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.
Video
Americans love their freedom. And depriving other Americans of said freedom (see: slavery, manifest destiny). But lately it's been the Democratic candidate for president, Vice President Kamala Harris, who has been focusing on freedom.
At a recent rally, she said this: "Across our nation, we have been witnessing a full-on assault on hard-won hard-fought freedoms and fundamental rights. The freedom to vote, the freedom to be safe from gun violence, the freedom to love who you love openly and with pride, and the freedom of a woman to make decisions about her own body and not have her government tell her what to do."
In the past, Democrats have talked about how the government could protect the freedom to love or the freedom to unionize. Flash forward to 2024, Reagan would be proud. What explains this rhetorical jujitsu? Well, it makes for a handy political foil. Trump could become that threat that Americans need protecting from.
There is, of course, one little problem with this messaging: reality. Because, in reality, Harris fundamentally believes that policy can make people's lives better. Sure, she received some criticism in her debate against Trump for being light on policy, and her campaign waited until well into September to publish an “Issues” page on her website. But make no mistake, Kamala Harris wants to use the levers of big government to build more housing, pass new child tax credits, and modernize education.
So, the question for Kamala—and Donald—is whether enough voters can live with those contradictions. We'll find out when millions of them exercise their most fundamental freedom at the ballot box on November 5th.
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 (🔔).
- Harris, Trump and the hypocrisy in US politics ›
- Will Kamala Harris’ momentum last in the race against Trump? ›
- Trump vs. Harris: A high-stakes election and its risks to democracy ›
- How Harris and Trump plan to tackle America’s housing crisis ›
- Muted mics, amplified impact: Harris and Trump debate for razor-thin margins ›
Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on World In :60.
As another hurricane hits Florida, how is information complicating disaster relief efforts?
Well, the heads of FEMA are saying this is by far the worst misinformation environment they've ever seen around a natural disaster, and it makes life a lot more difficult. First of all, it means a lot of people that need help aren't getting help, a lot of people that need to evacuate aren't evacuating, and it undermines the morale of the people that are working to try to help respond to the hurricane. So, for all of these reasons, when you have people saying that the money isn't actually being sent or it's being displaced, or that there are blockades, all of these things, if there's ever a time that you need scientists and authorities to be believed and listened to, it's in a national emergency. We saw these problems with the pandemic working with a lot of uncertainty, and you now see this working with a hurricane, working with a lot of certainty. So, even in an environment that should be depoliticized should be very straightforward that everyone comes together, it doesn't matter if you're red or blue. If you're getting hit by a hurricane, you need the same information. You need the same services that's being undermined by a disinformation environment. My God, am I worried about that in the aftermath of the US election in November. People should not sleep on how challenging it's going to be to get through that.
What do Southeast Asian leaders hope to accomplish at the ASEAN regional summit?
Well, the big thing they hope to accomplish, and this is not an organization like the EU or NATO; it's a pretty disparate group of countries that have very different political and economic systems and values and preferences; not a lot of common authority, but certainly, they all want to see an end to the civil war that has been expanding in Myanmar. And so the top issue is can they collectively push for diplomatic engagement between the two sides that have not been willing to talk to each other? Certainly, that is Secretary of State Tony Blinken's hope and effort in his attendance right now. We'll see if it goes anywhere, but it's increasingly disruptive for economics, for infrastructure, supply chain across the region, and right now, it is getting worse.
What do you make of reports that Trump stayed in touch with Putin after leaving office?
We heard from Bob Woodward, this new book coming out, some seven direct conversations, phone calls that Trump had with Putin since leaving the presidency, which does surprise me a little, honestly. We know that Zelensky really wanted to have one conversation with Trump a few weeks ago during the United Nations meetings on the sidelines, and it looked like that wasn't going to happen, and then finally it did. Certainly, for those that are concerned that Trump and Putin are continuing engagement and that means that Zelensky might be thrown under the bus, there's more reason to be concerned about that given those ongoing conversations. Certainly, you'd want to know what they're about. Trump does want an end to the war. Frankly, most of the world is aligned with him and wanting an end to the war, and I think it's useful to be able to talk with Putin directly. Frankly, I think that people like Biden and Ursula von der Leyen and the NATO secretary general should be talking to Putin even though there is a war going on that they're on opposite sides of, because it would help potentially long-term reduce tensions and lead to a greater potential of a negotiated settlement. But that's very different from a bunch of conversations that had not been discussed and that aren't necessarily trusted.
