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 }}
Hard Numbers: Google to build AI data hub in India, Mexican rains kill dozens, Venezuela shuts Norwegian embassy, China puts sanctions on Korean shipbuilder
64: Torrid rains in Mexico last week – the result of an unusual clash of hot and cold fronts – have left 64 dead and another 65 missing. The rain damaged some 100,000 homes, and has left five states without power. The worst-affected areas were in the central parts of the country, as well as along the Gulf Coast.
3: Just three days after the Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded its Peace Prize to Venezuela’s opposition leader Maria Corina Machado, Caracas shut its embassy in Oslo on Monday. The Venezuelan didn’t mention Machado in its statement about the closure. Norway also suffered a diplomatic blow for similar reasons in 2010, when China suspended trade relations after the Nobel Committee awarded its prize to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo.
5: China sanctioned five US-linked subsidiaries of South Korea’s Hanwha Ocean, accusing them of aiding US investigations. The move coincided with new US-China port fees and sent Hanwha shares down nearly 6%. Seoul said it’s assessing the impact as tensions over shipbuilding escalate.September 28, 2025, Tehran, Iran: Iranian lawmakers participate in an open session of parliament. Iran has recalled its envoys to Britain, France, and Germany for consultations after the three countries.
Do additional sanctions on Iran make a difference now?
The European Union confirmed on Monday that it has reinstated sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program, following the United Nations’ decision over the weekend to reimpose its own penalties.
The move piles fresh punishment onto an economy already battered by a collapsing currency, soaring inflation and deficits, and chronic shortages of water and energy. Iran is also still reeling from the 12-day war in June, which included US airstrikes on its three main nuclear sites and a wave of Israeli attacks on sensitive government targets.
What’s in these sanctions? They reinstate bans on arms imports and on the transfer of dual-use technologies that could support a nuclear program. The measures also freeze the assets of individuals linked to Iran’s missile and nuclear efforts, impose travel bans on sanctioned officials, and authorize inspections of Iranian cargo, including oil shipments. All of this comes atop extensive financial sanctions that the US has imposed since 2018.
Why are they called “snapback” sanctions? They were previously lifted, as part of a 2015 nuclear deal between Iran, the US, and Europe, on the condition that Iran continue to allow international inspection of its nuclear programs to ensure that they are for peaceful use. The US exited that deal in 2018, reimposing sanctions, but European partners continued some of its terms. After the war with Israel, Iran suspended access to inspectors, opening the way for these sanctions to automatically “snap back” into place.
Economic impact. The effects are already rippling out over Iran’s currency markets. The rial is now trading at more than a million per US dollar and fell another 4% on the black market on Saturday. That slide is eroding the purchasing power of the middle class and squeezing quality of life. Eurasia Group Iran expert Greg Brew described the sanctions’ practical impact as “largely symbolic and psychological,” warning that they will deepen public disillusionment by reducing prospects for diplomacy and long-promised sanctions relief.
“The impact of the last few years of sanctions has been to increase inequality in Iran,” says Brew. “More of the wealth and more of the power is moving upward, while the middle class has been squeezed and shrunk.”
Could that generate a fresh wave of protests? Possibly, as Iran has seen a number of economic-driven protests in recent years. But the political impact would likely be limited, in Brew’s view. "Iran has no organized political opposition,” he says, “There's really no locus around which the opposition can mobilize and the internal repressive apparatus is still as large and as powerful as it has always been, if not more."
Nuclear diplomacy stalled. The purpose of the sanctions is to pressure Iran to return to meeting its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which requires Tehran to forswear nuclear weapons development and accept international inspections.
"What we're looking at in the short term is Iran remaining within the NPT in name only," says Brew. Since the 12-day War, Iran has been skirting the treaty’s spirit by denying inspectors access to key facilities and refusing to clarify the status of its enriched uranium. The regime has made the decision to weather more sanctions rather than allow international inspections, underscoring the question: what, exactly, is going on at Iran’s nuclear facilities now?An aerial view shows damaged buildings in Gaza, July 28, 2025.
