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 }}
What We’re Watching: Drone drama, DeSantis vs. Ukraine, Japan hearts South Korea, Pakistan-Khan standoff
Drone drama over the Black Sea
In what is so far the closest thing to a direct clash between the US and Russia over Ukraine, a Russian jet on Tuesday crashed into an American drone over the Black Sea, sending the unmanned craft hurtling into the water.
Moscow disputes the claim, saying its jets didn't hit the drone. The US accused the pilots of two Russian Su-27s of being “unprofessional” and “environmentally unsafe” for harassing and “dumping fuel” on the $32 million MQ-9 Reaper drone.
But scholars point out that the US didn’t call the act “unlawful.” Russia was evidently within its rights to disrupt a drone in international territory that was almost certainly gathering intel for Moscow’s adversaries in Kyiv. Still, the incident shows the dangers of US and Russian military hardware operating in such close proximity, even if they aren’t in direct conflict.
Ron goes Don on Ukraine
Speaking of those dangers, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has waded into some foreign policy waters of his own, telling FOX News host Tucker Carlson he thinks that the Russia-Ukraine “territorial dispute” is not a vital US national interest and that Biden’s “blank check” for Kyiv is a distraction from more pressing issues like China.
This puts Desantis at odds with much of the GOP but firmly in line with … former President Donald Trump, whom he is all but sure to challenge for the Republican nomination in 2024.
Political wrangling aside, Desantis may be trying to catch a broader trend: In February, polls showed that only 48% of Americans favored providing weapons to Ukraine, down 12 points from May of last year. Is Ron on to something?
Japan and South Korea’s efforts to strengthen ties
South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol and Japanese PM Fumio Kishida are meeting in Tokyo this week in a bid to forge stronger economic and security ties. Diplomatic engagement between the countries has stalled in recent years owing to territorial disputes and Japan’s rearmament amid what Koreans see as Japan’s efforts to whitewash World War II-era atrocities.
This follows a recent landmark agreement between Tokyo and Seoul for a South Korean fund to compensate victims of Japan’s forced labor camps during its 20th-century colonization of the Korean peninsula – a deal that has proven unpopular with South Koreans for not holding Japan directly and financially accountable.
Improved cooperation would help both countries meet the increasing security challenges posed by China and North Korea in the region. Restoring trade links between South Korea and Japan, meanwhile, will help alleviate high-tech global supply chains. But for this to work, Kishida’s government must first win over South Korean hearts and minds.
Imran Khan 1 - Pakistan’s government 0
Pakistani security forces on Wednesday withdrew from near Imran Khan’s home in Lahore after failing to detain the former PM, despite having an arrest warrant. The reason: to allow a big cricket match to take place in the city.
As the standoff unfolded, Khan — who used to captain the national team in cricket-crazy Pakistan — took to Twitter, urging his supporters not to give up. He was ousted in a no-confidence vote last April over allegations of corruption and “terrorism”, which he and his supporters dismiss as politically motivated. But since then, Khan has fervently sought to win back the top job, leading a populist movement against Pakistan’s political elite and all-powerful army, whom he accused of being behind an assassination attempt against him in Nov. 2022.
So far, the government was too scared of igniting his base to arrest the former PM, even after he was a no-show in court. Yet, in a country where the army calls many political shots, perhaps he’s made too many enemies. And if he’s behind bars when Pakistanis vote in provincial elections this fall, will his fans remain silent?
What We’re Watching: Tense G-20 talks in India, Finland’s fence-building, China’s economic activity, Chicago’s mayoral runoff
An awkward G-20 summit in Delhi
When G-20 foreign ministers met in New Delhi on Thursday, it was, as expected, an awkward affair. While India, the current G-20 chair, had hoped that the bloc would focus on issues of importance to the Global South, like climate change and the global food crisis, the agenda was disrupted by US-Russia bickering over the war in Ukraine, which US Secretary of State Antony Blinken called "unprovoked and unjustified war", while Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov blamed the West for not doing enough to extend a deal to allow Ukrainian grain exports that will soon expire. Of course, focusing on anything else was going to be a tall order when the top diplomats of the US, China, and Russia were all in the same room. (President Biden and Xi Jinping last met at the G-20 summit in Bali in November, though there was no bilateral meeting between the US and Russia.) In a sign of how fractured Washington's relationship remains with these two states, Blinken on Wednesday again urged Beijing not to send lethal weapons to Russia and canned China’s peace plan for Ukraine. As for US-Russia relations … need we say more? India, which has gone to painstaking lengths to maintain its neutral status over the past year, says it thinks the group can get stuff done. But at a meeting last month of G-20 financial heads, the group couldn’t even agree on a joint statement.
