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 }}
Putin's strategy in Ukraine ahead of Trump's return
Putin has been warning them not to do that. They decided they were going to, the Russian response has been to formally change their nuclear doctrine so that they would be considered to be in a state of war legally against any country that allowed Ukraine to use their missiles against Russia. In other words, essentially, Russia is claiming that they're now at war with France, with the UK, with the United States. And also, the Russians used a medium range missile hypersonic nuclear capable directly against the Ukrainian target in Dnipro.
In other words, what we're seeing from Putin is, "I'm showing you what you're doing is moving towards World War III, and that's how I'm responding." Does that mean that Putin is actually escalating towards direct war with NATO allies? The answer to that is no. He wasn't doing that when he was losing the battle in Ukraine in the early months. He's certainly not doing it now that he's winning.
And he is winning. He has more troops on the front lines, including those from North Korea, those from Yemen, those that he's getting from other countries. Also, he's taking more territory on the ground in Ukraine at a faster pace now, more significant amounts of territory in Southeast Ukraine than at any point since the opening months of the war. Plus Trump is President-elect. Trump has said, "I want to end this war." And he is coming in just in a couple of months.
So what Putin is doing is not threatening World War III. He's instead showing off just how bad this Biden policy is, this existing NATO policy is. He's making it easier for Trump to pivot away and say, "I'm the peacemaker. We were heading towards World War III, this horrible escalation. I'm the guy that got the great deal done and look how brilliant I am." Putin is facilitating that.
Now, of course, to make that happen Trump still has to give Putin something that he wants. He has to give an outcome that is acceptable to Putin. And Putin's made clear, at least thus far, that he's not going to give up any territory that he has. That he's not prepared to accept that Ukraine would be able to join NATO. He's also said that Ukraine can't continue to have a functional armed forces which is something that would be completely unacceptable to Ukraine.
The devil's going to be in the details here. There clearly is an opportunity for Trump to end the war. He's promised he's going to end the war, and I think he can. I think he can create a ceasefire. The Ukrainian leadership has already made clear that they are supportive of ending the war, but they're not just going to listen. There has to be a back and forth conversation with the Americans. Seeing what it is that Trump is prepared to put forward, and whether or not the Russians are capable of accepting it, are willing to accept it. Even though it will look like a win for Russia compared to where they would've been under Biden, under Harris, or at any other point in the last couple of years.
Still, if you are Putin, there is an open question. You're taking land right now. The Ukrainians don't have the people to continue to put up a strong defense. Why wouldn't you delay this out for another three, another six months? Take more land. Try to get all the territory that you have formally annexed over the course of the war. Why not settle the war on your terms? A lot easier to do if you're winning than losing. And the question there will be to what extent Trump is willing to cause material punishment to Putin if he doesn't say yes.
And that's an open question. Trump historically has been willing to take easy wins that don't necessarily play well over the long term. Look at Afghanistan. He wanted to get the Americans out. He cut a deal with the Taliban. It was a deal that was clearly very advantageous from a military and from a governance perspective for the Taliban than it was for the United States. He cut that despite the fact that the allies were not supportive or coordinating. That undermined the US deeply. Biden then continued with that plan. And it was one of the biggest losses that the US has experienced over the last four years.
Now, that of course, was a loss that ultimately fell on Biden. This would be a loss that would ultimately fall on Trump. And so does he want to risk that? That's a very interesting question. And of course, you also have to look at Trump's staff because he can make a phone call with Zelensky and with Putin, but ultimately, it is the secretary of state, the national security advisor and others that are going to have to work out the details of that agreement. And those people, at least thus far, are not people that are oriented towards giving away the store to Putin. They're people-oriented towards mistrust of Putin, towards a hard line against the Russians, towards support of Ukraine.
I am thinking here that number one, there's a reasonably high chance that Trump can get the win that he wants, but number two, this isn't likely to be a walk in the park for the Russian president. The Europeans need to play here as well. And what will be important, there's been a few formulated conversations thus far between President-elect Trump and some of the European leaders.
They haven't gone very far, but they've also not blown up the bilateral relationships. Their ability to work with Trump advisors on Trump, and on a greater coordination of what an ultimate solution or settlement of the Russian-Ukraine war would be, will make a dramatic difference as to what extent this is sustainable. To what extent this leads to not only Ukraine that can continue to defend itself and the territory that it is left with, but also can integrate into Europe, can be politically successful as a democracy over time. And that NATO will stay strong and stay together and stay aligned with the United States because they don't have another choice. There is no autonomous European military capacity. It's either NATO sticks together or it fragments.
Those are all things that we're going to watch very carefully over the course of the next couple months. But for now, an escalatory period. And it's all performative and it's all oriented towards what happens when Trump becomes president. That's it for me, and I'll talk to you all real soon.
How Trump forced Europe's hand on Ukraine
Trump’s return to power—amid global wars, strained alliances, and economic tensions—could radically reshape the world order. It threatens to deepen rifts with Europe, complicate Middle Eastern conflicts, and push US-China relations to a breaking point. That might not be a bad thing, according to Ian Bremmer. He breaks it down on Ian Explains.
