Trending Now
Venezuela's opposition leader María Corina Machado says Maduro's days are numbered
Listen: On the GZERO World Podcast, Ian Bremmer sits down with Venezuela’s most prominent opposition leader, María Corina Machado, who remains in hiding. They discussed the future of her country, the role of the United States, and why she believes Nicolás Maduro’s grip on power is weaker than it seems.
Meet María Corina Machado, the woman who scares Venezuela's dictator
Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado threatens the country's dictatorial regime like no opposition leader before her, and that's why she's in hiding. How does she keep the pressure on Nicolás Maduro's administration from her hideout? Ian Bremmer explains.
South Korean president ousted, election looms
South Korea’s Constitutional Court on Friday voted unanimously to oust impeached President Yoon Suk-yeol over his decision to declare martial law in December. Supporters of Yoon who gathered near the presidential residence in Seoul reportedly cried out in disappointment as the court’s 8-0 decision was announced. Others cheered the ruling. The center-right leader is now the second South Korean president to be ousted.
Reality hits on new tariffs, but Trump says it’s ‘going very well’
Stocks have plummeted, layoffs have begun, and confusion has metastasized about the bizarre method the United States used to calculate its tariff formula. But Donald Trump says it’s “going very well."
Budget clash puts South African government on brink of collapse
The second largest party in South Africa’s coalition, the business-friendly Democratic Alliance, launched a legal challenge on Thursday to block a 0.5% VAT increase in the country’s new budget, raising concerns that the fragile government could collapse.
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.
Russia/Ukraine
Vice President JD Vance and his wife, Usha Vance, tour the US military's Pituffik Space Base in Greenland on March 28, 2025.
It’s just business, baby: The Danes send around $600 million per year to Greenland, and an unnamed official told the Washington Post that the United States is prepared to spend “a lot higher than that” to lure Greenland into America’s orbit. While the US has not shared exactly how much they are prepared to spend, JD Vance recentlyreiterated the claim that Copenhagenhad not “devoted the resources necessary … to keep the people of Greenland safe.”
But that doesn’t explain the combative approach when a US president could simply seek a bilateral meeting with Denmark to discuss opportunities to expand America’s presence in the Arctic. By forcing his territorial interests on Greenland, Donald Trump risks isolating America’s closest partners. Danish PM Mette Frederiksen in Nuuk on Wednesday told reporters, “The US shall not take over Greenland. Greenland belongs to the Greenlanders.”
What does this have to do with Russia and China? Trump and Vance have claimed that acquiring Greenland will protect the island from Russian and Chinese encroachment. But special envoy Steve WitkofftoldTucker Carlson that the US and Russia are “thinking about how to integrate” their Arctic energy policies and “share sea lanes” to send gas into Europe together, suggesting that American ownership of Greenland could foster better cooperation with Russia.
Is there art to this deal? A mix of financial incentives and political ideology is likely behind Trump’s interest in Greenland. Trump has long touted Andrew Jackson as an inspiration and mentioned “manifest destiny” in this year’s inaugural address, so his wandering eyes are to be expected. But here’s a hot take from Ian Bremmer: Maybe Trump and his team “don’t have any reason” for the proposed land grab and all of this “will eventually blow over.”President Donald Trump waves as he walks before departing for Florida from the South Lawn at the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., on March 28, 2025.
Is the bloom off the bromance between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin? On Sunday, Trump took Putin to task over Russia’s foot-dragging on a ceasefire in Ukraine and threatened to tariff Russian oil and impose more sanctions on the country.
“If Russia and I are unable to make a deal on stopping the bloodshed in Ukraine, and if I think it was Russia’s fault ... I am going to put secondary tariffs on oil, on all oil coming out of Russia,” Trump said. “That would be, that if you buy oil from Russia, you can’t do business in the United States … There will be a 25% tariff on all oil, a 25- to 50-point tariff on all oil.” So far, there’s been no reaction from the Kremlin, but Trump said he would be talking with Putin this week.
A Greenland connection? Trump’s comments came a day after he reaffirmed his interest in acquiring Greenland for reasons of American and international security – something that Putin seems just fine with. At an Arctic policy forum in Murmansk on Thursday, Putin expounded on the “historical roots” of America’s interest in the island and said it was a matter that did not concern Russia.
But it may concern Ukraine. In the same speech, Putin said he would support a UN-led administration in Ukraine to hold new elections. And Kirill Dmitriev, Putin’s envoy for foreign investment and economic cooperation, said that while Moscow is open for investment cooperation in the Arctic with the US, “before deals can be done the war in Ukraine needs to end.”France's President Emmanuel Macron speaks during a press conference following a summit for the "coalition of the willing" at the Elysee Palace in Paris on March 27, 2025.
The reassurance force has its share of supporters, notably British PM Keir Starmer. But Italian PM Giorgia Meloni offered “no national participation,” while Czech PM Petr Fiala dubbed the discussion “premature” until ceasefire conditions become known.
