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.
News
What We’re Watching: Peru declares state of emergency, Trump to meet Zelensky after Putin call, Bangladesh seeks to end political upheaval
People attend a vigil in memory of Mauricio Ruiz, a 32-year-old man who was killed during Wednesday's protest against Peru's President Jose Jeri, days after Jeri took office, in Lima, Peru, on October 16, 2025.
Peru declares state of emergency in capital city
It’s been a rough period for the country that is renowned for the stunning and peaceful mountain citadel of Machu Picchu. About a month ago, protests broke out against President Dina Boluarte’s pension reforms, government corruption and rising crime. Last weekend, the Congress impeached Boluarte and removed her from office over her failure to address these issues. Now, the Peruvian government is declaring a state of emergency in Lima after the protests, which haven’t stopped, turned deadly – police shot and killed a 32-year-old man on Wednesday at demonstrations outside the Congress.
With Gaza deal done, can Trump bring peace to Ukraine?
US President Donald Trump said he had a “very productive” phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin yesterday, the first time they had spoken since their Alaska meeting in August, adding that they would have another in-person meeting in the Hungarian capital of Budapest in the next few weeks. The call, which the Kremlin said came at Putin’s behest, came right before Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s White House visit, where he was expected to ask about which weapons systems the US can provide him. Trump had reportedly been mulling sending Tomahawk missiles to the Ukrainians, but he appeared to pour cold water on the idea following his chat with Putin.
Bangladesh’s new charter doesn’t please all
Bangladesh has been engulfed by chaos ever since then-Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina allegedly ordered the use of lethal force on student protesters last year. Trying to find a path forward, the South Asian country’s leading parties came together Friday to sign a new political charter. Yet not everyone is happy: Violent protests broke out in Dhaka amid the signing, as demonstrators felt the charter didn’t have a means to guarantee its commitments, including providing justice for the victims of last year’s killings. Meanwhile Bangladeshi prosecutors are seeking the death penalty for the former leader over her actions during last year’s deadly demonstrations. With elections scheduled for February, can the Bangladeshi government establish some calm among its 173-million-strong population?Hamas militant stands guard, as heavy machinery operates at the site where searches are underway for the bodies of hostages killed after being seized by Hamas during the October 7, 2023 attack, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Khan Younis, southern Gaza Strip, October 17, 2025.
Earlier this week, Hamas freed the remaining 20 living hostages who were held in Gaza, while Israel released nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners — the first step in their ceasefire deal. As Israeli troops pull back to the agreed-upon line inside Gaza, the next and perhaps most difficult phase begins: Hamas is expected to disarm, relinquish control, and make way for a two key elements of the transition: on the civilian side, a “temporary technocratic government”; and on the military side, an international security force to take Hamas’s place.
Sustaining the peace will require a confluence of factors: real Hamas disarmament; an effective interactional security force, most likely drawn from the Arab world; a civilian, technocratic Palestinian government; and the emergence of a clearer long-term governance plan for Gaza. There are many questions that will need to be addressed between here and there.
First, how strong is Hamas? The war decimated Hamas’s leadership and infrastructure. Many of its top commanders are dead or in hiding, and its political wing has been forced to the shadows. Inside Gaza, many civilians blame Hamas for provoking a war that left the territory in ruins. Meanwhile, clan militias and rival factions are trying to fill the power vacuum.
But Hamas is reasserting control, “deploying thousands of security personnel, especially in key areas like Gaza City, in an effort to uphold security and consolidate its authority,” according to Dr. Reham Owda, an expert on Palestinian politics.
Hamas has also begun executing rivals to exert its military authority over the strip. Among those killed have been members of the powerful Doghmosh clan, long at odds with Hamas. Since Monday, at least 10 members of Hamas’s security forces and some 20 fighters from rival Palestinian groups have died in the internecine clashes, according to the New York Times.