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 (🔔).
Ukraine fires US missiles into Russia. What's next?
Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on World In :60.
Ukraine has launched US-made long-range missiles into Russia for the first time. Will this change the course of the war?
I don't think so. First of all, the reason the Americans were dragging their feet for so long is because they didn't believe it would have any strategic impact in the war to give that permissioning to the Ukrainians and they were worried that it might lead to Russian escalation. That escalation is less likely given that Trump has been elected and he's going to be in power in just a couple of months, so the Russians basically have to deal with it, and they'll probably end up hitting more Ukrainian sites in the next couple of months. But I don't think it's really going to help the Ukrainians. I don't think it's going to hurt the Russians that much. What I do think is that the Russians are more likely to give better weapons, more capable weapons, to the Houthis, for example. So, if the Americans are going to arm proxies better, then the Russians will arm proxies better, and that could lead to bigger problems in the Gulf.
How likely will Trump be able to carry out mass deportations when he's in office?
I think he will be capable. He certainly was elected in part on that intention, on that promise. This is something that Biden really did not pay attention to until way too late and he lost a lot of votes in blue cities where people felt like there were just far too many illegal immigrants and the costs were great, and the security concerns were real. And so, the fact that he says he's going to use the military, that's potentially a Supreme Court question, but especially when you talk about people that have committed crimes in the United States, why they should still be in the US is a very serious question. And I wouldn't be surprised at all if 300,000, 500,000 deported in the first year. In other words, a hell of a lot higher than you've seen under Biden. There will be an inflation cost there, but it's one that I don't think Trump is going to take a big hit for.
Will there be political fallout from Hong Kong's decision to jail pro-democracy activists?
Not really, because China has changed the national security law. They've completely integrated Hong Kong into the Chinese political system and the pro-democracy activists don't have anyone that's willing to support them, not the UK, not the United States. I mean, they're human rights organizations, and you'll see members of Congress on the Democrat and Republican side that'll complain about it, but they won't do anything. So on balance, I don't think it matters, and that means, or I should say, it doesn't matter for China, which means very little blowback.
- No, the US didn’t “provoke” the war in Ukraine ›
- Russia cares more about Ukraine than the US does ›
- US compared to Russia after tanking UN resolution on Gaza ›
- The future of war: James Stavridis on China, Russia, and the biggest security threats to the US ›
- Can the US stay ahead of Russia & China in the space race? ›
Russian President Vladimir Putin chairs a meeting on the situation in Belgorod, Kursk, and Bryansk regions following an incursion of Ukrainian troops, in August 2024.
Putin loosens the muzzle on Russia's nuclear weapons
Just hours after Ukraine fired US-made long-range missiles at a Russian target for the first time, Vladimir Putinsigned a new Kremlin nuclear doctrine that lowers the threshold for Moscow’s use of nukes. They’re now fair game as a response to a conventional weapons attack.
The timing of the signing is clear. The Kremlin has long warned that Ukraine using US long-rangers could provoke a major response and has made not-so-veiled threats to use tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine.
Will that happen? There are at least two ways to look at this, and both revolve around one consideration: In two months, Joe Biden will relinquish power to Donald Trump, who campaigned in part on a pledge to end the war in Ukraine.
One school of thought: Make chaos while the sun shines. Putin now has two months to escalate as much as he likes, knowing that the increased danger will only heighten pressure on Trump to push for a peace deal as soon as he takes office.
The other: If it ain’t broke, don’t nuke it. Putin is on a roll right now, advancing in eastern Ukraine while imported North Korean cannon fodder is handling Kyiv’s forces in Kursk, the Russian border region Ukraine has occupied since August. Why risk the international backlash over a nuclear strike now? Better to retaliate with “hybrid warfare” by arming anti-US proxies elsewhere, or messing with infrastructure in Europe (the mysterious “sabotage” of two Baltic Sea communications cables earlier this week shows the vulnerabilities). In other words, Putin has plenty of options for havoc that fall short of splitting the atom.
The wildcard: Ukraine’s aim. If Kyiv inflicts serious damage on Russia’s military capabilities, that could shape the Kremlin’s thinking. Either way, both sides likely see the next two months as a final act for this phase of the war. The race for leverage is on.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy is embraced by US President Joe Biden in the Oval Office back in September 2023.
Biden green-lights long-range missiles, Russia blasts Ukraine
US President Joe Biden reversed course on Sunday and authorized Ukraine to use US-made long-range ATACMS missiles for limited strikes inside Russia, in response to North Korea’s deployment of thousands of troops to aid Moscow. While hoping to deter Pyongyang from deeper involvement, Biden also wants to bolster Ukraine’s offensive capability before President-elect Donald Trump takes office and makes good on his pledge to cut American aid to Kyiv.
How might Moscow respond? According to Eurasia analyst Alex Brideau, Russian President Vladimir Putin may respond in kind. “Putin indicated over the summer that he would arm US adversaries in response to Western weapons being used on Russian territory. There have been subsequent reports this fall that Russia has offered some support to Houthis attacking shipping in the Red Sea,” Brideau says.
