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 }}
Odds of NATO-Russia war rising
Russia's war in Ukraine has dramatically raised the odds of a direct confrontation with NATO due to Western sanctions against Moscow. Russia now considers NATO to be its enemy, and vice versa, former US Ambassador to NATO Ivo Daalder tells Ian Bremmer on GZERO World. In fact, Daalder explains, Russian military aggression is a very real and present danger.
That makes the current situation in some ways even worse than during the Cold War, when the United States and Soviet Union tried to find ways to coexist and set up arms control agreements.
But now all of that is gone. Russia has even walked away from New Start, the last nuclear weapons treaty between Washington and Moscow.For Daalder, who is also the president of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, the possibility of all-out war between the world's two nuclear superpowers is the highest it's been since the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.
Watch the full interview on an upcoming episode of GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, airing on US public television nationwide. Check local listings.
- What We’re Watching: NATO members’ defense budgets, Social Security as a political weapon, China’s support for Sri Lanka ›
- What happens if Russia nukes Ukraine? ›
- Cuban Missile Crisis turns 60 ›
- How close are we to a second Cuban Missile Crisis? ›
- Podcast: NATO’s Russia problem: the increasing danger of military confrontation between nuclear powers - GZERO Media ›
- Russia vs. NATO: Heightened risk of war - GZERO Media ›
US President Joe Biden delivers a speech in Warsaw, Poland on February 21, 2023.
What We’re Watching: Fiery rhetoric and a Ukraine “peace plan,” Israel’s economy v. judicial reforms, SCOTUS social media cases
Dueling speeches on Ukraine
A lot of players (and potential players) in the war on Ukraine have used the looming one-year anniversary of the invasion to position themselves for the months ahead. On Monday, President Vladimir Putin used his annual state of the nation address to insist that Russia would continue to fight a war he blames on Western aggression, and he announced that Russia would suspend participation in the New START nuclear arms control treaty, which binds Russia and the United States to limit their strategic nuclear stockpiles and to share information and access to weapons facilities. (Note: Inspections have already been suspended for more than a year, and Russia is in no position to finance a new arms race.) President Joe Biden, meanwhile, followed up his surprise visit with Volodymyr Zelensky in Kyiv by meeting in Warsaw with Polish President Andrzej Duda and asserting during a speech that “Appetites of the autocrat cannot be appeased. They must be opposed. Autocrats only understand one word: no, no, no.” In listing what he called Russia’s “atrocities,” he said its forces have “targeted civilians with death and destruction; used rape as a weapon of war… stolen Ukrainian children in an attempt to steal Ukraine's future, bombed train stations, maternity hospitals, schools and orphanages.” Chinese President Xi Jinping is expected to make news on Friday with a speech of his own in which he’ll lay out the specifics of a peace plan which, given the distance between the Russian and Ukrainian positions, has virtually no chance of success. The war grinds on.
Israel’s shekel drops amid judicial shakeup
A day after the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, passed the first stage of a bill reforming the judicial system, Israel’s currency, the shekel, dropped 2% against the greenback – the lowest value against the US dollar since 2020. Making matters worse, depreciation of the currency comes as the country is already grappling with sky-high inflation, with the central bank recently raising interest rates for the eighth time in less than a year. For weeks, Israeli bankers and business leaders have warned that Netanyahu government’s proposed changes to the judiciary, which include stripping the power of the High Court to override government legislation, would make the country less attractive for direct foreign investment. Indeed, HSBC – the world’s fourth largest bank – recently sent a letter to investors saying that the proposed reforms would harm both foreign investment and capital markets in Israel. This comes as a new poll found that 17% of Israelis are thinking about taking their savings out of Israel. Netanyahu and his right-wing cabinet say they aren’t backing down, but will that change if Israel’s economy continues to suffer and protesters continue to shout?
