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 }}
Metropolitan Police Department officers secure 16th Street near the White House, ahead of U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy meeting to discuss the war in Ukraine, in Washington, D.C., U.S., August 17, 2025.
What We’re Watching: Zelensky’s turn to meet with Trump, Israelis protest against Bibi again, Hong Kong media mogul faces trial
Zelensky heads (back) to the White House
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is back in Washington today, meeting with US President Donald Trump to discuss a potential end to the Russia-Ukraine war and hoping for a better outcome than his last visit to the Oval Office earlier this year. This time he’s bringing friends, European leaders including France’s Emmanuel Macron, Germany’s Friedrich Merz, Italy’s Giorgia Meloni, and the UK’s Keir Starmer, who are offering their support as he attempts to keep his country intact.
The confab follows Trump’s Alaska meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday, which produced very little by way of a ceasefire in Ukraine. While Zelensky will hope that this visit is more cordial than his last, he is likely still feeling the pressure: Trump reportedly told European leaders yesterday that he supports Putin’s offer to pause fighting if Ukraine relinquishes the Donbas region, even though Russian forces don’t currently hold this land. Zelensky has ruled out such a land swap. The US president also said on social media last night that his Ukrainian counterpart should forget about regaining Crimea or joining NATO.
Is there any timeline for peace here? With the White House now pushing for a peace deal rather than just a ceasefire, don’t expect an imminent pause in fighting, says US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Washington is nonetheless trying to strike a positive tone, with US special envoy Steve Witkoff declaring on Sunday that Russia had agreed to “robust” security guarantees, including a collective defense of Ukraine by American and European forces should Russia try to invade again.
Anti-Netanyahu protests growing in Israel
Is Israel’s anti-Bibi wing back to pre-October 7 levels? Hundreds of thousands of Israelis took to the streets of Tel Aviv – and other parts of Israel – on Sunday to implore Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to make a deal to return the remaining hostages. The crowds were roughly the same size as the rallies against Netanyahu’s judicial changes in early 2023. The protests came after the Security Cabinet approved a plan to conquer Gaza City two weeks ago, a possible signal that the Knesset is prioritizing rooting out Hamas over returning the hostages.
In latest setback for Hong Kong’s democracy, a media mogul faces trial
Closing arguments are underway in a landmark trial against Hong Kong media mogul Jimmy Lai, one of the city’s most prominent pro-democracy figures. Lai ran the now-shuttered Apple Daily newspaper, which China has criticized for spreading “fake news” and instigating “Hong Kong Independence”. After being held in solitary confinement for around 1,700 days, he is being charged under the controversial National Security Law for conspiring to collude with foreign forces and publishing so-called “seditious” articles. If convicted, the 77-year-old could face a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.
Feldman: Trump is using antisemitism to go after Harvard
Harvard Law professor Noah Feldman doesn’t downplay the reality of antisemitic violence in the US: “These things are real and they have to be taken very seriously.” But he draws a sharp line between legitimate concern and political opportunism.
“There is a flavor of using antisemitism as an excuse to go after Harvard,” he says. Feldman recounts a colleague whose science funding was cut due to alleged antisemitism on campus—despite being part of an all-Jewish research team. “It just makes no sense at all.”
As part of a wide-ranging conversation in the latest episode of GZERO World, Feldman argues that this kind of approach isn’t about fighting hate—it’s about making universities the enemy.
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 (🔔). GZERO World with Ian Bremmer airs on US public television weekly - check local listings.
As Trump pressures universities, what's really at stake?
American universities have long been engines of innovation, global leadership, and critical thought. But now they’re in the political crosshairs. Under the Trump administration, elite schools like Harvard and Columbia are facing lawsuits, funding threats, and mounting pressure to crack down on perceived antisemitism and “woke” culture. White House allies say it’s about protecting students. Constitutional scholar Noah Feldman says it’s about power.