Finland builds a border fence against Russia
Rakentaa se aita! That's Finnish for "Build that fence!" — which is what Finland plans to do to protect its borders from Russian draft dodgers. Construction of a 10-foot tall wall, ahem, fence began this week along Finland's 800-mile border with Russia, with the first section expected to be finished by June. The Finns want to stop Russians from entering after fleeing the draft to fight in Ukraine, a number that could rise if Vladimir Putin orders another mobilization in the coming months. Meanwhile, Finland's parliament on Wednesday overwhelmingly approved the government's plan to speed up the process to join NATO — ideally along with Sweden, a fellow Nordic, if Turkey ever backs off. Going back to the fence, parts of it will have all the bells and whistles — night-vision cameras, lights, and loudspeakers — that former US President Donald Trump could only dream of for his partially built "Big, beautiful wall." And like Mexico, you can bet that Russia won't pay for it.
Chinese economic activity rebounds
China's official manufacturing sector purchasing managers’ index — a closely watched indicator of economic activity — reached 52.6% in February, expanding at its fastest monthly pace in over a decade. What's more, home sales rose for the first time in two years amid a persistent property-sector slump. The good: The two figures beat expectations and are a clear sign that the world's second-largest economy is recovering quicker than expected after abruptly ditching zero-COVID. The bad: The starting point was very low, as China's GDP grew last year by only 3%, barely half of what the ruling Communist Party had targeted. The ugly: While this is excellent news for Xi Jinping and a global economy that's eager for both more Chinese demand for stuff and more Chinese capacity to make stuff, economic activity has yet to reach pre-pandemic levels. Also, China's economy is still facing strong pressure from the fallout of the US-China rivalry, with American companies feeling increasingly bearish about the future as ties between Beijing and Washington get icier.
Chicago election result portends impending showdown over policing
Voters in Chicago denied Lori Lightfoot, who made history as the city’s first openly gay and Black female mayor, a second term amid concerns over rising crime, which increased by 41% between 2021 and 2022. Lightfoot, who cruised to office in 2019 on an anti-corruption platform, had been widely criticized for the high crime rate in America’s third-largest city. No candidate in the Democratic stronghold clinched over 50% of the vote needed to win outright this week, so the two remaining candidates – both Dems – will go to an April 4th runoff, with the controversial issue of policing underscoring the stark divide between them. On one side is Paul Vallas, who has drawn criticism for past comments and for associating with the Windy City’s controversial police union leader. He promises to add hundreds of officers back to the police force if elected. His challenger, Brian Johnson, favors investment in services like housing, education, and mental health over more policing. Amid rising post-pandemic crime in major US cities, political differences over investment in public safety measures will play an increasingly central role in US mayoral elections. We’ll be watching as Philadelphia and Houston head to the polls later this year.What We’re Watching: China’s budding diplomacy, Biden’s border control, Russia’s big plans
What’s next for Russia & China?
Russia and China broadcast their friendship to the world on Wednesday as the West freaked out about the possibility of Beijing turning to arm Moscow’s troops in Ukraine. After meeting Chinese top diplomat Wang Yi in the Kremlin, Vladimir Putin said that strong Russia-China ties are “important for stabilizing the international situation.” (A tad rich coming from the guy who upended geopolitics by invading Ukraine a year ago.) Putin also confirmed that Xi Jinping would visit Moscow for a summit in the coming months. Wang, for his part, clarified that while their famous partnership “without limits” is not directed against any other nation, it certainly should not be subject to external pressure. He said both countries support “multipolarity and democratization of international relations” – in other words, not a US-led liberal international order. Still, no matter what Western governments say, the Chinese are not so willing to break ties with the US and its allies, mainly because Beijing's trade relations are too important. Meanwhile, we wonder whether the current status of the Russia-China relationship — friends with benefits but complicated — will blossom into a marriage (of convenience) or end in a bad breakup. What we know for sure is that China is getting more involved in the Ukraine conflict generally. Learn more here.