What We’re Watching: Israel advances Gaza City takeover plan, US brokers Armenia-Azerbaijan peace deal, Trump’s Russia deadline arrives
Netanyahu plans to conquer Gaza City
Rebuffing warnings from the country’s top military officials, Israel’s Security Cabinet early Friday approved Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s plan to take over Gaza City, the capital of the Gaza strip. Netanyahu has given the city’s 800,000 residents until Oct. 7 to evacuate, a deadline chosen to mark the two-year anniversary of Hamas’ attack on Israel. Netanyahu’s original plan involved occupying all of Gaza, and this remains possible unless, Israel says, Hamas returns the remaining hostages. The move has angered several Israeli allies, with Germany announcing it will halt military exports to Israel.
Armenia and Azerbaijan to sign historic peace agreement
The two South Caucasus nations will sign a US-brokered agreement at the White House today. They have been in conflict for more than 30 years, mainly over the fate of Nagorno-Karabakh, an ethnic Armenian separatist enclave of Azerbaijan. In 2023, Azerbaijan retook full control of it after a decisive military advance. The peace deal reportedly grants the US exclusive rights to develop a transit corridor through the energy rich region, which sits at the crossroads of Russian, Turkish, and Iranian influence. For a brief history of the conflict, see here.
Trump’s Russia deadline arrives
Trump’s deadline for Russia to strike a ceasefire deal with Ukraine, or face sanctions, is today. With the US leader set to meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in the “coming days,” it’s unclear whether he still intends to follow through with the threat – he was evasive when asked about it yesterday, although he has already been hitting at least one of Russia’s main trade partners hard with “secondary measures.” European leaders fear that Putin’s decision to meet with Trump is just another effort to prolong the war and stave off US pressure.A satellite overview shows the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Facility, amid the Iran-Israel conflict, near Qom, Iran, June 29, 2025
Hard Numbers: US intel shows two Iranian nuclear sites survive, EU adopts fresh Russia sanctions, Pakistani bird-seller loses nest egg, CBS sunsets Colbert, Cancer takes a long-term hit
1: A new US intelligence assessment says that the US strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities last month destroyed only one of the three sites targeted. While Fordow – Iran’s most fortified enrichment site – was mostly destroyed, the Natanz and Isfahan sites likely did not suffer the same damage. US President Donald Trump, who has said all the sites were “obliterated”, reportedly rejected a more thorough, weeks-long bombing campaign because it would have clashed with his stated objective of disentangling the US from foreign conflicts.
18: The European Union on Friday approved the 18th package of sanctions against Russia over President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. The centerpiece of the measures is a new cap on the price that members can pay for Russian oil. The package, which requires unanimous approval from EU members, overcame opposition from Slovakia, which won some exceptions from wider EU plans to phase out Russian energy imports altogether.
10: After ten years in business, a Pakistani bird-seller recently found his bank accounts suddenly frozen by the government. The reason? He had sold a parrot to prominent journalist and bird collector Asad Ali Toor, who routinely ruffles powerful feathers with his criticisms of Pakistan’s military and judiciary. The government has locked the accounts of others who had done business with Toor too, in what looks like a bid to isolate and silence a prominent critic.
32: After 32 seasons on air, the lights will go down next year on the Late Show, CBS's flagship evening comedy and interview program, which has been hosted by Trump-critic Steven Colbert since 2015. CBS said the move was made for financial reasons, as late night shows have been losing audience and revenue for years. Parent company Paramount said it was unrelated to a controversial settlement with Trump over an allegedly biased edit of a “60 Minutes” interview with his 2024 election rival Kamala Harris. Paramount is also, as it happens, currently seeking US government approval for an $8 billion mega-merger with Skydance Media.