On GZERO World, Feldman joins Ian Bremmer to argue that President Trump’s campaign against higher education is a broader attack on independent institutions—and the role they play in shaping public truth. Feldman warns that cutting federal science funding, punishing international students, and politicizing speech on campus are part of a strategy to delegitimize universities and assert control over what they teach and who they admit.
“No one at Harvard...wants to knuckle under to Trump,” Feldman says. “The university doesn’t have any value if it can’t be independent.”
Feldman also discusses rising antisemitism, Harvard’s legal battle with the Trump administration, and why standing up now could set the precedent for how all US universities respond in the future.
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 (🔔). GZERO World with Ian Bremmer airs on US public television weekly - check local listings.
U.S. President Donald Trump shakes hands with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, after an announcement of a trade deal between the U.S. and EU, in Turnberry, Scotland, Britain, July 27, 2025.
US and EU strike trade deal
It’s down the wire for countries trying to reach a trade deal with the US before Aug. 1, when President Donald Trump has threatened steep “reciprocal” tariffs. But on Sunday, the United States and the European Union reached a sweeping – and preliminary – agreement that sets new rules for the world’s largest bilateral trade relationship, avoiding a transatlantic trade war that many feared could rattle the global economy.
Trump announced the deal on Sunday after meeting with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at his Turnberry golf resort in Scotland, just days before 30% tariffs were set to take effect. “It’s the biggest of all the deals,” Trump said. Von der Leyen called the pact, which affects the world’s largest bilateral trade relationship, a win for “stability” and “predictability.”
Who agreed to what? The US will impose a 15% tariff on most imports from the EU — including automobiles, a major trading category. The rates had hovered in single digits before Trump took office. The 15% rate also applies to pharmaceuticals and semiconductors, which had not previously been subject to tariffs. European steel and aluminum will still be subject to a 50% tariff rate.
In return, the EU has agreed to purchase $750 billion in US energy exports, invest $600 billion in the American economy, and not place tariffs on the US. Brussels had prepared to retaliate with levies on up to $116.2 billion in American products if talks had collapsed.
Not everyone is happy. The euro fell against the dollar on Monday morning, reflecting, in part, concerns that the deal could hurt Europe’s export sector. French Prime Minister Francois Bayrou said that the bloc “resigned itself into submission” to the US, complaints echoed by far-right leaders in France and Germany. Critics also pointed out that the UK got a better deal from Trump, going home with just a 10% tariff.
But it is good news for transatlantic ties. The deal follows months of tense back-and-forth, and according to Eurasia Group’s Europe expert Mujtaba Rahman, “should contribute to a broader stabilization of the transatlantic relationship, certainly compared to where things sat earlier in the year.” In May, Trump threatened to impose 50% tariffs on nearly all EU goods, later reducing that to 30%.
“The EU and US have now struck deals on NATO and trade; the only real issue that remains outstanding is the question of Ukraine,” says Rahman.
What’s next: The final 15% figure mirrors a pact the US recently reached with Japan — and may now become Washington’s new baseline for deals with other trading partners like South Korea, Taiwan, and Switzerland, where the White House will now shift their focus before the Friday deadline.Jair Bolsonaro, Donald Trump, and Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.
Why Trump’s tariffs on Brazil will backfire
The president of the United States is overtly meddling in Brazil’s domestic politics. It's hard for Americans to even imagine that another country would dare threaten to tank the Dow unless the Supreme Court overturned a ruling or Congress repealed a law. Democrats and Republicans alike would howl if China tried to do that. Yet that's exactly what President Trump is doing to Brazil: flexing economic muscle to dictate the internal policies of a sovereign nation (and a democratic one, to boot). So much for his promise not to lecture other countries on how to govern their affairs (he should’ve clarified: as long as their leaders earn, or buy, his personal favor).
