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.
Middle East
French President Emmanuel Macron talks with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa as they arrive to attend a joint press conference after a meeting at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, on May 7, 2025.
Syria’s interim president Ahmed al-Sharaa, the former jihadist whose forces overthrew the dictatorship of Bashar al-Assad last December, met on Wednesday with French President Emmanuel Macron. It was his first trip to Europe.
The upshot: The French president said he would push for the lifting of EU sanctions – which have been in place since 2011 – if al-Sharaa continued on a path of reform and reconstruction that respected the rights of Syria’s religious minorities. He said he’d also lobby the US to follow suit.
The goal: France, with regional players Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Turkey, favors swift relief from Western sanctions against Syria to speed the rebuilding of a country wrecked by civil war and mass emigration.
But the US has been more cautious, giving Damascus a list of conditions for sanctions removal that include icing out Iran, expelling Palestinian groups, and giving the American military a free hand in Syria.
The bombshell: During the meeting, Al-Sharaa revealed Syria has been holding indirect security talks with Israel. That’s a big deal: since Assad’s fall, Israel has bombed Syrian military sites, expanded a “buffer zone” into the country, and conducted airstrikes on behalf of Syria’s Druze minority.
Any prospect of an accord with Israel – which is deeply suspicious of Damascus’ intentions – would significantly improve Syria’s prospects of stability and prosperity.Thousands of Yemenis gather in Sanaa's Al-Sabeen Square to demonstrate unwavering solidarity with Palestine and vehemently denounce Israel and the US. Organized by the Houthis, the protest included chants against Israeli actions in Palestine, with demonstrators pledging steadfast support for Palestinians amid regional tensions.
President Donald Trump said this week the US campaign against the Houthis is done for now. “They have capitulated,” he said, “but more importantly… they say they will not be blowing up ships anymore.”
The Houthis from the Signal chat? The very same. The Trump administration in March ramped up bombings of the Iran-backed group – which controls much of Yemen – to stop its ongoing attacks on ships in the Red Sea, a critical global trade artery.
The Houthis began attacking ships in October 2023 in an act of solidarity with Hamas, protesting Israel’s war in Gaza.
Why did the Houthis stop? Not necessarily because of the US airstrikes alone, says Gregory Brew, an Iran expert at Eurasia Group.
“The US hit the Houthis dozens of times,” he said, “but failed to do serious damage to the group’s capabilities.”
Rather, Tehran reportedly pushed the Houthis towards the US pact, a positive sign for US-Iran relations, Brew says. The US and Iran meet for a fourth round of talks on Iran’s nuclear program this weekend.
Meanwhile: the Houthis and Israel continue to clash. Israel leveled Yemen’s main airport this week after a Houthi missile landed near Ben Gurion airport near Tel Aviv. Israel is, notably, excluded from the US-Houthi pact.
The post-October 7 debate around Israel and Gaza has reignited long-standing tensions on college campuses across the US, with many struggling to define where legitimate criticism ends and hate speech begins. On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, Ilya Shapiro says that while it’s possible to be anti-Zionist without being antisemitic, “it’s very rare in my experience.” He points to protests targeting Hillel chapters and synagogues as examples where ostensibly political opposition to Israeli policy veers into bigotry.
The line between anti-Israel speech and antisemitism is blurry, especially in the context of heated slogans and protest chants. “When protesters chant, ‘From the river to the sea,’ that’s not just saying they oppose Netanyahu’s government—that’s a direct threat to Israel,” Shapiro says, arguing that many college demonstrations go far beyond policy critique.
Watch full episode: The battle for free speech in Donald Trump's America
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.
The Trump administration says it's defending free speech by confronting liberal bias on college campuses—but is it doing the opposite? On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters explains how the administration’s focus on elite universities has led to sweeping actions that may ultimately restrict speech, especially for foreign-born students. “These are not students who smashed windows or assaulted security guards,” Peters says. “It’s pretty hard to see how the administration can make the case that these people are national security threats.”
And the impact is already being felt. Peters points to advice from university officials telling students to avoid posting on social media out of fear that political expression might jeopardize their legal status. In Trump’s America, he argues, the First Amendment is being selectively applied—and for some communities, the price of speaking out may be higher than ever.
Watch full episode: The battle for free speech in Donald Trump's America
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.