Will Hamas disarm? Despite US and Israeli pressure, the group has shown a reluctance to disarm, fearing it amounts to political suicide. What Hamas may aim for instead is partial disarmament: giving up heavy rockets and tunnels while evolving its internal security wing into a police force. For Israel, given Hamas’s continued calls for the destruction of their state, keeping them in military power is a nonstarter.
What would an international security force look like? A central pillar of Trump’s ceasefire plan is the creation of an international security force to stabilize Gaza during the transition. Owda says that without this force, the conflict will persist on two fronts, “a war between Hamas and the Israeli army, and an internal war between Hamas and family militias.” But she cautions that international troops will only be accepted by Gazans if they are from Arab and Islamic countries. “Palestinian factions will not accept forces from Western countries and may clash with them.”
So far, no country has made a firm commitment to provide troops to the force, but Indonesia, Azerbaijan, and Pakistan are currently in negotiations. The US has said no American troops will be inside Gaza.
Meanwhile, Israel is wary of an international stabilization force in Gaza, which would restrict its freedom of military action — a central tenet of its security doctrine — and might set a precedent for similar arrangements in the West Bank.
Can a technocratic government be established? The recent ceasefire deal called for a “technocratic” Palestinian administration to run Gaza until elections can be held. The plan, championed by Washington and Egypt, would install a committee of non-partisan experts — business leaders, doctors, engineers — to manage day-to-day affairs under the oversight of an international board, with Tony Blair seemingly in the lead — see our recent coverage of his role.
Speaking of a possible technocratic Palestinian administration, Owda says, “These individuals represent the business and civil society sectors, are independent, and mostly hail from prominent Gazan families.” She adds, “However, without international forces, these members will face significant security challenges and lack the capacity to govern the Gaza Strip, as no national government can function effectively without security stability.”
In theory, this model offers a clean slate. It avoids empowering Hamas while ensuring basic services are being provided. But in practice, pulling it off will require a well-armed international security force being installed to keep Hamas at bay.
Longer term, can the Palestinian Authority (PA) return? “Yes, eventually,” says Atlantic Council’s Middle East expert Gina Abercrombie-Winstanley. “The current violence among the remnants of Hamas and other gangs in Gaza is a stark reminder that there must be a clear and strong Palestinian hand in charge in the strip.”
But the PA is also very weak and unpopular. It has been unable to protect Palestinians in the West Bank from the incursions of Israeli settlers, and it has been 20 years since President Mahmoud Abbas last called for elections. Polling conducted in May 2025 by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research found President Abbas's approval rating at just 19%, though satisfaction was slightly higher in Gaza at 29%.
As imperfect as the PA is, it does have credibility as a governing body and is best placed to attract wide support among Gazans,” says Abercrombie-Winstanley, noting that elections are key to building trust and sustaining the Palestinian Authority’s credibility.
The ceasefire is only the beginning. Gaza’s future will be defined by whether Hamas relinquishes power, whether technocratic governance can be effective, and whether international forces can maintain security without inflaming local tensions. Every element of the plan faces resistance in some quarter, and any backsliding could reignite violence. For Gazans, the stakes are high: a stable, functioning government could finally bring reconstruction and relief, while failure risks another cycle of destruction.At the World Bank-IMF annual meetings this week, GZERO’s Tony Maciulis spoke to Rania Al-Mashat, Egypt’s Minister of Planning, Economic Development, and International Cooperation, about the enormous task of reconstruction in Gaza and the impact of the war on the region. Watch that conversation here
.Hard Numbers: Chile makes inflation error, Trump indicts ex-ally, Gaddafi’s son seeks freedom from Lebanon, China conduct military purge
Latin America News Agency via Reuters
$117 million: Chile’s government admitted it double counted inflation when setting electricity rates, costing consumers about $117 million. The error triggered a 2% rate cut for January, sent inflation expectations below target, and cost Energy Minister Diego Pardow his job.
18: Former National Security Adviser John Bolton was indicted on 18 counts of mishandling classified information, having been accused of sharing over 1,000 pages of top-secret “diary” notes with family via personal email and apps. Bolton denies wrongdoing, calling the case political. If convicted, the 76-year-old could face life in prison.