But if the missiles are used to fire deep into Russian territory, the Kremlin warned early Monday that it would see this as an attack from the US, not Ukraine, and said Biden was adding “oil to the fire” with this policy reversal.
Winter warning. Biden’s announcement also follows Russia’s launching of 120 missiles and 90 drones this weekend, its most intense offensive since September. The attacks targeted energy infrastructure across the country ahead of the cold winter months. While Ukrainian forces neutralized 144 of the projectiles, thermal energy plants suffered “significant damage,” resulting in emergency blackouts, and at least two people were killed and several others were injured, including two children. Although Ukraine’s nuclear plants were not directly hit, key electrical substations were. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, only two of Ukraine’s nine reactors are now operating at full capacity.
A response to Scholz? The Russian strikes come two days after German Chancellor Olaf Scholz called President Vladimir Putin for the first time in two years. Though Scholz urged Putin to withdraw his troops, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky slammed the call for opening a “Pandora’s box” that could undermine efforts to isolate Moscow.Firefighters work at the site where an industrial area was hit by a Russian missile strike in the Kyiv region on Nov. 13, 2024.
Russia fires on Kyiv
The attack also renewed fears that, with the approach of winter, Russia will again attack energy infrastructure targets in Ukraine to leave parts of the country without power or heat for extended periods. Ukraine’s state-owned national power company announced on Wednesday that new limits will be imposed on electrical supply for businesses in and around Kyiv and in the regions of Odesa, Dnipro, and Donetsk.
What Russia and North Korea gain from defense treaty
Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on World In :60.
North Korea ratified a major defense treaty with Russia. What do both sides hope to gain?
Well, the North Koreans really want mutual defense. They are helping the Russians out in their time of need, sending a whole bunch of troops, things that the North Koreans have in surplus and don't really value and the Russians can really use right now. And they would love to see Russian troops in North Korea. They'd love to see that appear as mutual defense and give the North Koreans a lot more leverage so they are not forced to be supplicants in Beijing, and they can also be more assertive versus South Korea, Japan, and others. This is a major escalation in this war and a big problem geopolitically.
The Russians, of course, are just looking for more troops, more ammunition, more ability to fight, and they are in a much, much stronger position to get terms that they want from the United States and from the Ukrainians. Especially now that the US has elected somebody that says he really, really wants to end the war. Putin will be like, "Okay, but here are the things that I need if you want me to end the war." Trump's incented to give him a lot more of those than almost anybody in NATO right now.
Japan's PM survived a rare parliamentary vote. How will he tackle the country's sluggish economy?
Well, he is saying that he's going to do a lot more stimulus, and so basically blow out the budget. Exactly, not where he has been historically. Japan's economy is pretty flat. Interest rates are close to zero, though they've been pushing them up a bit, historically surprising, recently. It's not like companies are all itching to get into Japan. Their demography is falling apart, and most people are pushing their production elsewhere, so including Japanese companies. So it's a real challenge, and Ishiba is going to be there maybe for a year. This is a very weak LDP coalition government.
What do I expect to come from COP29, the new climate summit happening in Baku?
Well, the Americans are attending with their knees cut off because Trump is going to be president in a couple months and he will pull the Americans out of the Paris Climate Accord once again. The trajectory on post-carbon investment and the prices coming down at scale for the Americans and for everyone in the world is already way too well-developed to pull back, and that's a good thing. But the US is going to be focused more on additional permitting and for oil and gas and production increases. Even beyond the record levels that they are right now under the Biden administration. They'll go further.
And so it's really, the Americans are going to be pretty marginalized at this summit, and the Chinese are driving the bus. They're producing a lot more coal, of course, but at the same time, they're also producing a hell of a lot more post-carbon renewables at global levels. In other words, China's doing at global scale what Texas is doing in the United States. And that is making them much more important as decision-makers.
Nobelist Oleksandra Matviichuk on Russia-Ukraine war reshaping world order
Matviichuk highlighted that Ukraine is confronting not just Russia but an entire authoritarian bloc, including Iran, China, North Korea, and Syria. "Ukraine is not a goal. Ukraine is a tool how to break international order," she stated, underscoring that the conflict represents a broader challenge to global democratic values.
When asked about the future of US support, particularly in light of Donald Trump's re-election, she expressed uncertainty but affirmed Ukraine's resolve: "We don't know what will be the policy of the next president's administration, but what we know for sure is that Ukrainians will continue our fight for freedom. We have no other choice."
This conversation was presented by GZERO in partnership with Microsoft at the 7th annual Paris Peace Forum. The Global Stage series convenes global leaders for critical debates on the geopolitical and technological trends shaping our world.
Follow GZERO coverage of the Paris Peace Forum here: https://www.gzeromedia.com/global-stage
- Many knew Putin wasn't bluffing, but not how far he'd go, says International Crisis Group’s Comfort Ero ›
- Is Ukraine running out of time? Former US ambassador Ivo Daalder sizes up the Russia-Ukraine war ›
- Czech president Petr Pavel: Ukraine war fatigue weakening NATO unity against Russia ›
- How Russian cyberwarfare could impact Ukraine & NATO response ›