SCOTUS appears hesitant to crack down on social platforms
On Tuesday, the US Supreme Court began considering whether social platforms can be held responsible for harmful content promoted by their algorithms in Gonzalez v. Google, one of two cases the justices are hearing this week that may affect how social media platforms moderate content. But the justices made clear that they are unlikely to issue a sweeping decision limiting protections for YouTube, a Google subsidiary, any time soon, indicating that drawing the line on regulation is a slippery slope that should be considered by Congress. Some quick background: This case was brought by the family of Nohemi Gonzalez, a 23-year-old exchange student killed in an ISIS attack in November 2015 in Paris that also targeted the Bataclan theater. They argue that YouTube used data it collected on its users to push ISIS-related content to interested parties. At the crux of the legal battle is whether algorithms, which affect almost every online interaction, are legally protected under Section 230, a 1996 provision that says interactive service providers are not legally considered publishers of information posted by users on their sites. Both Republicans and Democrats have criticized the provision for different reasons, but efforts to revise it have stalled in Congress. Google, for its part, argues that it is legally absolved from content promoted on its platforms as it is not a publisher. The debate continues Wednesday when the Supreme Court will hear another case, Twitter v. Taamneh, looking at whether social platforms can be liable for aiding and abetting acts of international terrorism.
China to shake up Russia-Ukraine war
Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on World In :60.
How big of a deal is Russia pulling out of New START?
Well, this is of course is the nuclear agreement that the Americans and others have already been accusing the Russians not of being in compliance with. The nature, of course, of the US-Russia relationship right now is completely broken. There's no high level engagement or diplomacy. It is notable that Putin said in his annual State of the Union speech, the one that he essentially canceled last year, that he is suspending Russian participation in START, but not withdrawing. I don't think it's a nothingburger. I think it matters because generally nuclear temperatures have been going up over the past months, but this is not a particularly large issue.
Is China's potential support of Russia in Ukraine a "red line" for the West?
Yes, this is a much bigger issue. We are talking about a peace deal that the Chinese are saying that they're going to announce in short order. President Xi planning a big speech on February 24th, which is the one-year anniversary of the Russian invasion. That's unprecedented for China to suddenly be taking a leadership role, a public leadership role, on an issue that is not of primary national security concern to the Chinese self.
It's not Taiwan, not South China Sea. It's not their backyard. It's between two major combatants, the Russians, the Ukrainians, the Americans, and NATO, of course, being involved by proxy. I think it's a very big deal. If the Chinese were not just to go ahead with their peace deal, which will be seen as performative and won't get any traction from NATO or from Ukraine, but actually do provide weapons to the Russians, we will see secondary sanctions from the West. And the Europeans will not like that, so it could put a lot of pressure on the coalition's unity. We'll see pressure to escalate the weapon systems that the West is putting in place. We'll also see real challenges in US-China relations directly. Secondary sanctions against the Chinese from the US is almost certain, as I said.
Turkey is still facing humanitarian crisis as aftershocks continue to hit the region, are they receiving enough aid?
Another six Turks dead from new aftershocks just in the past hours. They said they need $1.4 billion in immediate support. Total amount committed so far looks to be less than 20% of that. Been a big outpouring internationally, lots of countries participating. That certainly helps in terms of Turkey's geopolitical position. But in terms of helping the people on the ground and quick reconstruction, making the rescue effort works, no, it's not where it should be and that's unfortunate. And almost 50,000 Turks already known to be dead from that devastating, devastating earthquake. The pictures, the videos, have just been absolutely horrifying.
- Can China lead on Russia/Ukraine peace? ›
- China’s place in the war in Ukraine ›
- What We’re Watching: Putin blames the West, China in Ukraine war, Sunak close to Northern Ireland deal ›
- Hard Numbers: Another quake in Turkey, debt interest payments up ... ›
- One year in: Ukraine war will last as long as Putin is in power - GZERO Media ›
- NATO unity & how to end war in Ukraine - GZERO Media ›
- Russian Black Sea Fleet commander still alive despite Ukraine's claims - GZERO Media ›
Quick Take: President Biden's first week
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take (part 1):
Ian Bremmer here, happy Monday. And have your Quick Take to start off the week.
Maybe start off with Biden because now President Biden has had a week, almost a week, right? How was it? How's he doing? Well, for the first week, I would say pretty good. Not exceptional, but not bad, not bad. Normal. I know everyone's excited that there's normalcy. We will not be excited there's normalcy when crises start hitting and when life gets harder and we are still in the middle of a horrible pandemic and he has to respond to it. But for the first week, it was okay.
