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 }}
Are we entering a new era of nuclear weapons testing?
President Trump misinterpreted Vladimir Putin’s comments about nuclear-powered weapons; he reportedly ordered preparations to test US nuclear weapons, sparking Russia and North Korea to signal they might do the same.
Bildt explains how this confusion could reverse 35 years of progress in limiting nuclear tests and destabilize an already volatile world on GZERO Europe.
US President Donald Trump and Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orbán shake hands as they pose for a photo, at a world leaders' summit on ending the Gaza war, amid a US-brokered prisoner-hostage swap and ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, on October 13, 2025.
What We’re Watching: Orbán seeks Russian oil carveout from Trump, Nigerien uranium to pass through risky area, Israel hits southern Lebanon
MAGA’s European hero comes to Washington – with a mission
Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán will visit the White House today to try to convince US President Donald Trump to allow him to continue purchasing Russian oil despite new US sanctions on Russia’s two largest oil firms. Oil refineries in China and India – the largest two buyers of Russian oil – are already exploring alternatives. But Orbán is hoping he can leverage his personal and ideological connection to Trump to gain a carveout. Landlocked Hungary relies on Russian pipelines for nearly 90% of its oil, though other non-Russian import routes via the Balkans are also possible. With the opposition surging ahead of next April’s election, there’s a lot on the line for Orbán. Will Trump give his mate a favor, or put his foot down?
Will Nigerien uranium reach Russia?
French officials believe Russian nuclear giant Rosatom struck a $170-million deal with the ruling military junta in Niger to purchase 1,000 tons of uranium from a mine formerly run by a French firm. The reported deal is the latest sign of Russia’s growing influence in the region, at the expense of the former colonial power, France. The greater concern with this purchase, though, could be that the uranium will have to pass through areas of Burkina Faso that are controlled by jihadist groups. Islamist militants are gaining momentum in West Africa – they have the Malian capital surrounded – sparking concern among governments in the region.
Israel attacks southern Lebanon
Israel temporarily breached its ceasefire deal with Lebanon on Thursday, issuing evacuation orders before bombing buildings in southern Lebanon it claimed were a part of Hezbollah’s military infrastructure. One person was killed and three were injured, per media reports. The Israeli military said the strikes were due to Hezbollah rebuilding its military capabilities, despite the Lebanese government agreeing to disarm the group. Fears are rising in Lebanon that Israel may resume major airstrikes if Hezbollah doesn’t give up its weapons soon, but Lebanon's government worries about inflaming local tensions if they push Hezbollah too aggressively.
Argentina's President Javier Milei gestures after the La Libertad Avanza party won the midterm election, which is seen as crucial for Milei's administration after US President Donald Trump warned that future support for Argentina would depend on Milei's party performing well in the vote, in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on October 26, 2025.
What We’re Watching: Milei sticks to his guns, Putin gets ready to test, Central Asia comes to Washington
Argentina’s Milei says no float just yet
Argentine President Javier Milei says he still won’t float the peso freely, signaling he’ll continue to spend his country’s central bank reserves to artificially manage the exchange rate until the 2027 presidential election. Why is that a big deal? Just last month, ahead of the midterm elections, Milei got $2 billion from the United States – as well as a $20 billion credit line – to shore up dwindling reserves. Keeping the currency strong is part of his broader effort to bring down inflation, which includes taking a chainsaw to government spending. But investors expected that after the midterms – which he won handily – he’d move in a more market- friendly direction, letting the peso float. So much for that. If the policy puts reserves in danger again, will the self-styled “anarcho-capitalist” president get another bailout from Tío Sam?
Putin signals he’s ready to match any new US nuclear tests
Just days after US President Donald Trump announced that the Pentagon would resume nuclear testing – without going into some key details – Russian President Vladimir Putin signaled he is ready to do the same, asking members of his security council yesterday for proposals. Neither country has tested a nuclear warhead in decades, although both still test and maintain delivery systems such as rockets and missiles. A return to actual warhead testing could provoke a dangerous new arms race at a time when arms control agreements are already withering fast. For more, see our recent report here.