$11 million: A Lebanese judge has set bail for Hannibal Gadhafi – the son of the assassinated Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi – at $11 million. The younger Gadhafi has been jailed in Beirut for a decade, after Lebanese militants abducted him in an apparent bid to gain information about a Shiite cleric. He hasn’t faced any formal charges.
9: Chinese President Xi Jinping ousted nine high-ranking military officers, including the second-most senior general, in an apparent crackdown against corruption and disloyalty. All nine will face court martial.
What We’re Watching: The CIA returns to LatAm, Russia faces oil squeeze, China cracks down on church network
Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro prepares to leave at the end of a press conference, days after he said Venezuela would deploy military, police and civilian defenses at 284 "battlefront" locations across the country, amid heightened tensions with the U.S., in Caracas, Venezuela, September 15, 2025.
Does Trump want regime change in Venezuela?
The 1970s called: US President Donald Trump confirmed a report yesterday that he authorized the Central Intelligence Agency to conduct covert operations in Venezuela, the latest military escalation from the White House against the Latin American nation. The exact nature of the operation is unclear, though Trump said he’s exploring land operations. Venezuelan bonds have jumped amid the escalation. So far, the US military has bombed several ships that have come from Venezuela, killing 27 people, but has yet to hit Venezuela within its borders. The US has been rapidly expanding its military presence in the region, which begs the question of whether Trump actually wants to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro from office.
Is Russia about to face the squeeze?
Indian oil refiners are reportedly preparing to cut purchases of Russian oil, a move that could have major consequences for the Kremlin’s war effort in Ukraine. Moscow stands to lose a large tranche of export income: Oil comprises the bulk of its exports, and India is the second-largest importer of this fossil fuel behind China. The move comes as the US explores sending tomahawks missiles to Ukraine – Trump is set to meet with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in Washington tomorrow to discuss further military support. There is some debate, though, over whether India will actually turn off the taps – Delhi wants to maintain good standing with Moscow, and appeared to deny the report. For more on why India values its relationship with Russia, read here.
Attending a “house church” in China could get you arrested
China has arrested dozens of Christians in its largest crackdown in years. The arrests are believed to target Zion Church’s underground “house church” network, which operate in private homes outside strict Chinese regulations on religious life. Rights groups say this may signal a wider campaign against underground churches as President Xi Jinping tightens control. US officials including Secretary of State Marco Rubio have condemned the arrests, while Zion Church’s leaders say persecution will only strengthen China’s underground faith.
Former UK prime minister Tony Blair and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi attend the world leaders' summit on ending the Gaza war, in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt, on October 13, 2025.
At first glance, it might seem odd that Tony Blair is leading the Western proposal for the future of Gaza.
It’s been 18 years since Blair exited 10 Downing Street, ending a historic decade in power that featured three election victories – including two landslide wins – that marked the peak of the Labour Party’s powers in the United Kingdom. Yet he played a major role in brokering the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, and is now part of the “Board of Peace” that, under the ceasefire deal, will aim to ensure a permanent cessation of fighting in the region.
To better understand the former UK prime minister and his interests in Gaza’s future, it’s worthwhile to go back and examine his record.
From a domestic perspective, many praised Blair’s time in power, which ran from 1997 to 2007. He introduced a national minimum wage while bringing the unemployment rate to its lowest level in decades. He created a program called “Sure Start” to boost education for young children in low-income areas, the benefits of which the UK is still realizing. Annual growth rates averaged about 3% during his time in power, the likes of which his successors could only dream.
“But Iraq.” These two words have become modern-day parlance in the United Kingdom for a fatal flaw. For all his domestic success, Blair’s decision to join US President George W. Bush in invading the Middle East country in 2003 prompted a major backlash. Between one and two million took to the streets of London that year to protest the decision in what was the largest demonstration in the city’s history. Though Blair retained power after the 2005 election, his legacy would be tarnished forever. In case you missed it, the decision to invade Iraq backfired, leaving Iraq in ruins and exacerbating the issue of terrorism.