Biden’s tough new move on immigration
The Biden administration this week unveiled a new hardline immigration plan that will likely come into effect after the current pandemic-era immigration policy, known as Title 42, lapses on May 11. It would then stay in place for two years. Under the measure, first revealed last month, asylum-seekers who cross the US southern border illegally or who fail to apply for asylum in the first country they cross through will be banned from applying for asylum in America. This comes after Biden’s team last month introduced a new policy, whereby migrants from Nicaragua, Haiti, Cuba, in addition to Venezuela, would be eligible for “parole” – meaning temporary two-year work visas – only if they apply for asylum from outside the US and if they have a US sponsor. The new plan mirrors a similar policy introduced by former President Donald Trump that was ultimately blocked by the courts. Rights groups, citing a potential threat to humanitarian protections, say they will seek legal action again. Biden has been struggling to contain an uptick in migrants arriving at the southern border in recent months – and the subsequent political backlash. But this plan will infuriate the left flank of the Democratic Party whose support Biden needs as the 2024 presidential race gets underway.
Russia looks beyond Ukraine?
Ukraine is not the only piece of former Soviet ground that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin might like to recapture. Belarus, allied with Russia as part of a “union state” since 1999, has seen Kremlin influence within its borders grow since strongman President Aleksandr Lukashenko called on Putin for help with domestic protests that broke out in response to a rigged 2020 election. Lukashenko has so far resisted pressure from Putin to commit Belarusian troops to the war in Ukraine, but he has allowed Russia to use his country as a staging ground for invasion. This week, a consortium of journalists representing Yahoo News, Germany’s Süddeutsche Zeitung, and other media organizations published a document they say was obtained from inside Putin’s government that details a Russian plan to essentially annex Belarus by 2030. The 17-page report, titled "Strategic Goals of the Russian Federation in Belarus" and completed in the summer of 2021, calls for Russian infiltration of Belarus’ politics, economy, and military. Like Ukraine, Belarus is situated on land that has sometimes been ruled by Moscow, and it serves as a forward buffer against further NATO advance toward Russian borders. It’s also consistent with a Kremlin announcement this week that created uncertainty over Russian recognition of the independence of Moldova, another former Soviet Republic. Moldova’s pro-Western President Maia Sandu and Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky recently alleged a Russian plan to organize a coup in Moldova.“Blood and glass" and the power of Big Tech
A little more than ten years after the start of the Arab Spring — a popular pro-democracy revolution helped along by Facebook and Twitter — the world's largest social media platforms this week banned the US president for inciting deadly violence in the United States.
If ever there were an illustration of the simultaneous promise, peril, and more importantly the power of social media to shape our lives and politics, this is it.
Not surprisingly, the Trump ban — and the decision by Apple, Amazon, and Google to expel other right-wing platforms where Trump supporters had plotted violence — has raised a host of thorny questions about how to define free speech, how to regulate tech companies, and what comes next at a delicate and dangerous moment in the "world's oldest democracy." Let's decode some of it.
This isn't, legally speaking, a "free speech" debate. The Bill of Rights in the US Constitution offers no inalienable right to post on Twitter or Facebook, much less to be published, say, by Simon and Shuster. What's more, free speech laws generally stop short of permitting incitement to violence, the primary reason for the tech companies' recent actions.
But it is about the staggering and seemingly arbitrary power of technology companies to shape what is, in practice, the main public square of the 21st century.
Agree or not with the tech companies' decisions here, we don't know much about how those decisions were reached, or by whom. Well beyond Trump's supporters, critics as wide-ranging as German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Russian dissident Alexey Navalny, and the left-wing American Civil Liberties Union pointed out the dangers of arbitrary tech censorship, or the potential powerlessness of people with far less power and recourse to fight back than the US president.
