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 }}
Why the US is sending aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: Hi, everybody. Ian Bremmer here. And a Quick Take to kick off your week. A big $90 billion package that has been approved by the US House of Representatives, going through the Senate shortly after months of debate and, all of the package, all three major pieces of it, have some significant, complicated features.
First of all, the biggest piece for Ukraine, $60 billion, massive military support.
They had been in danger of losing significant more territory. This certainly shores them up. It helps the Ukrainians. It makes the Europeans panic less, but, you know, can they longer term hold on? What is the end game? The Ukrainians are, of course, running short not just of material to fight, but also air defense capabilities and, critically, people, soldiers. It's much harder for them to get people for the front lines than it is for the authoritarian, and much larger populated Russia. And so, the intention is that the Ukrainians don't fall apart, but of course, longer term, the idea that the US will continue to be able to provide 60 billion in support year after year. Certainly not true if Trump becomes president, probably not true if Biden wins a second term. What you really want to do is try to find a way to get them in a better position so that negotiations, inevitably, that need to occur with Russia, can be more productive and more constructive from the Ukrainian side, from the European side, from the NATO side. The US kick the can on this last year when the Americans, were in much better position supporting Ukraine. Now it's harder. Always is the case is that you think that things are going to get better. You don't feel like taking the political risk and as a consequence you extend and pretend. And now they're in a worse position. So I'm glad that the money came through. I'm glad the Ukrainians, are still fighting courageously and want to fight courageously. But of course, longer term, this war leads to some degree of partition where the Ukrainians are losing their land.
Israel, closest ally of the United States in the Middle East. Some 17 billion in military support for Israel, also some 9 billion in humanitarian aid in Gaza in this plan.
But, of course, increasingly, the United States does not support Israel continuing to fight against Hamas in Gaza. They want to see a lot more protection for Palestinian civilians, which the Israelis have been reluctant to put in place. They don't want to see a ground offensive into Rafah. Over a million Palestinians shelter in there. The Israelis are fully intent on continuing with that, proceeding with it. They did want to see a cease-fire that was linked directly to a hostage release. Now, increasingly, the US is talking about those two things as critical but delinked. And at the same time as the US is providing all this money, you have sanctions being placed by the United States on battalions of the Israeli Defense Forces engaged in human rights violations. This shows just how impossible this position is for President Biden to maneuver domestically, not to mention internationally. The US is overwhelmingly, the one country that is most supportive of Israel. Biden is overwhelmingly the political leader that is most supportive of Israel. But most of his constituents are not. And this is absolutely going to hurt him, even though it's a foreign policy issue and they don't usually play that heavily in recent decades in the election coming up in November. And you’ll see it, of course, across campuses all over the country, including my own at Columbia.
And then finally Taiwan. And this is in a sense the least controversial, because everyone on the Democratic and Republican side pretty much supports more support for Taiwan, is opposed to China. It's very easy to get lots of legislation that makes life more difficult for China. At the same time, though, the long term strategy of the United States is to make Taiwan less important, less important for the Americans in making sure that semiconductor production, moves from Taiwan to the United States, to other allies, not just a few miles off of the mainland Chinese coast, but also export controls that prevent the Chinese from getting advanced semiconductors from Taiwan as well. In other words, the big US strategy is not just arming the Taiwanese and helping them defend themselves, but also making Taiwan fundamentally less important to mainland China. and one of the main reasons that the Chinese would not be interested in attacking Taiwan long term or squeezing them hard economically long term, is because they're so indispensable to the Chinese economy. This is not going to be the case long term.
In all three of these areas, you've got the United States with friends, but they are less aligned with strategically than they are tactically. And that means that this money that we see going forward is all about kicking the can on short term gains that make sense politically for the US right now. But long term do not resolve the challenges that exist for the US with these countries.
That's it for me and I'll talk to you all real soon.
- Tiktok ban and foreign aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan passes in the House ›
- Split the difference: Johnson to push separate bills for Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan ›
- Europe welcomes US Ukraine package, but pushes to add even more aid ›
- How the US election will change the world ›
- Biden vs Trump foreign policy: Political scientist Stephen Walt weighs in ›
- Ian Explains: Will foreign policy decide the 2024 US election? ›
U.S. Representative Don Beyer (D-VA) attends a news conference in the United States Capitol about the COVID-19 Hate Crimes Act, in Washington, U.S., May 18, 2021.
Rep. Don Beyer goes back to school
Rep. Don Beyer, a 73-year-old car dealership owner-turned-politician, is not your typical grad student. A Democrat who served as Virginia’s lieutenant governor in the 1990s and an ambassador during the Obama administration before getting elected to Congress in 2015, Beyer decided to go back to school in 2022 to pursue a master’s degree in machine learning at George Mason University.
