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 }}
Ambassador Robert Wood of the US raises his hand to vote against the ceasefire resolution at the United Nations Security Council, on November 20, 2024.
US vetoes Gaza ceasefire resolution
US vetoes Gaza ceasefire resolution
The US on Wednesday cast the lone veto to sink a UN Security Council resolution calling for an immediate, unconditional ceasefire between Israel and Hamas.
Washington said it opposed the measure because of wording that would have allowed Hamas to wait until after a ceasefire to release the roughly 100 remaining hostages that it still holds in Gaza. This is the fourth time the United States has blocked a ceasefire resolution of this kind.
The draft also called for Palestinian civilians in Gaza to be allowed to return to their homes, for the unhindered delivery of humanitarian aid to the strip, and for a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces.
The resolution’s failure comes as the humanitarian situation in Gaza continues to worsen. Earlier this week, unknown armed men looted roughly 100 trucks in a humanitarian convoy, causing food prices in the already-starving enclave to soar. The UN estimates only 16% of the 1.7 million people in central and southern Gaza have received adequate food rations.
Last week a 30 day ultimatum ran out for Israel to improve humanitarian access to the Strip or risk losing some US arms transfers. Washington said Israel had done the bare minimum to satisfy its concerns.
The challenges of peacekeeping amid rising global conflicts
In a GZERO Global Stage discussion at the 7th annual Paris Peace Forum, Dr. Comfort Ero, President and CEO of the International Crisis Group, shed light on the increasing elusiveness of global peace amid rising conflicts worldwide. She pointed out a "crisis of peacemaking," noting that comprehensive peace processes and settlements have become rare, with the last significant one being in Colombia in 2016.
"We are in the era of big power rivalry and a multipolar world where there are more actors piling in... competing interests, competing visions," Dr. Ero explained. She emphasized that traditional tools for nudging conflicting parties to the negotiation table, such as sanctions, are no longer effective, and the United Nations Security Council is becoming increasingly dysfunctional.
Highlighting the complex situation in Sudan, Dr. Ero described it as a significant crisis that lacks the media attention given to conflicts like those in Ukraine and Gaza. "We're talking, by the way, 20 years on from Darfur when we said never again. And here we are, and Sudan is on the verge of collapse," she warned. The conflict has led to millions being displaced and a dire humanitarian situation, with neighboring countries like South Sudan and Chad bearing the brunt of refugee inflows.
On the topic of United Nations Security Council reform, Dr. Ero was skeptical about the permanent five members relinquishing their veto power or extending it to others. "The P5 will jealously guard the veto power and will make sure that that is not watered down," she observed, raising questions about the Council's influence in the future.
This conversation was presented by GZERO in partnership with Microsoft at the 7th annual Paris Peace Forum. The Global Stage series convenes heads of state, business leaders, and technology experts from around the world for critical debates about the geopolitical and technological trends shaping our world.
Watch the full conversation at https://www.gzeromedia.com/global-stage, and watch out for more GZERO coverage of the Paris Peace Forum this week.
Global economy at risk if Middle East conflict expands, says World Bank's Ayhan Kose
While the global economy shows signs of growth and decreasing inflation, the near future involves risks, including the escalation in the Middle East impacting oil prices, strained China-US relations, and an increasingly challenging tariff and trade environment, said Ayhan Kose, World Bank Deputy Chief Economist. He discussed the geopolitical tensions influencing the global economy with GZERO's Tony Maciulis at the IMF and World Bank Annual Meetings in Washington, DC, in a GZERO Global Stage interview. Kose also addressed the other major economic gathering happening this week: Russia’s 16th annual BRICS Summit in Kazan, Russia, largely seen as a counterweight to Western-led order. While acknowledging the widening economic and geopolitical divide, Kose emphasized the need for international cooperation. He expressed concern about “the increase in the number of protectionist measures and consequences of that for global trade.” Kose also emphasized the "urgent and important" need for World Bank member nations to continue to support development in poorer countries, a more difficult conversation today as many face their own economic headwinds and the world awaits the results of the 2024 US presidential election.
Canada's fight with India over Sikh assassination heats up again
Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on World In :60.
What is the role of the United Nations in the Israel-Gaza war?
Well, it's actually quite a few roles. One, the General Assembly and the Security Council are principle places where you get to see how the various countries around the world respond to the war, what their political positioning is, so the comparative isolation of the United States on the Security Council, for example, what countries do, don't stand with Israel, the Palestinians of the 194 member states around the world? Secondly, the UN is the principal organization that delivers humanitarian aid on the ground in Gaza, staffed overwhelmingly by Palestinians, thousands of them. That's been controversial because a number, something like seven or eight, have been found to have been involved in the support for the attacks on October 7th, the terrorist attacks. And then, finally, you have UN peacekeepers, thousands of them, on the ground in southern Lebanon, with many countries around the world participating. That's the Security Council that's responsible for that but has not been particularly effective at ensuring that the Security Council resolutions, creating a buffer zone, pushing Hezbollah back, and not allowing them to strike Israel, have actually been implemented. So lots of places that they have a role, you learn a lot about the world as a consequence, but it's not like they have a lot of power or a lot of money.