The ‘stans come to stan Trump
The leaders of the five Central Asian republics – can you name them? – will meet with Trump at the White House today. Russia has long dominated the resource-rich former-Soviet region, but China has made significant commercial inroads in recent years. Trump is seeking greater US access to critical minerals and other resources there, while the Central Asians – wary of both Russian intentions and China’s heft – are keen to diversify their economic and security ties. (Btw, the five are: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Did you get ‘em all?)
October 21, 2025: The owner of this cattle feedlot in Sergeant Bluff, Iowa, USA, used to fly a Trump/Vance flag. The Trump/Vance flag is no longer flying at the feedlot.
Farmers feel the impact of Trump’s trade policies
These days, US farmers aren’t just worried about the weather jeopardizing their harvests. They’re keeping a close eye on geopolitical storms as well.
The American agricultural industry exports roughly 20% of its production, making it heavily reliant on global trade. This year, China – the third biggest buyer of US agriculture – has drastically cut back orders in response to President Donald Trump’s tariffs. While China agreed to resume buying soybeans, a major import crop, after meeting with Trump at the ASEAN summit last week, it has not bought any US corn, wheat, sorghum, or soybeans so far this year. Accordingly, the USDA projects that American agricultural exports to China will fall 30% compared to last year, to $17 billion. That’s down more than 50% since 2022.
“There’s uncertainty in the markets,” Farm Bureau economist Dr. Faith Parum explains. “Farmers are making decisions now for next year, unsure of where the markets are for what they planted this year.”
Parum says she is “optimistic” about the trade deals Trump made with Southeast Asian countries at the ASEAN summit last week, as Malaysia, Cambodia, and Vietnam all opened up to more US exports. The region is now the fastest-growing export market for US agriculture, with over $12 billion in products shipped there last year.
But the US-China trade tensions come at a bad time for many farmers. Despite a record corn harvest this year, many US growers are losing more than $100 an acre, according to Parum, squeezed between falling crop prices, a result of losing their major buyer, and rising production costs. Parum says production costs, like fertilizer, transportation, and labor, have increased over the past few years. Fertilizer prices have not stabilized since Russia’s full scale invasion of Ukraine, and have risen since July because of China limiting exports. Meanwhile, immigration crackdowns have caused the price of farm labor to go up.
From 2020 to 2022, 61% of the hired farm workers were immigrants, and only 7% were US born – the rest were immigrants who had obtained US citizenship. As a result, according to Eurasia Group US policy expert Noah Daponte-Smith, “A lot of [workers] are losing their authorization to work or being deported outright. And that is creating labor market pressures in the food supply chain that are pushing prices up.”
“[Immigration] is one of these issues where administration policy counteracts other policies, namely: keeping food prices down,” Daponte-Smith added.
This tension can also be seen in the meat aisle. Beef prices are at record highs due to droughts which have shrunk herd sizes. Trump’s solution was to quadruple imports of Argentine beef. The deal gave Argentine President Javier Milei, an ideological ally of Trump’s, a lifeline ahead of midterm election but enraged US beef producers who were suddenly subjected to more foreign competition. The pushback was immediate, prompting Vice President JD Vance to hold a private meeting with lawmakers from leading agricultural states to hear out their grievances.
There’s a political component to this: America’s agriculture industry is disproportionately consolidated in Republican led-states like Iowa, Texas, and Nebraska, and farmers are an “ancestral” contingent of the GOP, says Daponte-Smith. Republicans have a 25-point advantage over the Democratic party in rural areas of the country, according to Pew Research Center.
“Trump’s between a rock and a hard place,” says Daponte-Smith. “The administration campaigned on an anti-inflation message, but his efforts to bring prices down anger a core Republican constituency.”
Yet farmers remain optimistic about the country’s direction, according to Purdue University, with 71% saying the US is “headed in the right direction.” However, confidence in tariffs has declined: only 51% now believe tariffs will strengthen the agricultural economy, down from 70% in spring. Meanwhile, 30% think tariffs will weaken it.
Politically, Trump appears to be moving quickly to neutralize the farm backlash, offering farmers a multibillion dollar financial support package drawn from tariff revenues.
“They don’t want this to be happening next August,” says Daponte-Smith. “That’s when it really could be an issue.”
America’s “buy now, pay later” trap
The United States is #winning.