Blair’s foreign policy wasn’t a complete bust. He is considered a hero in Kosovo after he helped gather an international coalition to end the Serbian crackdown on the enclave in 1999. Many young boys there are now named after the former Labour leader.
But he still wants to have a say in the Middle East. In truth, Blair never stopped caring about the region. The same day he resigned from UK office, he was appointed as special envoy of the Middle East Quartet, a group comprising the United Nations, the United States, the European Union, and Russia that tries to mediate the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The Bush administration had pushed for his appointment, but he didn’t achieve much, and resigned from the post in 2015 after eight years. The next year, he set up his think tank, the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change. With help from the world’s one-time richest man – which has drawn some scrutiny – the group has become arguably the most influential UK think tank, and was even involved in drawing up plans for the future of Gaza.
What’s his plan? The former UK leader released a 21-point proposal last month. This included establishing the Gaza International Transitional Authority to manage Gaza on an interim basis, a long-term goal of placing all Palestinian territories under the Palestinian Authority, and creating a security force – known as the International Stabilization Force – to maintain peace between Gazan residents and to nullify Hamas. Unlike some other plans, Blair’s one excludes any encouragement of the “voluntary migration” of Gazans out of the Strip.
The plan has been 14 years in the making, per the Vision of Humanity: Blair helped fashion a report in 2011 about building infrastructure and creating governance in Gaza.
Blair then helped US special envoy Steve Witkoff and former White House adviser Jared Kushner to create a US plan for Gaza this month, one that borrowed from the UK leader’s prior proposals. This plan – backed by many Arab states – would create a “Board of Peace” that will temporarily govern the enclave, with US President Donald Trump acting as its chairman and Blair as one of the board members. It doesn’t explicitly name any other leaders who would be part of this body. Drawing on Blair’s roadmap, Washington’s plan also calls to establish the International Stabilization Force.
Is Blair really going to govern Gaza? The plan isn’t set in stone, but it looks that way – especially after the Palestinian Authority endorsed the idea of giving him a role. Hamas has rejected giving a role to the former UK leader, but the plan also says the militant group can’t have a role in the future governance of Gaza, so their vote might not count for much. If Blair does nab a role, can he achieve some measure of redemption, and finally restore something that he cherishes now more than ever: his legacy?
Federal officers detain a man at the Immigration court office areas at the Jakob Javits Federal Builing in Lower Manhattan on July 28,2025 in New York City.
48: Pakistan and Afghanistan agreed to a 48-hour ceasefire after a series of skirmishes along their 1,622-mile long border over the last week. The two neighbors have long had a testy relationship, dating back to Afghanistan’s vote against allowing Pakistan to join the United Nations in 1947. Their current tensions center on the Taliban’s reporting funding for a militant group that seeks to undermine the Pakistani government.
14%: Soy plantations cover 14% of Brazil’s agricultural land – and they are now the subject of a major geopolitical muddle involving the US and China. At stake are Brazil’s rainforests. Beijing has stopped buying soybeans from the US amid a broader trade dispute, and seeks to fill the shortfall through Brazil, which could threaten President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva’s efforts to stem deforestation.
79: South Korea is working to rescue citizens trapped in Cambodia’s online scam centers, where hundreds have been trafficked, tortured, or killed after being lured by fake job offers. Officials say 79 remain missing. The crackdown follows US, UK, and Chinese actions against Southeast Asia’s multibillion-dollar cybercrime networks.Chart of the most consequential Supreme Court cases of 2025.
The 2025 Supreme Court term began this month, ushering in a slate of cases that could reshape American governance. No one will be watching more closely than President Donald Trump, whose efforts to expand executive power and limit independent oversight will be under the judicial microscope.