Since then, Beyer has served as vice chair of the Congressional Artificial Intelligence Caucus and introduced a bill to provide transparency into the development of so-called foundation models.
GZERO spoke with Beyer about his studies, his concerns and hopes for the technology, and whether the US will catch up to Europe in regulating AI.
GZERO: Was there a specific moment when you realized that you were unprepared for the challenge of artificial intelligence and wanted to learn more? Why did you feel you needed to take the step of actually enrolling in a master’s program to get the education you needed?
Beyer: I was interested in AI long before I knew what it was that I was interested in, and this goes back a long time, to the early 1980s. I had read and heard several compelling discussions of the topic and got interested in pattern recognition and using technology and deep learning to make sense of big data sets. Going back to school arose first from opportunity, having a good school nearby that offered the coursework to finally tackle something that had interested me for a long time. I wasn’t sure it would work, but I have no regrets at all. And then part way through my course of study, it suddenly became a much bigger topic for the country and the Congress.
How have your professors and classmates reacted to having a sitting congressman in class?
Many of my classmates are unaware, which is just fine with me. Those who know have been tolerant and kind. I am just another student.
What are you learning in your classes?
Mostly math and coding, so far.
Do you feel more prepared to legislate around AI because of this education?
Yes, much more so. Even though I’m not a fully trained computer scientist, I at least have more than a generalist’s understanding of neural networks, large databases, the predictive and generative uses of computer science, and so on.
What are you most concerned about with the rise of artificial intelligence? What are you most excited about?
The big concerns in the short run for me are deepfakes, misinformation, and economic disruptions from job displacement. But there are very exciting prospects in areas like health care, scientific research, management and workflow, productivity, and much more.
Europe just passed the AI Act. Are you optimistic that Congress can pass comprehensive AI regulations anytime soon?
Congress is more likely to take an incremental than a comprehensive approach, at least in the near term, to solve specific problems rather than attempting a large overarching regulation like what the EU did. But we are working on legislation right now with every intention to pass laws.
Anything else you want to leave us with?
Most people associate Congress with chaos, dysfunction, and partisanship, but those of us working on AI have a refreshingly cooperative and collaborative spirit. This is important to get right. Few things have greater potential to change all our lives and the lives of future generations.
Biden's vigorous SOTU speech aims to prove doubters wrong
Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington, DC, shares his perspective on US politics.
What's going on with the Biden State of the Union?
So big week in US presidential politics. Super Tuesday basically effectively ended both primaries for the Republicans and the Democrats. We now have two all but official candidates. Joe Biden gave his fourth State of the Union address this week. Big question around Joe Biden, is he up to the task? 75% of Americans say that he is too old to run for a second term, but he is a attempting to prove them wrong like he did last night in Washington with a vigorous speech where he spoke for an hour, which officially kicked off his campaign.
Biden spoke about themes of income inequality, he spoke in favor of aid to Ukraine, and he rolled out a couple of tax increases that Republicans don't like. There's a lot of risk in every public appearance that Biden gives these days because of the fact that Democrats are very concerned that he's going to make a verbal flub or that he's going to look physically frail. That did not happen last night, and I think that's a good sign for Biden for now.
But every time he goes on stage for the rest of the year, there's going to be concern about how old he looks. So the campaign can now begin in earnest. Biden didn't mention Donald Trump by name in the speech, but he did indirectly attack him, talking about how Republicans are the party of the rich and how the threats to democracy represented by this election. At least that's how Joe Biden wants to frame it.
Why Mitch McConnell is stepping down
Jon Lieber, head of Eurasia Group's coverage of political and policy developments in Washington, DC, shares his perspective on US politics.
What are the implications of the retirement of Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell from his leadership post?
This week Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell announced his intention to step down as leader of the Republicans after serving longer in that post than anybody else in American history. There are really two implications that I can see.
The first is that McConnell was basically acknowledging the inevitable. It was very unlikely that he would be able to stay on as leader after this Congress anyway. If Donald Trump wins the presidential election, then he almost certainly is going to push McConnell out of the job. And if he didn't win the election, there's a whole generation of Republicans in the Senate who are looking for an opportunity to step up. McConnell, at 82 years old, did not represent that new generation. So the time had come to pass on the torch, and McConnell chose this February to announce it.
The second takeaway is that McConnell is really giving the speech the Democrats are hoping Joe Biden would give. McConnell's only eight months older than President Joe Biden, who's running for a second term right now. And lots of questions have come up recently about Biden's fitness for office because of his advanced age. This is going to be an increasing problem for Biden as more and more Democrats start talking about it. But in the absence of any challenger, it looks like Biden's going to be the nominee and his age will just be a liability they all have to learn to live with.
Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky speaks during 'Ukraine. Year 2024' conference, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine, February 25, 2024.
What lies ahead in the Russia-Ukraine War?