Part of the reason that this is even an issue is that the tech companies have gotten so big in the first place. If Facebook had 200,000 users rather than 2 billion, it wouldn't matter much. So implicit in all of this is the question, again, of if/how to regulate tech companies, and whether to reduce their power to control speech and markets in ways that may inflict harm on society.
Three regulation models. Globally, there are basically three main approaches to tech regulation at the moment. In China, tech companies — some of the world's largest — are privately-run but expected to act as the loyal arms of an authoritarian state, advancing its interests at home and abroad (sometimes even with help from Silicon Valley). In the EU, where by contrast there are very few tech firms of global scale, governments set strict rules on privacy, speech, competition, and transparency which companies must adhere to in order to gain access to a lucrative market of 500 million relatively high-income people.
Lastly, the US — cradle of what are still the world's most influential tech giants — has taken a hands-off approach: tech companies have until now been left largely to regulate themselves, and enjoy certain protections against liability for material posted on their sites. That light touch is what helped them become giants in the first place.
Where does the US go now? In recent years both mainstream US political parties have warmed to the idea of stronger regulation of tech companies, though for different reasons. Republicans allege liberal bias in Silicon valley, while Democrats are primarily worried about policing hate speech and protecting privacy.
Last week's events have supercharged both sides' concerns: Republicans are crying foul over the "deplatforming" of their supporters, while top Democrats see those actions as too little, too late. "It took blood and glass in the halls of Congress" for tech firms to act, said Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal, a leading voice on tech regulatory issues.
Of course, as a result of last week's Georgia Senate runoff, it is now Democrats who will assume (razor-thin) control over Congress along with the White House, putting them in a position to start advancing their vision of what better tech regulation should look like.
American carnage
Our newsletter is called Signal. We chose that name because we wanted to do our best to separate "signal" from "noise" for our readers — to cut through ideology and emotion to try to offer insight into what's happening, why it's happening, and what might happen in the future. With that in mind, here's what has happened in the United States over the past 24 hours and how we got here.
President Donald Trump has built a large following by telling people that American politics is a game that has been rigged against his supporters. In November, he was defeated by Joe Biden in a free and fair election. Before, during, and after that election, Trump has tried to persuade his followers that the election was stolen from them. That charge is false. It has been the subject of dozens of lawsuits and court cases, and no court has found that it has merit.
In Washington on Wednesday, the US Congress began legal proceedings to formalize the election result according to law. A mob of armed rioters, goaded by the president, who encouraged his supporters at a rally Wednesday not to "concede," stormed the building to stop that lawful process.
Order has been restored, at least for now. Congress certified President-elect Biden's victory early this morning, and he will be inaugurated the rightfully elected president of the United States on January 20. Under intensifying pressure to concede that Biden has won, President Trump has promised "an orderly transition of power."
But this event has raised troubling questions about the future of American domestic politics and the US' role in the world. Here's a preliminary list of questions we'll be trying to answer in coming weeks, months, and years.
Will this violation of rule of law in the United States — the halting of a transition of presidential power by an armed mob — split the Republican Party into warring factions that can't be reconciled into a single coherent political party?
What impact will the (brief) occupation of the US Capitol by Trump supporters have on the willingness of Republican lawmakers to bargain and compromise with soon-to-be president Joe Biden? Will they be willing to work with a president whom many Trump supporters consider illegitimate and an enemy?
How will Joe Biden and the Democratic Party respond to this increasingly toxic political environment? Will Democrats attempt in some way to reach out to Republicans disgusted by this rioting? Or will most become convinced they must move forward with no Republican support?
Will President Trump be held responsible for instigating this insurrection by members of his own party? If the current hostilities escalate over the next 13 days, will there be a serious attempt to remove him from power?
What will foreign governments make of this spectacle? US allies and rivals alike already know that President Trump won 74 million votes, more than any other presidential candidate in history except the man who defeated him. They know he has expanded his political base. They already understood, therefore, that Trump, or at least "Trumpism," might return in 2024. How does the sight of a pro-Trump mob storming the US Capitol building alter their calculation of how much to invest in making longer term economic, political and security bargains with the Biden administration.