Here are the biggest cases to watch:
Is it time to end the Voting Rights Act? Louisiana v. Callais
Louisiana v. Callais will be argued today. It could upend the Voting Rights Act (VRA), the landmark 1965 law that outlawed discriminatory practices that were designed to limit people's access to the ballot on the basis of race. Before the VRA, African Americans in the South — though granted suffrage by the 15th Amendment in 1870 — were often disenfranchised by literacy tests, poll taxes, and gerrymandered districts designed to dilute their political power.
Today, Section 2 of the VRA is frequently used, most often by Democrats, to challenge electoral maps that diminish the voting strength of minority groups. Louisiana vs Callais arose after courts ordered Louisiana to create one more majority-Black congressional district in order to better reflect the state’s demographics. In practice, this would also create a safer district for Democrats in a state that is controlled by the GOP.
The state is arguing that all “race-based redistricting is unconstitutional,” even when it creates more demographically-balanced maps, and that the VRA “inherently rests on a racial stereotype: that all voters of a particular race must — by virtue of their membership in their racial class — think alike.”
The stakes: If the Court accepts Louisiana’s argument, it would overturn decades of precedent and would likely spur several states to redraw maps ahead of the midterms — which could cost Democrats seats.
“A ruling to strike down Section two would matter quite a lot to redistricting efforts in the South,” says Eurasia Group US expert Noah Daponte-Smith. “It would put a number of Democratic seats currently protected by the VRA at risk, bolstering Republicans’ narrow advantage in the ongoing redistricting war.”
Who controls US trade policy? Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump
Learning Resources, Inc. v. Trump tests whether the president can use the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs without congressional approval.
In February and April 2025, Trump invoked IEEPA to impose sweeping tariffs. First, on Canada, Mexico, and China, citing drug trafficking and immigration emergencies. Then, globally with “Liberation Day” tariffs that hit nearly all US trading partners.
Lower courts have unanimously ruled that there was no emergency and that IEEPA does not grant the president authority to impose unilateral tariffs — a power the Constitution explicitly assigns to Congress under Article I.
The Trump administration cites that IEEPA gives the president the power to “deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat…to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States,” and argues the threat of fentanyl and disadvantageous trade deals constitute a national security and economic threat.
The stakes: If the Court sides with Trump, it would effectively cede Congress’s constitutional power over trade to the presidency. If it rules against him, the tariffs could be struck down. A middle-ground decision could let the tariffs stand but narrow IEEPA’s reach. Either way, who will chart America’s role in the global economy hangs in the balance.
“The IEEPA case is one of the most significant in the court’s recent history,” says Daponte-Smith. “The implications for US and global markets, and for US politics, are enormous.”
Can the president fire members of the Federal Reserve? Trump v. Cook
The case with the greatest potential to expand executive power is Trump v. Cook, which centers on whether the president has the authority to remove Federal Reserve officials. The case stems from Trump’s attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook over allegations of mortgage fraud. The Court has temporarily blocked her dismissal pending oral arguments in January.
Cook denies the mortgage fraud and argues that she is being removed for political reasons – namely that she was appointed by Former President Joe Biden and has a record of siding with Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, who Trump has disagreed with on interest rate decisions. Trump, in his letter firing Cook, said that the mortgage fraud allegations constitute “gross negligence in financial transactions that calls into question [Cook’s] competence and trustworthiness as a financial regulator.”
The stakes: “A Fed in which any governor can be fired by the president for cause is not truly independent,” says Daponte-Smith. Cook’s removal would open the door for Trump to install loyalists who could align monetary policy with his political goals. No President in the Fed’s 111-year history has ever successfully removed a sitting Fed governor, largely because the central bank’s independence is seen as a cornerstone of US economic regulation.
More to come?
While Daponte-Smith says rulings in these three cases could “substantially expand executive power, with little oversight, effecting a significant change in the manner in which the United States is governed,” he warns that the high-stake showdown between the Supreme Court and the executive branch may still be ahead.
“I would be watching the various cases percolating up through the court system on the legality of National Guard deployments domestically,” he says. “I’d expect at least one to reach the Supreme Court this term — likely on an emergency basis — and the administration has taken a confrontational tone with the courts on this issue.”