire to jeopardize its more strategically important interests in the Gulf (particularly its ties with Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates) by helping Iran make regional trouble.
That said, China is often well-served by the three rogues’ anti-Western operations and maintains a de facto policy of pro-axis neutrality. Indeed, without active acquiescence from China, the axis’s rogue activities would be less impactful. Short of violating international sanctions or jeopardizing its own interests, expect Beijing to continue to do business with and legitimize the axis as it undermines the US and its allies this year.
Three caveats are in order. First, Russia, Iran, and North Korea leaning on each other is a sign of their desperation and weakness on the global stage. When your best (and near only) friends are two rogue states, you’re in trouble. Second, all of them seek to avoid an active shooting war with the West, which means continued caution when escalating direct attacks on the United States or its core allies. And third, despite their common interest in sowing chaos, dictators have trouble trusting each other, making the entente a fragile one. This axis is a marriage of convenience and opportunity; its members are neither strategic nor ideological bedfellows – they are focused primarily on regime survival and geopolitical gain. As such, their relationships will remain largely transactional.
Still, the disruptive potential of their growing cooperation – especially with a boost or at the very least a blind eye from Beijing – should not be underestimated.
Welcome to Antarctica: A conflict-free zone
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: Hi everybody. Ian Bremmer here and a Happy New Year 2024 from Antarctica.
That's actually where I am in a year where we're going to have, unfortunately, so much international conflict, so much geopolitical posturing, so much difficulty around the world. Seems like a good place to take a fresh start to kick off the year one continent that is actually free of that conflict and free because the world has decided to govern it well, the Antarctic. They used to be territorial claimants with overlapping claims, old colonial powers, and countries that were closed, whether it's Chile, Argentina, France, the United Kingdom, Australia, others. But they all suspended those claims as they entered into an Antarctic Treaty back in 1959.
For the duration of that treaty, which still is in place today and will be, we think, for at least decades to come. That means that Antarctic is free and clear of territorial claims and also free and clear of any military use or any natural resource exploitation, any commercialization. Now, instead, it's used for peaceful and scientific purposes for the benefit of humanity on this planet, and it has been running as such for over 60 years, despite the fact that there's no enforcement mechanism for this treaty. It's a very thin document, and everybody basically engages to try to ensure that over time we'll all work together, and so far, so good.
In fact, right now I'm closest to a Russian research base and an Indian base. Even though those are countries that don't get along incredibly well, they manage to still socialize and share weather information, other data, you wouldn't know that they're from different countries. In fact, that's true of the Americans and the Chinese and pretty much everybody that's here on the ground in Antarctic. Now, part of the reason for that is because there's very few people on the ground. It's really hard to get here. There are no indigenous people whose land has been taken away and who have claims upon it.
So in a sense, the very remoteness has made it comparatively easier to govern. Also, the fact that no one has seen huge profit in it, and over time, that could change as the space rate race heats up and people see that basing rockets in the Antarctic or satellite tracking could be useful and have military purposes, commercial applications. Maybe as we're going to Mars. Certainly also, as we talk about rare earths and the ability to extract minerals from the earth. There'll be more discussion of this, but for now, at least 8 billion people on the planet and the Antarctic is run pretty darn well.
Now, climate change has made a difference, and I've seen that with emperor penguin colonies getting smaller and glaciers receding, but it still seems very far away, this continent, from what we've been experiencing pretty much everywhere else, and so nice to reflect on that for a moment as we kick off 2024. I hope everyone enjoyed their New Year. I'll be back in the States real soon and I'll be talking to you about topics that are very close to our heart and a little more challenging to talk about.
That's it for me. I'll talk to you all real soon.
Top stories of 2023: GZERO World with Ian Bremmer
GZERO World with Ian Bremmer looks back at the big stories that captured our attention in 2023. From Russia’s ongoing Ukraine invasion and the Israel-Hamas war erupting in the Middle East, to mind-blowing advances in artificial intelligence and former President Trump’s multiple indictments, it can be hard to keep track of everything that happened this year. GZERO was on the ground for all of it: bringing you news-making interviews from world leaders, reporting from around the world, and, as always, geopolitical analysis with a side of wit. Don’t worry, we’ll be back in 2024 to unpack the biggest stories and help make sense of the unseen forces shaping our world.