In the United States, the right to free speech is enshrined in the Constitution, but that doesn’t mean everyone agrees on what it looks like in practice. On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer opens with a landmark case: when neo-Nazis won the right to march through a Holocaust survivor community in Skokie, Illinois. The decision was controversial but helped define modern free speech as “ugly, uncomfortable, and messy,” yet fundamental to American democracy. Today, that foundational idea is once again being tested—on college campuses, in immigration courts, and in the rhetoric of both political parties.
Conservative legal scholar Ilya Shapiro argues that institutions once devoted to open inquiry are increasingly undermining that mission. “Universities have forgotten their basic responsibilities,” he says, citing unequal rule enforcement and what he calls an “illiberalism” that predates Trump but has intensified with political polarization. Shapiro supports the Trump administration’s aggressive scrutiny of elite universities but warns that some immigration-related free speech crackdowns risk overreach: “I'd prefer the administration go after clear immigration violations, not rely on vague designations like ‘harmful to foreign policy.’”
Meanwhile, New York Times reporter Jeremy Peters warns that the Trump administration’s tactics may do more harm than good. “Rather than executing clean policies that defend free speech,” he says, “they’re using blunt force to try to deport people who didn’t do anything terribly wrong.” Peters points to a growing “chilling effect,” especially among international students, who are now being advised to self-censor for fear of legal consequences. Both guests agree that university culture has played a role in the current crisis, but they differ sharply on whether the government’s response is upholding or threatening the First Amendment.
In America’s culture wars, free speech is no longer just a right—it’s a weapon, and both sides are wielding it.
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.
Debris of missiles spread on highway near the Ben Gurion Airport in Israel\'s Tel Aviv as it is hit by a ballistic missile launch from Houthis in Yemen on Sunday May 4, 2025.
Yemen’s Iran-backed Houthi rebels launched a hypersonic ballistic missile at Tel Aviv Sunday, striking close to the main runway of Ben Gurion Airport. The strike injured four and shut down air traffic in the morning. The Houthis have repeatedly attacked Israel and maritime traffic in the Red Sea since November 2023, a month after Hamas launched its Oct. 7 attacks on Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu condemned the airport strike and vowed retaliation against both the Houthis and their Iranian “masters” “at a time of [Israel’s] choosing.” Officials are investigating why the country’s Iron Dome defense system did not intercept the missile, while several airlines have suspended flights to the airport for the coming days.
A warning shot over Gaza? The strike comes the morning after the Israel Defense Forces called up tens of thousands of reservists Saturday evening to expand operations in Gaza. The mobilization is one of the largest in recent history and came after the most recent failure to secure a deal for the release of Israeli hostages and bodies of hostages still held by Hamas.
On Sunday, Netanyahu criticized Qatari mediators for not using their influence to pressure Hamas to accept the most recent hostage deal, and on Monday, Israel's Cabinet voted to ramp up the offensive against Hamas in Gaza.
Free speech in Trump's America with NYT journalist Jeremy Peters and conservative scholar Ilya Shapiro
Listen: Free speech has become one of the most contentious issues in American politics, but what does it actually mean today? On the GZERO World podcast, Ian Bremmer sits down with conservative legal scholar Ilya Shapiro of the Manhattan Institute and New York Times free speech reporter Jeremy Peters. They discuss how free expression is being defined—and challenged—on university campuses and by the Trump administration, particularly when it comes to national immigration policy. “The dynamic of ‘free speech for me but not for thee’ is prevalent,” Shapiro warns, pointing to inconsistent enforcement of campus speech rules and a broader “illiberalism” taking hold in higher education.
The conversation turns to the Trump administration’s aggressive response to Israel/Gaza protests, including efforts to penalize non-citizen students for their political speech. Peters cautions that this approach may violate the very rights the administration claims to defend. “Rather than execute a clean policy to support free speech,” he says, “they’re using blunt force to try to deport people who didn’t do anything terribly wrong.” The potential legal battles ahead could determine how far the government can go in defining speech as a national security issue, especially for non-citizens.
Both guests acknowledge that antisemitism on campus has become a flashpoint, but differ on how it’s being addressed. Shapiro argues that while not all anti-Israel sentiment is antisemitic, many protesters are crossing that line: “It’s possible to be anti-Zionist without being antisemitic, but it’s very rare in my experience.” Peters agrees the issue is complex and evolving, noting that universities “seem much more focused on preventing antisemitism than they were just a year ago.” Together, the guests raise urgent questions about the balance between expression, identity, and institutional responsibility in a sharply divided political landscape.