What does the world look like when the planet's only superpower is now wracked by a level of political instability and scenes of unrest more commonly associated with what are called "emerging" markets?
What We're Watching: New US Supreme Court justice, Morales can go back to Bolivia, Nile dam talks resume
SCOTUS battle rages on: In a major victory for US President Donald Trump just a week out from the presidential election, the Republican-controlled Senate confirmed Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court, who was then swiftly sworn into office at a nighttime ceremony at the White House. Barrett, a conservative who was tapped to replace deceased Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg just 46 days out from the presidential election, is the first Supreme Court justice to be confirmed in over 150 years without the support of a single member of the minority party. Democrats are furious, saying that Republicans — who blocked Obama from filling a Supreme Court vacancy in 2016, arguing at the time that the seat should only be filled after the next US president was elected some nine months later — have cynically backtracked on their own assertions. Democrats have also called the rushed confirmation process "illegitimate." Pressure is now mounting on Joe Biden (specifically, from the progressive wing of his party) to expand the size of the Supreme Court should he win in November, so Democrats can install liberal justices to offset the crucial court's hard-right shift.
Evo Morales' likely return: A Bolivian judge on Tuesday dismissed an arrest warrant for alleged sedition and terrorism against former president Evo Morales, paving the way for Morales, who led the country from 2006 to 2019, to return to Bolivia without fear of detention. Although the warrant was thrown out over a technicality, the investigation against Morales continues. If Morales does return, he'll still likely be expected to show up in court to face the charges, which stem from his alleged role organizing roadblocks in the wake of the disputed 2019 election. Morales initially claimed victory in last year's vote, but the military forced him to resign amid allegations of vote-buying and civil unrest. He has since lived in self-imposed exile in Mexico and Argentina, but vowed to return if Luis Arce, the candidate aligned with his socialist MAS party, won the October 18 October presidential election (he did, in a landslide). Now that Morales will likely be back soon, we're watching to see how his physical presence in Bolivia will affect Arce's first moves as president, given how the new president — a UK-educated economist who seeks to end Bolivian political polarization — distanced himself from Morales during the campaign.
What We're Watching: Walter Reed's door, Sudan's peace, Nagorno-Karabakh's war
What's next for patient Trump? After four days of confusion about the state of President Trump's health following a positive test for COVID-19, the US President was discharged from Walter Reed Medical Center on Monday evening — just 29 days before the US election. Before falling ill (the president reportedly required both oxygen support and a cocktail of experimental medications only used in severe cases of COVID) and being forced off the campaign trail, Trump trailed challenger Joe Biden by significant margins in some important swing states. With just four weeks until Election Day — and millions of Americans already voting by mail — we are watching the pace of President Trump's recovery and how quickly he'll return to his signature large rallies. And if Trump recovers quickly and fully, will his claim of having "beaten the virus" resonate with the undecided voters whose support could help save his campaign?
Sudan formalizes landmark peace deal: After years of conflict that led to hundreds of thousands of deaths and displaced some 2 million people, Sudan's transitional government has now formalized a peace deal with rebel factions to stabilize the country. The accord comes a year after Sudan's joint civilian-military government — which came to power after popular protests ousted the country's long time strongman President Omar al-Bashir in 2019 — and the Sudanese Revolutionary Front, a rebel bloc, began negotiating conditions of a peace deal. Terms that were particularly hard to iron out include the integration of rebels in the nation's armed forces, as well as establishing a blueprint for greater political representation and equitable land rights for different ethnic groups, long a point of contention in Sudan. The deal has backing from global heavyweights including the European Union and the African Union, who both signed the agreement as "guarantors." But the refusal of two influential rebel groups to sign it underscores the continuing challenges to stabilizing a country long-gripped by economic crisis, natural resource wars, and ethnic discord.