Bob Woodward's new book "War" claims Trump phoned the Russian president seven times after he left office -- we have exclusive tape of those calls and you won't BELIEVE what you hear. #PUPPETREGIME
Watch more of GZERO's award-winning PUPPET REGIME series!
What's the situation of Europe one year after the October 7th attack against Israel? What's the main takeaway from the visit of the new NATO Secretary General to Kyiv? Carl Bildt, former prime minister of Sweden and co-chair of the European Council on Foreign Relations, shares his perspective on European politics from Lisbon, Portugal.
What's the situation of Europe one year after the October 7th attack against Israel?
Well, I think deep apprehension is the best way of summing it up. Fears that we will see a further escalation of the conflict. Could be further problems in Gaza, could be further problems in West Bank. But perhaps particular now the situation of Lebanon, where there's the risk that we will see a further meltdown by the way of Lebanon. And we already have a million people on the move inside Lebanon. We have perhaps 100,000 people who are trying to flee from Lebanon into Syria. Mind you, there was a million and a half fleeing from Syria into Lebanon a couple of years ago. And the fear that we will see any refugee flow coming out of that area into Europe with all of the problems that would entail. So, deep apprehension on that situation.
What's the main takeaway from the visit of the new NATO Secretary General to Kyiv?
I think it was important for Mark Rutte to go to Kiev as the first thing he did really as the new Secretary General of NATO in order to make very clear his personal commitment to Ukraine, and the fact that he would put that at the top of his list of priorities, much in the same way as outgoing Secretary Jens Stoltenberg has done during the last few years. So, that was an important signal in itself.
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: A Quick Take to kick off your week. It is October 7th, and that means one year since Hamas perpetrated the worst terrorist attacks since 9/11. Almost 1,200 Israelis dead, mostly civilians, and still a hundred plus held hostage from that day a year ago. Not much progress on that latter front or on a ceasefire. Not much progress in the region since then. What it did do, of course, on October 7th, is it outraged and unified what had been a very divided Israeli population, divided with massive internal demonstrations on domestic political issues. And suddenly the only issue that mattered was responding to, redressing those attacks, whether you're on the left or the right in Israel and being able to defend the Israeli homeland and get the hostages back.
On the former, they've certainly been effective, hitting back as hard as possible. We've seen that Hamas today is a shell of what it was on October 7th a year ago. The leadership mostly dead. The weapons caches mostly destroyed. The tunnels mostly sealed. Hezbollah, the most powerful non-state military actor in the world, has been damaged critically, and they started rocket attacks against Israel a day after the October 7th terrorist attacks. Israel has now opened up a second front, really the primary front now in the war, and after a couple of weeks of that war, Hezbollah's leadership is dead. Their communication capacity was critically destroyed. The war is ongoing but is certainly not going well for Hezbollah. On the one hand, you've seen a major escalation from the rockets and the bombing happening in Gaza to a ground war across the entirety of that territory now to Lebanon and with significant shots fired missiles and the rest military operations with Iran's other proxies, the Houthis and Yemen, Shia militants in Syria and Iraq, and of course involving Iran itself.
On the other hand, the capacity of these proxy organizations to escalate in return is now far, far less capable, far less serious. Hamas cannot threaten Israel the way they could on October 7th. Hezbollah certainly far, far diminished in their ability to escalate even if they want to. Two big questions are remaining. First, Iran. They are a country that still has all sorts of capabilities to escalate if they wish, possibly not effectively against Israel itself, but against the West, against the world. If they wanted to, they could completely disrupt oil tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, and as a consequence, ensure that much of the oil that comes out of the Middle East, not just Iran's one and a half million barrels a day of export but from the Gulf states is stuck in place. And that would mean oil prices towards $150, even in a depressed demand environment as we see now, and a global recession.
So Iran's capacity, if they want to escalate, is far, far greater than that of Hezbollah or Hamas or anyone else in the region. And they have shown themselves to be quite risk-averse in response to Israeli strikes against Iranian leaders across the region, military leaders, and also against Hamas leadership in Tehran. And that was true back in April, and that was true back a week ago. But still, we are awaiting what is almost certainly going to be an Israeli response, a military response, against Iran for the 180 ballistic missiles that they launched against Israel with no fatalities in Israel. One in the West Bank of a Palestinian, but nonetheless, certainly could have caused a lot of people to be killed. And we will see if that the Israeli response leads to further Iranian escalation. I am at this point hopeful, and I would even say optimistic, that it does not, but optimism feels like exactly the wrong word to describe any of this in the region.