At least that’s how it looks if you’re tracking the economy, market indices, or the parade of countries lining up to cut deals with President Donald Trump. Asian and Gulf countries have pledged trillions of dollars in foreign direct investment in the US during the Trump presidency. The United Kingdom, the European Union, and several Southeast Asian nations have offered non-reciprocal trade deals. Canada folded on its plan to impose a digital services tax. Japan made unilateral concessions on automotive tariffs and Nippon Steel. European pharmaceutical companies are relocating production stateside to avoid punitive tariffs. Consumer confidence may be in the doldrums, but spending remains resilient (driven by the wealthiest Americans). Combined with an artificial intelligence spending boom and massive deficit spending – enabled by the dollar’s ongoing status as the global reserve currency – markets continue betting on American liquidity and growth.
It’s a heady moment. But while the short-term picture looks strong, the United States is systematically trading long-term strategic advantages for immediate tactical gains, with the accumulating costs hiding in plain sight.
Start with immigration. For decades, the cornerstone of America’s technological, economic, and soft-power dominance has been its ability to attract the best and brightest from around the world. Talented engineers, scientists, and entrepreneurs long chose the US because it promised opportunity, freedom, openness, and meritocracy – a fair shot at the American Dream. Now, the welcome mat is fraying. The Trump administration is increasingly hostile to immigrants (whether legal or illegal, skilled or unskilled), nativist sentiment among Americans is growing, and civil liberties (especially for non-white immigrants) feel increasingly uncertain. The numbers speak for themselves: International student arrivals to the US have declined by nearly 20% relative to last year. Meanwhile, China is rolling out new visas explicitly designed to poach high-skilled workers from the United States, and Canada is plastering airports with recruitment pitches. As America becomes a less attractive destination for top global talent relative to its competitors, the long-term economic damage will compound.
Then there are the universities. Yes, many humanities departments had grown intellectually insular and politically captured. Taking on these echo chambers for fringe woke ideology was long overdue. But the Trump administration has gone much further, slashing research infrastructure at America’s (and the world’s) finest universities. These institutions are what keep America at the cutting edge of advanced science and technology and draw the most talented students globally – the ones who become tomorrow’s leading researchers, inventors, and entrepreneurs. Undermining that ecosystem will erode one of the most important pillars of the US economy at a time when public trust in science itself is declining. Growing vaccine skepticism, embrace of conspiracy theories, reflexive rejection of expertise – these aren’t just cultural quirks, they’re a structural disadvantage when competing against countries where faith in science remains strong. They’re making Americans less capable of driving the next wave of technological advances, and therefore less likely to dominate the commanding heights of the world economy and geopolitics.
Consider artificial intelligence. The United States is racing ahead in consumer-facing AI – chatbots, engagement-maximizing social media algorithms, generative tools to produce yet-more-addictive slop, ever-larger language models that claim to be one step closer to superintelligence – because that’s where the money is. But these technologies are also fragmenting society, amplifying misinformation, and possibly contributing to a kind of collective psychosis. China, by contrast, has channeled AI development away from consumer applications in favor of defense and industrial uses, which carry less risk of social fragmentation and more strategic upside.
It’s a similar story when it comes to energy. The United States has become the world’s most powerful petrostate, producing more oil, gas, and coal than any other country. That’s not inherently a problem – fossil fuels will continue to power data centers, agriculture, and heavy industry for decades to come. But the US has effectively ceded leadership on post-carbon energy to China, which already dominates battery technology, solar power, next-generation nuclear, and supply chains for critical minerals. Washington is doubling down on hydrocarbons while letting the future of energy pass it by.
Or take trade policy. The Trump administration is imposing the highest US tariffs in a century – including on major allies, on countries with no bilateral trade imbalances, and on sectors where America lacks capacity to ramp up domestic production quickly enough to avoid shortages or inflation. Following Trump’s Oct. 30 meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping – which put escalation on hold for a year and lowered fentanyl tariffs on China from 20% to 10% in exchange for politically-sensitive soybean purchases – the effective US tariff rate on Chinese imports now sits at 32%, close to the rate on ASEAN countries and lower than on its strategic partner India and South America’s largest economy, Brazil, which actually runs a trade surplus with the United States.