Moscow’s response?A hard nyet.Maria Zakharova, spokesperson for the Russian foreign ministry, claimed that the UK and France are “hatching plans for military intervention in Ukraine” under the guise of peacekeeping. She added, “Russia categorically opposes such a scenario, which threatens a direct conflict between Russia and NATO.”
So far, there has been no formal response from the Trump administration, although special envoy Steve Witkoff referred to the plan as “simplistic” and “posturing” in an interview with Tucker Carlson on March 21. We’re watching to see if there will be further reaction – and whether this will impact ceasefire talks.
The Canadian flag flies on Parliament Hill in Ottawa.
Canada’s foreign interference watchdog is warning that China, India, and Russia plan on meddling in the country’s federal election. The contest, which launched last weekend, has already been marked by a handful of stories about past covert foreign interventions and threats of new ones.
This week, the Globe and Mailreported allegations that India interfered in 2022 to help get Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre elected, though he was not aware of the efforts. They also broke news that former Liberal Party leadership candidate and member of Parliament Chandra Arya was banned from running for leader and reelection because of alleged interference tied, once again, to India.
Now, Canada’s election interference monitoring group is warning that China, India, and Russia will try to interfere in the current election.
Poilievre also accused Liberal leader Mark Carney of being cozy with Beijing due to a $276 million loan Brookfield Asset Management secured from the Bank of China when Carney was Chair of Brookfield’s board. Carney rejected those accusations and, on Wednesday, said that Canada should not pursue greater economic ties with China but should prioritize other Asian nations and Europe.
Other Canadian critics have complained that the US is interfering, citing Donald Trump consigliere Elon Musk’s public statements about the country. But officials say this doesn’t meet the bar for foreign interference. Neither, apparently, do the actions of Alberta Premier Danielle Smith,who recently admitted to Breitbartthat she pressed Trump administration officials to delay tariffs to help elect the Conservatives over the Liberals, since Poilievre would be “the best person” for the White House to deal with given that he would be “very much in sync with the new direction in America.”Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy speaks during a press conference, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine March 25, 2025.
The United States announced on Tuesday that Russia and Ukraine had verbally agreed to a temporary ceasefire in the Black Sea and a moratorium on energy infrastructure strikes. Ukraine confirmed the agreement — which followed marathon talks in Riyadh — and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said he was grateful to the US for brokering it. But soon after, Moscow introduced fresh conditions for agreeing to a limited ceasefire, including the removal of sanctions on certain Russian banks and exports. Even Donald Trump, in response to Russia’s apparent bait and switch, remarked “it could be they’re dragging their feet,” but said he remained confident that Vladimir Putin wants to strike a deal.
Clouds of war: Russia, meanwhile, is seeking to gain as much ground as possible in Ukraine before there’s a more expansive pause in fighting, incentivizing it to drag out negotiations. On Monday, the Kremlin launched missiles on a residential area in the northeastern city of Sumy that injured 88 people, and a cyberattack hit Ukraine’s ticketing system, resulting in long waits at railway stations. In response, Ukrainian forces struck Russia’s civilian energy infrastructure, which is included in the outline of Tuesday’s ceasefire.
What Ukrainians want: An overwhelming majority of Ukrainians support a broad 30-day truce, according to a March Kyiv International Institute of Sociology poll. But just 16% said they would agree to Russia’s publicly stated terms for a fuller ceasefire, with 79% calling it “completely unacceptable.”
What comes next? Trump maintains that he believes both sides want to see an end to the war, and he reiterated that “I just want to see it stop. I also don’t want to pay.” What’s crystal clear is that further talks will be necessary, highlighting how this is merely a bump on the long road to peace in war-torn Ukraine.
“The US can seek to convert these agreements into a broader ceasefire, provided that they hold,” says Alex Brideau, Russia director at Eurasia Group. “The back-and-forth talks the Americans have had with the Ukrainians and Russians demonstrate the challenges the Trump administration will face.”
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: I want to talk about the transatlantic relationship. The US relationship with Europe. Because of all of the geopolitics in the world, this is the one that I think has been impacted in a permanent and structural way in the first two months of the Trump administration. I wouldn't say that, for example, look at the Middle East and US relations with Israel, the Saudis, the Emiratis, the rest of the Gulf States, frankly, all very comfortable with Trump. If there's a significant change, I would say it's incrementally more engaged, and in terms of worldview than under the Biden administration. Japan, South Korea, Australia, India, you look at Asia relations and certainly Trump and the US on trade worrying them, making them sort of react in a more defensive posture. Seeing how much, how more quickly, they can get something to the US that will lead to trying to diffuse potential conflict there. But not radically different from the way they thought about the United States in 2017 in the first Trump term.