On the second anniversary of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, G7 leaders met in Kyiv to pledge their unwavering support for the country’s resistance. They announced additional military and financial aid, as well as a suite of sanctions against Russia. The objective: to break the current stalemate and push Putin to the negotiating table.
Will it be enough?
Sanctions may be little more than symbolic. Instead of turning the ruble to rubble, as US President Joe Bidenpredicted in 2022, the Russian economy has rebounded thanks to higher defense spending and oil export revenues.
As for military aid, the biggest chunk is stalled in the US Congress, where support has faltered along partisan lines. Ukraine could face a “catastrophic” shortage of ammunition and air defenses by late March if an additional aid bill isn't passed.
The most likely scenario?
Most experts envisage an eventual negotiated settlement that compromises Ukrainian territorial integrity for long-term stability and Western integration – Eurasia Group put such a scenario as their #3 top risk for 2024. While a deal might resolve this conflict in the short term, it could embolden Putin to start others. While NATO’s recent expansion is meant to deter Russia’s imperialist designs, should a Trump White House hollow out the alliance, Europe could be more vulnerable than ever to attack.
Ukraine on the path to joining NATO, says deputy Mircea Geoanǎ
After two years of fighting and brutal warfare in Ukraine, NATO deputy Mircea Geoanǎ says the stakes of the war could not be higher for the West. Ian Bremmer spoke with Geoanǎ on GZERO World at the Munich Security Conference and asked him to give a sober assessment of the war so far, as political battles and mounting crisis fatigue in the US and EU put military and financial assistance for Kyiv in jeopardy. Geoanǎ says the West can't afford to desert Ukraine in its time of need.
“Ukraine will become a member of NATO, it will become a member of the EU,” the NATO deputy warns, “If they don’t prevail, there is no NATO, there’s no EU.”
NATO and Ukraine are getting closer every day, Geoanǎ argues, they're becoming more interoperable with each other, and a level of trust has developed with Kyiv. Abandoning the fight now would be a broader sign of the West’s collective ability to deal with global security challenges coming from elsewhere in the world, like Iran and North Korea. This war is bigger than Ukraine, which is why it’s so important for allies to stay united.
Watch full episode here: Can Ukraine win the war?
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week online and on US public television. Check local listings.
Can Ukraine win the war?
Are NATO allies as united in their support for Kyiv as they were when Russia began its invasion of Ukraine two years ago? That was the question at the top of everyone’s minds at the Munich Security Conference, where world leaders gathered to discuss the biggest challenges to global security. On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer sat down with Deputy Secretary General Mirceǎ Geoana on the sidelines of Munich to discuss the ongoing war in Ukraine and what the conflict means for the future of the NATO alliance.
“Ukraine is more than Ukraine, and Ukraine is more than European security,” Geoanǎ explains, “Ukraine is an indicator of the willingness and the capacity of the West to be able to cope with challenges coming from China or anywhere else.”
Geoanǎ also called the recent death of Alexei Navalny a “wake-up call” for the West and challenged President Trump’s recent comments about allowing Russia to invade NATO countries that don’t meet the target of spending 2% of GDP on defense. While he admits Europe could do better, he points out that NATO allies are well above the 2% target on aggregate due to heightened security concerns in former Soviet countries and the Baltics.
“In the end, this alliance, [which will celebrate] 75 years in the next few weeks, will be as indispensable to America and to all of us like it’s been since the inception,” Geoanǎ says.
Catch GZERO World with Ian Bremmer every week online and on US public television. Check local listings.
What's the plan for Ukraine after two years of war? Ian Bremmer explains
As Russia’s invasion of Ukraine enters its third year, what's the plan for both sides as casualties rise, Europe's support wavers and US funding for Ukraine hangs in the balance?
It’s been two years since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine, which shows no signs of ending any time soon. On Ian Explains, Ian Bremmer looks at how Ukraine and Russia have fared so far and what comes next for Kyiv and Moscow. So far, the numbers tell a grim story. Both countries have lost around 70,000 troops each, with hundreds of thousands more injured, according to recent estimates. Meanwhile, Russia still occupies around a fifth of Ukrainian territory. So what’s the plan?
On the Ukrainian side, the strategy remains the same: survive. After a disappointing summer counteroffensive and recent shakeup of Ukrainian military leadership, Kyiv is hoping recent attacks inside Russia can put Moscow on its back foot. The Kremlin, for its part, is waiting out the clock, banking on war fatigue in Europe and political infighting in the US to stem the flow of military assistance to Ukraine. A prospect that seems all the more likely if Donald Trump wins the US election in November.
Ninety-two percent of Ukrainian citizens say that the only acceptable end to the war would be a complete Russian withdrawal from their country, including Crimea. As the conflict enters a third year, 44 million Ukrainians overwhelmingly want to defend the territory, but is that enough to win?