It’s a corrupt (ab)use of executive power. The Trump administration has articulated a number of shifting and often contradictory aims to justify its tariffs: shrinking bilateral trade deficits, raising revenue, reshoring supply chains, creating manufacturing jobs, squeezing China, wringing better deals. It’s certainly the case that some of these goals make less sense than others, tariffs aren’t always the right tool for the job, policy execution has been sloppy (remember the formula?), and Trump’s negotiation skills haven’t been up to snuff. But at least most of the tariffs have been guided by Trump’s sense of the national interest. They accordingly amount to legitimate statecraft. Not so with the Brazil tariff, which the president’s letter justifies purely on political grounds. There’s no national‑interest fig leaf – just an open bid to help a political opposition leader he likes.
It's also plainly illegal. Since “Liberation Day,” the White House has invoked a bunch of statutory authorities to unilaterally levy tariffs without Congressional legislation, most notably the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA). Usage of this law rests on the notion that the tariffs are a remedy for a “national economic emergency.” The US Supreme Court has yet to rule on the legality of IEEPA tariffs; it will probably do so in the fall, when I expect it to curb the president’s authority. But whatever the justices decide, we already know that the president doesn't have the legal authority to impose a tariff solely because he disagrees with the target’s domestic politics.
President Lula has no ability to give in to Trump’s demands. Even if he wanted to appease Trump, both Bolsonaro’s trial for plotting to assassinate Lula and overturn the 2022 election – a “witch hunt,” per Trump – and the new social media rules – seen as “censorship” in Washington – are beyond Lula’s constitutional jurisdiction. For Brasília they are non-negotiable matters of sovereignty. Nor does Lula have much trade leverage. Many US imports already face low duties; while Brazil could plausibly lower tariffs on some US goods like ethanol, deeper cuts require agreement by all four Mercosur members and their legislatures.
Even if he had the means to offer Trump the concessions he demands, Lula has no incentive to back down. On the contrary, the Brazilian president sees an electoral opportunity to lean into the tariff fight with the US at Bolsonaro's expense. Lula entered the 2026 campaign cycle as an unpopular incumbent presiding over a soft economy. Much like Trump’s “51st state” threats against Canada rallied Canadians around the flag and helped the Liberal Party’s Mark Carney stage a spectacular comeback, Trump’s threat to Brazil’s sovereignty and economy in direct support of Bolsonaro just handed Lula a flag-wrapped gift. It’s good politics for him to escalate the clash against Trump, cast himself as defender of Brazilian sovereignty, and blame his domestic nemesis for both the extremely unpopular foreign interference and any economic pain.
Don’t feel too bad for Bolsonaro. The former president has been trying to persuade Trump to more actively support him for months. Bolsonaro’s son Eduardo – a lawmaker who’s close with Trump’s sons and a top contender to succeed his father as the right-wing challenger to Lula – has been in Washington lobbying the White House for targeted financial sanctions against Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, the lead judge in Bolsonaro’s trial (and, incidentally, a key champion of the social media regulation). Eduardo’s success in getting Trump to take up his cause is matched only by his failure to grasp the extent of Trump’s tariff obsession. Now he faces legal jeopardy at home for inviting foreign aggression, and his father’s grievance politics may finally come back to bite him. Whatever happens in 2026, the Bolsonaros have no one to blame but themselves.
The fight is set to get worse. Lula stepped up the escalatory rhetoric, refusing to accept Trump’s letter and threatening mirror tariffs. Diplomats will hunt for an off-ramp and try to buy time, but neither side is likely to blink before Aug. 1. The aggregate economic damage of 50% tariffs is manageable – Brazilian exports to the US account for less than 12% of Brazil’s total exports and about 2% of the country’s GDP, and some products (like oil) and sectors where Brazilian exporters have leverage are likely to be exempted. Trump’s letter also left the door open for individual companies to get waivers if they promise US investments. Still, the Brazilian industrial sector is highly dependent on the US export market (especially in products like steel, aerospace, cell phones, tools, and coffee), so the tariff won’t be entirely painless.