Mexico, Canada, Panama, here you've got countries that are facing very significant challenges from the United States, but also ultimately understand that they have no other options. Now, in Canada, that's a bigger fight because there are elections coming up at the end of April. But after those elections are over, I certainly expect that they will move quickly to try to ensure that ongoing relations are functional and stable. That's already true for the Mexican government with a president who has 85% approval, can do pretty much everything necessary to ensure that US-Mexico relations aren't dramatically impacted by everything Trump is demanding. So that's everywhere else.
But in Europe, that's just not the case. Three different reasons why the Europeans are facing a much more permanent impact. The first is on the trade side, like everybody else, and trade is well within the European Union's competency. They understand that they have leverage. If the Americans are going to hit them with significant tariffs, they're going to hit back with the same numbers. But that doesn't mean it's going to be relatively difficult and take a long time to resolve it, as opposed to places that are much weaker where they just fold quickly to the United States. Okay, fair enough. But still, that's not all that dramatically different from first term. Second point is there's a war going on in Ukraine, and the United States has made it very clear that they want to engage, to re-engage with Putin, who is Europe's principal enemy. And they're going to do that irrespective of how much the Europeans oppose it, and they're not going to take any European input in those conversations.
Trump would like a rapprochement with Russia to include a Ukrainian ceasefire. But if that doesn't happen, he is oriented towards blaming the Ukrainians for it, towards taking Kremlin talking points on Ukraine not really being a country, and then on moving to ensure that US-Russia relations are functional again. All of that is deeply concerning, is existentially concerning, particularly for a bunch of European countries that are on the front lines spending a lot more in defense, not because the Americans are telling them to, but because they're worried about Russia themselves, feel like they have to be more independent. Then finally, because Europe is the supranational political experiment that relies most on common values and rule of law, and the United States under Trump is undoing that component of the US-led order specifically.
I wouldn't necessarily say that about collective security or existing alliances and willingness to provide some sort of defense umbrella, but I would certainly say that in terms of rule of law and territorial integrity. And here, the fact that the United States no longer really cares about territorial integrity, is prepared to tell Denmark, "Hey, you're not a good ally. You're not defending Greenland. We're interested in moving forward ourselves, and we don't care how you've treated us historically. We're going to send our leaders and we're going to cut our own deal inside your territory." That's exactly the way the Germans felt when JD Vance said that he wanted to engage directly with the Alternatives für Deutschland, who the Germans consider to be a neo-Nazi party.
Everything that's core to the Europeans in their statehood and in the EU, the United States under Trump is on the other side of that, and it's increasingly conflictual. It's directly adversarial. And so I would say number one, the Europeans are aware of these problems. Number two, they're taking them late, but nonetheless finally very seriously. And so they understand that the Europeans are going to have to create an independent strategy for their own self-defense, for their national security, for their political stability, for their democracies, and they have to do that outside of the United States. In fact, they have to do that and defend themselves against the United States.
Now that reality doesn't mean they're going to be successful. And indeed, the more summits I see on Ukraine, frankly the less I have been convinced that the Europeans will be able to do enough, quick enough to really help Ukraine dramatically cut a better deal with the Russian Federation that is very uninterested in doing anything that is sustainable for the Ukrainians long term. It makes me worry that the EU longer term is not fit for purpose in an environment where the principle, the most powerful actors don't care about rule of law. The United States, China, and for Europe, Russia right on their borders. So for all of those reasons, I mean, the European markets have gone up recently. European growth expectations have gone up because the Germans and others are planning on spending a lot more, that's short-term. Long-term here. I worry that the Europeans are in an awful lot of trouble. So something we'll be focusing on very closely going forward over the coming weeks and months. I hope you all are well, and I'll talk to you all real soon.
- Trump, Musk sow election interference controversy in India - and Europe ›
- Putin trolls Europe about "the master" Trump ›
- Will Europe step up as America turns its back on Ukraine? - GZERO ... ›
- What Trump's return means for Europe, with Finnish President Alexander Stubb ›
- Trump's dealmaking with Putin leaves Ukraine and Europe with nowhere to turn ›
President Donald Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, speaks to reporters at the White House in Washington, on March 19, 2025.
While US President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff predicted “real progress, particularly as it affects a Black Sea ceasefire on ships between both countries,” leading to a “full-on shooting ceasefire,” Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov contradicted him, telling Russian state TV on Sunday that “difficult negotiations” await and that “We are only at the beginning of this path.”
Witkoff was also criticized by Western experts for an interview with pro-Trump broadcaster Tucker Carlson that aired Friday, in which he dismissed UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s proposed peacekeeping plan for Ukraine as “a posture and a pose” and repeated several Kremlin talking points, including that Ukraine is a “false country.” Witkoff also said that Russia’s control over five Ukrainian regions – of which he was only able to name two – should be internationally recognized and praised Vladimir Putin as “super smart,” adding, “I don’t regard Putin as a bad guy.”