Then the second big question remaining is about the devastation on the ground. In Gaza, for the last year, a million and a half Palestinians are now living on the back of humanitarian aid of on average 125-ish trucks coming in a day. That's compared to 800 to 1000 on average before October 7th. As well as all of those tunnels which have now been sealed, they brought a lot of arms and illicit goods in. They also brought things like food, luxury food stuffs, and other things that you could buy on the gray market in Gaza. Those are closed, and there's no Gaza economy. There's no local Gaza agriculture right now. So the 1.5 million Palestinians are living in an absolutely unimaginable condition on single-digit percentage calories, many of them, in terms of consumption from what they would have been living on before October 7th.
Then you have the West Bank, which has been indirectly involved in the fighting. There's been a lot of skirmishing, a lot of shooting, a lot of people getting killed. And then also Israeli settlers and the IDF taking and securing more land from the Palestinians there. Then of course, in Lebanon in the last two weeks, you have over a million Lebanese who have been displaced from that fighting. Far more will be displaced in all likelihood in the coming weeks. All of this from a humanitarian perspective unacceptable by any yardstick. The United States seen by most of the world as complicit in watching it and not providing the either restraint on Israel or the humanitarian support effectively to help ensure that the suffering is reduced. And of course, this is going to cause hatred and radicalization for generations. And antisemitism was already way too high and on an upswing before October 7th, certainly only greater in this environment a year later.
And of course, with all of this, we don't know what's going to happen with upcoming elections. Kamala Harris came out on "60 Minutes" and described the United States as the best friend of the Israeli people around the world, refused to say whether or not the US was an ally of Prime Minister Netanyahu himself. A very strained relationship between the United States and the Israeli Prime Minister today. While former President Trump came out publicly in the last few days and said that the Israeli government, the Israeli military, should actively take out Iran's nuclear capabilities. So frankly, I would say between Harris and Trump, their policies, their orientation specifically on the Middle East and the Israeli wars in Gaza, in Lebanon, and the fighting we're seeing with Iran, probably the biggest difference on foreign policy between those two candidates would be on this issue. And we will find out in a month plus who is going to lead the United States, but utterly critical as we think about the future of this conflict in the region.
So that is where we are a year after the October 7th terrorist attacks, and now very deep in expanding war that is affecting much of the region. And I will continue to talk about it and follow it for you. So I hope everyone's going well, and I'll talk to you all real soon.
In a GZERO Global Stage discussion at the 79th UN General Assembly, Ian Bremmer and Amina Mohammed emphasized the potential of artificial intelligence (AI) to drive progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and address global inequities.
Bremmer noted that AI could be the key to achieving goals like clean water access and reducing hunger, pointing out the transformative power AI could bring in the coming years.
"AI is your opportunity," Bremmer said. He highlighted the importance of capacity building, standard setting, and ensuring that the Global South has a seat at the table in AI governance efforts, noting that AI has the potential to move the world towards meaningful progress by 2030.
Amina Mohammed echoed this sentiment but urged caution, emphasizing the need for responsible deployment of AI. "It's really exciting, it's scary, and we're not ready," she said, stressing the importance of investments and proper infrastructure to ensure AI benefits humanity as a whole. Mohammed underscored the responsibility of global leaders to ensure checks and balances are in place as AI continues to evolve.
Bremmer and Mohammed spoke during GZERO’s Global Stage livestream, “Live from the United Nations: Securing our Digital Future,” an event produced in partnership between the Complex Risk Analytics Fund, or CRAF’d, and GZERO Media’s Global Stage series, sponsored by Microsoft. The Global Stage series convenes heads of state, business leaders, and technology experts from around the world for critical debates about the geopolitical and technology trends shaping our world.
On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer sits down with Iran’s Vice President for Strategic Affairs Mohammad Javad Zarif to get his perspective on the regional conflict. Zarif adamantly condemns Russia’s incursion into Ukrainian territory. He says, “Russia is to blame for the invasion of Ukraine,” but insists “the United States is responsible for what led to that invasion,” referring to US aid to Ukraine.
Zarif emphasizes the importance of Iran’s trade relationship with Russia. When Bremmer presses him about Iran’s complicity in the war, Zarif denies involvement. He says, "We simply engage in business.” As the Russia-Ukraine war continues to drag on, Iran’s actions will come under increased scrutiny.
Watch full episode: Iran's next move: Interview with VP Javad Zarif
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 (🔔).