The cumulative result is a roughly 17% regressive tax on American businesses and consumers, which are forced to pay more for intermediate inputs and final goods. Paired with a sharp turn toward industrial policy and state capitalism, the US is moving away from the free-market principles that made its economy so competitive in the first place. Targeted government intervention in select sectors (e.g., semiconductors, banking) can sometimes be justified on specific grounds (e.g., national security, financial stability), but history shows that broad protectionism and state direction tend to make economies less, not more, dynamic over time.
This short-term thinking extends to geopolitics. As I wrote last week, most countries are prepared to give the US wins – some pyrrhic, some significant – to avoid open conflict. But these same countries are also working to ensure they’re never in that position again. The EU has finalized trade agreements with Mexico, Indonesia, and the South American trading bloc Mercosur. Brazil is deepening economic ties with Europe, China, and Canada. India is working to stabilize relations with China while accelerating infrastructure projects that reduce its dependence on US markets. Saudi Arabia has signed a nuclear deal with Pakistan to hedge against future security neglect from Washington.
These moves aren’t costless – they require years of political capital, billions in investment, and new institutional architecture. Once built, they’re hard to reverse. But countries have learned the hard way that US policy can change course every election cycle with little in the way of policy continuity or long-term strategic planning, and they’re building alternatives now while accommodating Washington in the short run. Every four years, there’s a 50/50 chance that everything – not just the winners and losers but the rules of the road – shifts. Gone are the days when politics ended at water’s edge. That structural volatility reduces American leverage over time, even as it delivers wins for the world’s largest economy.
So when asking whether the United States will retain its lead over its allies and adversaries, the answer depends on the time horizon. Short-term? Absolutely. America remains by far the world’s most powerful country, so there’s a lot of room for damage before structural decline sets in. Moreover, artificial intelligence is about to change everything, and the US is one of only two games in town (China being the other) and still the preferred partner for most of the West and parts of the Global South.
But long term, the trajectory is troubling. The historical advantages the United States enjoyed over its peers – better physical and institutional infrastructure, superior demographics driven partly by immigration, public tolerance for inequality undergirded by perception of meritocracy, greater capacity for deficit spending – are all heading in the wrong direction, arguably unsustainably so. China, despite being in a weaker overall position, is doing what it can to exploit these shifts. And while Beijing faces severe structural challenges of its own, it benefits from the increasingly accurate perception that it takes the long view while America chases the next election.
Perhaps most worrying is the one thing everyone in a deeply divided America now agrees on: that the country’s biggest threat is domestic. They just disagree on who that threat is. That kind of inward turn ensures the bulk of the national energy and focus will remain on fighting internecine political battles rather than making the deeper, patient investments – in people, institutions, research, and infrastructure – required to keep the United States competitive a generation from now.
America is giving up long-term leadership in exchange for short-term wins. The question isn’t whether the United States will pay for this addiction to immediate gratification. It's only when the bill will come due – and how much it will cost.
Democratic nominee for New York City mayor Zohran Mamdani getsures on stage after winning the 2025 New York City mayoral race, at an election night rally in the Brooklyn borough of New York City, New York, USA, on November 4, 2025.
Now the real work begins
By Zohran Mamdani’s own telling, his campaign for mayor began roughly a year ago, when he stood on a street corner in the Bronx, the New York City borough that is home to some of the country’s poorest and most diverse congressional districts – typically the backbone of the Democratic coalition – asking voters why they voted for US President Donald Trump.
Mamdani, a democratic socialist, interviewed them for his social media account. He listened – these voters were upset about rising costs. And so he focused his own campaign on affordability, pledging to make New York City, the capital of global finance, a more affordable place for the working poor and middle classes. It worked. Yesterday, the residents of the United States’ largest city elected him to be their mayor.
When he takes office on Jan. 1, the real work will begin – and there is much of it.
Mamdani has promised a lot. Among his campaign pledges are: free universal childcare, free bus services, and city-run grocery stores. He also wants to deploy mental health workers to work alongside police officers. He says he will freeze the rent for rent-stabilized homes as part of a bid to lower housing costs.
So how is Mamdani going to pay for this? He wants to raise taxes. Specifically, he wants to increase state corporate tax from 7.25% to 11.5%, and introduce a flat 2% tax on the 34,000 people in New York City who earn $1 million or more annually. He also wants to boost tax collection and reform procurement procedures. These policies, he says, will raise $10 billion, enough to pay for the $6-billion cost of universal childcare and the $800-million price tag of free bus rides.