The cleanest de-escalation route runs through Bolsonaro himself: he’d need to directly ask Trump to ease or drop the tariffs, probably once the industrial lobby gets too loud and Lula’s poll numbers rise beyond comfort. That scenario is likelier than Lula caving or Trump unilaterally backing down. The White House has already ordered a Section 301 probe into various Brazilian policies that will give Trump a legally sturdier mechanism to impose sky-high duties on Brazil should courts clip his IEEPA wings.
Trump’s gambit will boomerang. The tariff will prop up his ally’s arch-enemy Lula, hurt US consumers (say goodbye to cheap cafezinho and OJ), and nudge Brazil closer to China and the EU – and away from Washington. As Trump keeps doing his darndest to deglobalize America, expect this pattern to keep repeating itself.
An armed PKK fighter places a weapon to be burnt during a disarming ceremony in Sulaimaniya, Iraq, July 11, 2025, in this screengrab obtained from a handout video.
What We're Watching: Kurdish militants melt away the past, Trump to shift focus away from Congress, Germany gets a taste of US-style court battles
Kurdish militants burn their own guns
In a symbolic ending to more than 40 years of rebellion against the Turkish government, fighters from the PKK — a Kurdish militia — melted a cache of weapons in a gigantic cauldron on Friday. Earlier this year jailed PKK leader Abdullah Ocalan called for disarming as part of a process expected to deliver more cultural autonomy for Kurds, who make up 20% of Turkey’s population. The move shifts attention onto the future of affiliated Kurdish militias in Syria, as well as to Turkey’s parliament, where President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan is courting support from Kurdish parties as he seeks to soften term limits.
Is the White House done with legislating?
A week after signing the One Big, Beautiful Bill into law, and just six months since taking office again, US President Donald Trump is reportedly done with pushing major legislation through Congress. As he goes into campaign mode ahead of the 2026 midterms, he will instead focus on key issues like trade and immigration via executive actions, which don’t require congressional approval but are susceptible to legal challenges. However, it seems not everyone is aligned: House Speaker Mike Johnson has said he still wants to pass two further budget reconciliation packages. Which is it? More bills or no more bills?
German constitutional court clash embarrasses Chancellor Merz
Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz's government had to shelve a vote on appointing three judges to the Constitutional Court after one of them was accused – spuriously, it turned out – of plagiarism, and criticized by conservative coalition members for supporting abortion rights. Critics are likening the drama to US-style culture wars over the judiciary, and have warned it undermines the legitimacy of Germany’s top court. The debacle also reflects the fragility of Merz’s three-month-old coalition, which holds just a slim, 12 seat majority in the Bundestag.
Graphic Truth: Federal employment already dropping
The US Supreme Court on Tuesday allowed President Donald Trump to proceed with widespread cuts to the federal workforce, pending a full trial, overruling a San Francisco judge’s order in May that temporarily blocked layoffs at 22 agencies. Prior to the Supreme Court’s ruling, thousands of government employees had been preparing for mass layoffs, with many notified of their pending terminations but awaiting official confirmation.
Here’s a look at the changing size of the federal workforce, which includes the US military, since Trump first took power in 2017.
Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy meets with U.S President Trump in the Hague during the NATO Summit on Wednesday June 25, 2025.
What We’re Watching: Ukraine to get key US weapons again, Trump makes fresh tariff threats, Afghan refugees under triple threat
Now Zelensky has a reason to say ‘thank you’
In a major White House U-turn, US President Donald Trump declared that his government would resume sending key defensive weapons – including Patriot missiles – to Ukraine. The move, which undoes a Pentagon order from last week to pause the shipments, is a big win for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, as Ukraine has recently been suffering Russia’s worst aerial attacks of the entire war. The decision also reflects Trump’s growing impatience with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who has rebuffed White House calls for meaningful talks on a ceasefire.