Why did Canada expel Indian diplomats?
Well, it's a fight that's been going on for over a year now with the assassination of this Sikh terrorist that India was found to be behind on sovereign Canadian territory. There had been a conversation between Modi and Trudeau on the sidelines of recent G20 Summit. It looked like facilitated by the United States, that that relationship was improving. It has fallen apart again. One of the things, I mean, there's more information that's come out in Canada about what India's role has been interfering with Canadian politics and citizens, but also the fact that Trudeau is in really tough shape domestically. He's thinking that a fight with India right now may help him in terms of popularity. I don't think it's going to work, but that certainly is not irrelevant.
How important is Elon Musk in the US election?
I don't think he's very important to the outcome. Obviously, Twitter/X is significantly oriented towards the right in terms of both Elon and what's being algorithmically promoted, but it's a lot smaller for US citizens than TikTok, which is younger and is more focused to the extent there's a political slant on the left. So if you ask me, which is going to matter more? I suspect TikTok will bring out more voters than Twitter/X, will. I think you on, is important in the election because he has personally done so much to promote disinformation, and it's making it harder for the average American to know what they can trust, what's a trusted source of media, what's a trusted source of information, what they should believe around vaccines, around FEMA response to a hurricane, around whether or not the election is free and fair. And I'm worried deeply that there's much greater likelihood of violence in the United States on the back of his personal decision of how to run Twitter/X than there would've been otherwise. We'll be focused on this very closely.
Europe's biggest concerns about Middle East, one year after Oct. 7
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.
How October 7th changed Israel and the Middle East
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.
- Iran's next move: Interview with VP Javad Zarif ›
- Israel, Hamas, and Hezbollah: Fears of escalation grow ›
- Israel’s geopolitical missteps in Gaza ›
- Ian Bremmer: Understanding the Israel-Hamas war ›
- Israel-Hamas war: Who is responsible for Gaza's enormous civilian death toll? ›
- Podcast: The State of the World in 2024 with Ian Bremmer - GZERO Media ›
The view from Tehran: Iran's VP Zarif on Israel, Gaza & US complicity in ongoing conflicts
Listen: The Middle East finds itself teetering on the brink of a full-scale regional conflict as the world marks one year since the October 7th Hamas attacks. Israel has intensified its military operations against Iran-backed forces across multiple fronts, leaving destruction in its wake. In the span of a week, the assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Israel’s ground offensive into Lebanon have thrown gasoline on an already raging fire.
On this episode of the GZERO World Podcast, Ian Bremmer sits down with Iran's Vice President for Strategic Affairs Mohammad Javad Zarif, just before the Nasrallah assassination news broke. They discuss Iran's recent actions during this critical time. In their conversation, Zarif discusses the conflict’s broader regional impact, Iran’s right to self-defense, and its determination that Iran will not fall into Israel’s “trap.” Zarif also weighs in on the upcoming US presidential election, speculating on whether a Harris or Trump administration would benefit Iran, and addresses the rumors of an alleged Iranian plot to assassinate former President Donald Trump. He says, "We don’t send people to assassinate people. I think it’s a campaign ploy." Zarif adds that, despite the new Iranian President’s pledge for a rapprochement with the West, recent developments have only driven the wedge further. And with Israel now in northern Lebanon, Iran now stands at a crossroads of what to do next.
Subscribe to the GZERO World Podcast on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Stitcher, or your preferred podcast platform, to receive new episodes as soon as they're published.- Iran is protecting itself through restraint in Israel-Hamas war, says Kim Ghattas ›
- Israel's war in Gaza has emboldened Iran, says Karim Sadjadpour ›
- Podcast: Iran on the verge: why you don’t want the nuclear deal to fail, according to Iran expert Ali Vaez ›
- Israel hits Iran directly – what next? ›
- The challenges of peacekeeping amid rising global conflicts - GZERO Media ›
Iran's right to self-defense: VP Mohammad Javad Zarif
Is the shadow war between Israel and Iran officially out in the open? Iran launched a wave of ballistic missiles into Israel Tuesday night, calling the attack a response to Israel’s assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, who was killed in Lebanon last week. Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps also said the attack was retaliation for the killing of Hamas’s political leader, Ismael Haniyeh, assassinated while visiting Tehran last July, as well as Israel’s April attack on an Iranian embassy in Syria, which killed an Iranian commander.
On GZERO World, Ian Bremmer spoke with Iran’s Vice President of Strategic Affairs Mohammad Javad Zarif on September 25, days before Nasrallah’s assassination and Iran’s missile response. Zarif, who served as Iran’s foreign minister until 2021, made it clear that Tehran had a right to defend itself and warned Iran could respond to Israel at any time. Zarif said that Iran had, up to that point, shown restraint in order to avoid being “dragged” into a wider war, which he claimed would play into Israeli interests.
“[Israel] thrives on tension, on conflict, and we will not provide it to them,” Zarif said less than a week before Iran fired missiles into Israel’s territory, “But that doesn’t mean we will fail to defend our territory, our people, and our guests.”
Watch Ian Bremmer’s full interview with Vice President Zarif on GZERO World beginning this Friday, October 4. Check local listings.
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 (🔔).