Fighting intensifies in Nagorno-Karabakh: Despite ongoing calls from NATO, Russia, and the United Nations for a ceasefire, fighting between the Azeris and Armenians over the contested Nagorno-Karabakh region has only intensified in recent days, with both sides accusing the other of targeting urban enclaves and civilian areas. Nagorno-Karabakh is internationally recognized as Azerbaijani territory but controlled by ethnic Armenian separatists. Azerbaijan's President, Ilham Aliyev, said on Sunday that his forces would not back down until they reclaimed land seized by ethnic Armenians three decades ago. The clashes, which began in late September, are the most intense confrontation in the South Caucasus (where Armenia and Azerbaijan are located) since the sides fought a years-long war in the 1990s that killed 30,000 people and displaced more than a million. The latest escalation suggests positions are hardening on both sides, and that the conflict — which has drawn in outside players including Russia and Turkey — will only intensify in the weeks ahead.
The world leaders who love Trump
Donald Trump's presidency has irked a lot of people around the world. And in fairness, that's no surprise. He was elected in part to blow up long-standing assumptions about how international politics, trade, and diplomatic relations are supposed to work.
But while he has correctly identified some big challenges — adapting NATO to the 21st century, managing a more assertive China, or ending America's endless wars in Afghanistan and Iraq — his impulsive style, along with his restrictions on trade and immigration, have alienated many world leaders. Global polls show that favorable views of the US have plummeted to all-time lows in many countries, particularly among traditional American allies in Europe.
And yet, there are many world leaders who have gotten a lot out of his presidency — in ideological support or specific policies — and who won't be happy if he loses in November. Let's visit some of Trump's highest-profile fans.
Brazil. In 2018, an obscure, far-right lawmaker named Jair Bolsonaro swept to power with a brand of provocative anti-establishment politics so similar to the US president's that he earned the nickname "Trump of the Tropics." What's more, Trump's disdain for environmental regulation has helped Bolsonaro to avoid wider global censure for encouraging Amazon deforestation. But just as Trump's victory helped to legitimize rightwing populism around the globe, says Brazilian commentator Guga Chacra, Trump's loss could hurt Bolsonaro's own re-election bid for 2022.
The illiberal Europeans. Much of Western Europe is fed up with Trump, but the avowedly "illiberal" rightwing nationalist governments in Poland and Hungary are fervent admirers. When Polish President Andrzej Duda was on the verge of losing re-election this summer, he made a beeline for the White House for a photo-op that probably helped him to a narrow win. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, meanwhile, has already openly endorsed Trump for re-election.
Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has bet big on the Trump administration, and it's paid off. No American president in recent memory has been as accommodating to Israel's aims — whether in recognizing its control of the Golan Heights, walking out of the Iran nuclear deal, moving the US embassy to Jerusalem, or brokering the normalization of ties with the UAE and Bahrain. As a result, Trump is hugely popular with Israelis, and he featured prominently in Bibi's own re-election campaign this summer. Netanyahu now faces growing protests — along with lingering graft charges – and he can ill-afford to see Trump fall from power, Tel Aviv-based commentator Neri Zilber recently told us.
India. New Delhi has been very, very pleased with one particular aspect of Trump's policy: his hard line on China. India has had testy ties with Beijing over the years, and they are getting worse as the two countries now jockey for 21st century Asian supremacy. So while previous US administrations had talked a big game on China but then gone soft behind closed doors, Trump, says Pramit Pal Chaudhuri of the Hindustan Times, "was willing to break China."
Russia. When Trump won in 2016, Russian lawmakers popped champagne. Four years later, the bilateral relationship is as toxic as ever — the US has imposed more sanctions while walking out of arms control treaties that Moscow wants to renegotiate. Still, Trump has been great for Vladimir Putin in a more general sense: Trump's view is that international politics is about transactions rather than values and he thinks America has no business playing global policeman. All of that lines up nicely with Putin's vision of a multipolar world in which US power is significantly diminished. If Trump loses, Putin would have to contend with a more traditional internationalist president in Joe Biden.
But let's be serious: what Putin probably wants most, whoever ultimately wins, is a disputed election that further undermines confidence in American democracy.
Want to know more about how the world sees the US election? Check out our entire project on it — interviews with locals in 24 different countries — here!