To start, thank God that the inauguration itself was smooth. And that indeed, the biggest takeaway from the inauguration is that we can all meme Bernie Sanders, the people's meme for months, apparently, maybe for years. That's something the United States probably needed after four years of just their head exploding with things that were only meme-able in ways that upset people. This is something that can bring people together, but it's not a serious issue. Serious issue is that that was not violence. The serious issue is that there were not violent protests, there were not massive demonstrations. It wasn't disruptive. It was horrible to see 26,000 members of the National Guard protecting the inauguration and all the ceremonies around it. But I was still very glad to see that in all of the state capitals and everywhere people were so worried. In fact, the only major violence that we had from a demonstration perspective was not on the far right, it was the far left and Antifa in Portland, largely broken up with arrest and some violence, but that was it for the whole week. And given the events of January 6th to have gotten that far in two weeks is a positive thing.
As far as Biden's actions, the initial executive orders were pretty consistent with what we had grown to expect coming into the Paris Climate Accord is as much of a layup as one can possibly have in foreign policy. Every other country in the world opposed the US leaving the Paris climate accord, very easy for Biden to rejoin and quite popular, actually a strong majority of Americans support it, including a decent number on the right. The willingness to recommit to the World Health Organization in the middle of a pandemic also should be a no brainer and indeed, that's what they've done. The fact that they will find a few billion dollars to get the Americans involved in COVAX to provide vaccines for low and middle income countries. Certainly, a positive from my perspective, the kind of leadership you'd want to see from the US. You don't want to only see the Chinese taking the lead, the Indians taking the lead and providing vaccines internationally. You want the Americans doing more.
I liked the idea of going to the Russians offering a five-year extension of the START nuclear arms deal. No, we don't trust each other. No, we don't like each other, but there's still areas we need to work together. And avoiding mutually assured destruction strikes me as pretty much the top of that list. And the Russians initially, at least the response has been reasonably positive. Won't stop there from being additional sanctions from the US because of the Navalny arrest and the thousands of arrests and I'll talk about that in a second. Beyond that, in terms of the initial phone calls, Biden foreign leaders starts with Canada, Mexico, and the UK, the three countries that truly have no choice, but the United States. The closest, most interdependent relations with the United States among major economies in the appropriate order, Canada, Mexico, and the United Kingdom. They all went extremely well and there was nothing particularly surprising or uncertain around it.
Then French President Emmanuel Macron. And I am sure if I have missed it in the last couple of hours of call it, the German Chancellor and the Japanese Prime Minister should be following in very short order. That's again, as close to normalcy in terms of foreign policy as one can get. There's really a message being sent that this is business as you remember it, it's business as usual, it's business as we saw under Obama and Biden. That's again, given the level of volatility and the indifference to foreign actors. When you put forward America first as your brand, that's not hard to do, but let's keep in mind that under Obama and Biden, the United States was criticized as leading from behind, was losing influence internationally. And so, the honeymoon, I think with this Biden approach, if it is meant to be consistent with Obama, Biden is probably going to be pretty short and won't get them as far as they would like it to get.
Didn't get himself in trouble on Iran. I thought that was positive. Certainly, there are a lot of potential critics saying he just wants to get back into the Iranian nuclear deal with no changes, and they're not going there and they're not biting. Despite the fact the Iranian foreign minister said, "Let's meet now." And the fact that the Iranians are also starting to enrich at higher percentage, their uranium, which means moving closer to a nuclear breakout capabilities on weapons. That's a big deal, but they have to be cautious. It shouldn't be seen as the top priority. And it's not so far, I give them pretty good marks on that. The 1.9 trillion, this is the big issue, of course, domestic issue is how do you respond to the further relief, which is required so many small and medium businesses, for so many members of the working class, for so many unemployed in the United States?
I do believe that they will get close to that number. It will be over 1.5 trillion, it'll happen by April, even though it probably will have very bipartisanship in the House and Senate, that's okay. It's better than governing in every way by executive order, but it just shows how divided the United States is in this period of maximum crisis. A place where I'd be much more critical was on the 100 million vaccines, the rollout in the first 100 days. The criticism that there was no Trump plan, but the fact is that by the end of the Trump administration, you had 940,000 vaccines being delivered on average every day. You're saying over three months, you can't get any better than that? That implies that you're not coming in with a plan. And they've had months to put a plan together. I suspect this is under promise and try to over-deliver.