To do that he will need to look beyond the city itself. Firstly, increasing the state corporate tax will require approval from the New York State Legislature and Gov. Kathy Hochul – this will be especially challenging with Hochul up for reelection next year. Secondly, the City Council as well as the State Legislature will have to approve the additional tax for those earning over a million. Finally, these measures will face major opposition from the city’s financial establishment, most of whom supported Mamdani’s main opponent, former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.
Then there’s another major issue in New York City: public safety. Mamdani’s rivals – including Cuomo – relentlessly tried to paint him as being soft-on-crime, highlighting his previous advocacy for defunding the police. Mamdani has also raised fears among some of the city’s million-plus Jewish residents, in part over his refusal to denounce the use of the term “Globalize the Intifada.” To alleviate some of these fears, Mamdani said he will keep Jessica Tisch, a widely-respected technocrat, as police commissioner, who has presided over a significant drop in crime since being appointed by outgoing Mayor Eric Adams last year.
The Trump challenge. Mamdani will immediately be in conflict with the president over a range of issues: immigration enforcement, infrastructure financing, and public safety. The president has several powerful tools at his disposal – he can cut infrastructure funding to the city, as he did for a proposed tunnel across the Hudson River, and could send in the National Guard to quell protests and arrest undocumented migrants.
Trump and Mamdani, both populist New Yorkers from radically opposite points of the political and generational spectrum, seem to openly want this confrontation.
“Donald Trump, since I know you’re watching, I have four words for you,” Mamdani said during his victory speech last night. “Turn the volume up.”
Trump responded on social media last night: “…AND SO IT BEGINS!”
Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro reacts after shooting an arrow during a rally on the Day of Indigenous Resistance, his first public appearance after opposition leader Maria Corina Machado was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, in Caracas, Venezuela, on October 12, 2025.
What We’re Watching: Venezuela clamps down on dissidents, Democrats celebrate election successes, Leading economist warns of triple bubble
Venezuela’s Maduro turns the screws as Trump ponders regime change
Amid intensifying US attacks on alleged Venezuela-linked drug trafficking boats in the Caribbean, Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro is cracking down on dissent at home. The largest US military buildup in the Caribbean in decades has raised concerns that US President Donald Trump may seek to knock Maduro out of power altogether. Maduro — who remains deeply unpopular after evidently rigging last year’s presidential election — has deployed loyalist vigilantes to police dissent and arrested dozens more critics. (For more on this see our latest “Debrief” with Eurasia Group’s Venezuela expert Risa Grais-Targow here.)
Democrats celebrate a good election night
As Democrats plot a path back to power in next year’s midterms, last night’s local election results give them much to chew over. First, voters in California authorized a redistricting that gives Dems a shot to overturn five GOP-held seats. Second, centrist Democrats comfortably won the gubernatorial races in New Jersey and Virginia, while voters in swing-state Pennsylvania re-elected three liberal state Supreme Court justices. A key factor in VA and NJ was that voters of color who had voted for Trump in 2024 swung back to the Democrats. Lastly, of course, democratic socialist Zohran Mamdani’s victory in the New York mayoral race will intensify internal party debates about whether to double down on centrism or populism.
Leading economist warns of three big bubbles
Is the world economy about to take a bubble bath? The head of the World Economic Forum has warned of three potentially crippling financial market bubbles: in crypto, in AI, and in public debt. If any of the three bursts — that is, if a critical mass of investors think they are overvalued and start a mass sell 0ff – we could be in for a world of hurt. Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon and JP Morgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon have both recently warned of a coming market correction. The WEF comments came amid a brief selloff yesterday in tech stocks over concerns about over-investment in AI.
Zohran Mamdani and America's political future
A Democratic Socialist, Mamdani’s rise signals a generational and ideological shift in American politics. “Mamdani represents an urban, educated, professional base,” Ian explains.
But unlike right-wing populism rooted in nationalism and manufacturing, this new movement stems from economic insecurity driven by AI disruption, stagnant hiring, and generational inequality.
The result, Ian says, is a wave of progressive populism the Democratic establishment isn’t prepared for and one Donald Trump hopes to exploit. “President Trump wants Mamdani to win as a foil, as someone he intends to go to war against… Mamdani is more politically expedient and useful.”