And it's also, they don't necessarily have a great plan together yet. And that's a place that we're going to watch very carefully, but the Americans should do better over the coming months, and the Americans should be careful about over criticizing operation Warp Speed and vaccine rollout under the Trump administration. Lots of places where the Trump administration failed, vaccines, in my view, not one of them, certainly in terms of initial production and distribution at the federal level. At the state level is a different story. But the state level is going to be a problem for Biden going forward too. The US is a federal system.
And then finally the fact that Biden hasn't weighed in particularly on impeachment, probably smart, because impeachment is not going to lead to conviction in the Senate. That feels pretty clear at this point. I hate to say this, but as bad as January 6th was, it wasn't enough of a crisis to make people respond to it. It was normalized by certainly most Republicans and even some Democrats who were saying, "Look, we just want to move on and start governing again." And that means politics of obstruction. It means divisiveness. It means Trump's not president anymore. So, let's not deal with that. But it also means there were no consequences for the actions that were taken, and I think that's a really big problem. So anyway, that's kind of where we are.
Quick Take, Part 2: Pro-Navalny Russian protests & Putin; AMLO's COVID Diagnosis
Ian Bremmer: Pro-Navalny Russian Protests & Putin | AMLO COVID Diagnosis | Quick Take | GZERO Mediayoutu.be
Russian opposition leader Navalny in jail. Hundreds of thousands demonstrating across the country in Russia over well over 100 cities, well over 3000 arrested. And Putin responding by saying that this video that was put out that showed what Navalny said was Putin's palace that costs well over a billion dollars to create and Putin, I got to say, usually he doesn't respond to this stuff very quickly. Looked a little defensive, said didn't really watch it, saw some of it, but it definitely wasn't owned by him or owned by his relatives.
And in the investigation itself, it said it was actually in a holding company by people linked to the Kremlin as opposed to Putin himself. But the hundred million people that have watched it, don't find Putin very credible on this. The interesting thing is the Kremlin clearly sees Navalny as a threat. They're responding in a more defensive way than I've seen the Kremlin respond to really anything since Putin has been president on the domestic front. And I don't know if that means that they can't kill him while he's under detention or whether they feel like they have to. Certainly, it makes it much harder for them to let him go. I think it makes it more likely that he's detained for a longer period of time or he's convicted of some ginned-up crimes. But the influence that he has across the country is actually growing.
And that probably means a harder fist from the Russians in the kind of response to local opposition. Keep in mind the economy's not doing very well. Nobody's is, but Russia's in particular right now, and Putin's approval ratings are not what they were when he first annexed Crimea for example.
Final point Mexico, you may have seen the news, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, the president has contracted COVID. So many world leaders have come down with it. Even with the most extraordinary capacity to try to protect these people, coronavirus is incredibly transmissible. And a lot of these leaders in the governments aren't taking it as seriously as they should. That certainly is true of the Mexican president or the Brazilian president or the American president or the UK prime minister. All of whom have gotten coronavirus, though, I would say the French president's taken it quite seriously and he still got it.
But specifically in Mexico, this is important because Lopez Obrador himself controls so much of the decision-making in the country. There's no real functioning cabinet in Mexico, it's all the Mexican president. And the direction and the details of policy in Mexico are not about his ministers, it's about him. So, if Trump had been incapacitated for a few weeks, it wouldn't have much impact on American policy. He didn't do it.
In Brazil, same thing. All the economic policy was largely given to the key ministers Bolsonaro Doesn't really understand economic policy. In Mexico, whatever you think of Lopez Obrador, he's doing it. And so if he's laid up for a long time or in the worst case, if he dies, this is actually going to be a really significant problem for the Mexican government, where there is no obvious successor and very little capacity for governance outside of the Mexican president himself. Let's keep in mind, he's 67 years old. He had a heart attack in 2013 and supposedly suffers from hypertension. So, you put all that together, this is actually something to watch. He gets the best medical care of anybody in Mexico, but it's still something to be concerned about and I suspect we're going to see market reaction to that.
So that's a little bit from me, hope everyone is safe. Please avoid people. Be good and I will see you real soon.