⅓: Good news from the front lines of the “War on Cancer”: the age-related death rate from the disease in the US is fully ⅓ lower than it was in the 1990s, mirroring progress in other developed countries. Experts attribute the improvement to a combination of public policy (such as smoking bans) and scientific breakthroughs. Building on those gains, and expanding them globally, remains a key challenge.
Amir Seaid Iravani premanent representative of the Islamic Republic of Iran speaks during the UN Security Council on June 24, 2025 in New York City.
Iran was hit – did the nuclear non-proliferation regime take the blow?
It’s not clear yet how much the US attack on Iran's nuclear sites this weekend set back the Islamic Republic's ability to develop atomic weapons, but experts say the airstrikes almost certainly threw a bomb into something larger: the global nuclear non-proliferation regime.
Since 1970, the UN-backed Non-Proliferation Treaty, known as the NPT, has been the backbone of efforts to prevent more countries from developing nuclear weapons. Nearly 200 countries have signed it – including Iran. But with the stroke of a B-2, Trump may have wrecked it.
The treaty formally recognizes the nuclear arsenals of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council—China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the US. All other countries promise not to develop those weapons – though they can use nuclear power for civilian uses. They agree to inspections from the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency to ensure they aren’t secretly developing weapons, under threat of sanctions.
Since the treaty's signing, just four nations have acquired nuclear weapons. North Korea, India, and Pakistan, as well as Israel – which despite Tel Aviv’s denials is widely believed to have secretly weaponized its program in the 1960’s. None of these countries had signed the NPT, though, so the international condemnation of their development was, structurally, limited.
Overall, experts say, the treaty has been a success. “There are more countries today that had started nuclear weapons programs and decided to stop them than there are countries that have nuclear weapons,” says Matthew Bunn, professor of Energy, National Security, and Foreign Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School. “So our efforts to stop these programs succeed more often than they fail.”
However, US and Israel’s attacks on Iran disregarded the NPT mechanisms entirely, something that could raise doubts about the value of the treaty among other countries that are party to it.
“The US is seen by many countries, particularly in the Global South, as a bully that uses its military power outside of international law,” says Bunn. “That’s a problem for the US being able to negotiate what it wants in forums like the NPT.”
History suggests it may be worth having nukes. Nuclear weapons are seen as the ultimate deterrent to invasion or regime change, making them particularly sought after by countries at odds with global powers or aggressive neighbors.
Iraq and Libya gave up their nuclear weapons programs in the 1990s and early 2000s, while Ukraine surrendered its actual arsenal after the Soviet collapse. The first two were invaded by the US and NATO, while the third was invaded by Russia. Meanwhile, North Korea successfully built several bombs and has avoided regime change despite being on a war footing against the US-backed South for 75 years.
Since the attack, Iran has threatened to abandon the NPT, calling the attacks an “irreparable blow,” with lawmakers considering the possibility of pulling out on Sunday. If they leave the treaty, it raises the likelihood that more countries could follow suit, meaning the world could see more nuclear weapons development, with less international oversight.
“Countries that fear they may be on the pointy end of an American stick will be more motivated than before to seek nuclear weapons,” says Bunn.
But it's not just America’s enemies who want nukes. Many of Washington’s allies have long agreed to forego nuclear weapons because they had the protection of America’s own nuclear umbrella. But now, Bunn says, “American allies are beginning to wonder if they need their own nuclear weapons because of the US president who routinely questions whether the US should defend its allies.”
South Korea and Poland, which share borders with nuclear-armed North Korea and Russia respectively – are both asking that question. Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk is “talking seriously” about obtaining nuclear capabilities and in South Korea, polls have found that as much as 70% of the population supports having its own arsenal.
“A number of countries are saying to themselves, we've rested our entire security policy on the notion that America will always be a reliable partner. And it looks like that may not be true. Do we need nuclear weapons of our own?” says Bunn.
Syrians set off fireworks during celebrations in Clock Square in the center of Idlib city, after US President Donald Trump's decision to lift sanctions on Syria.
Trump ends Syria sanctions ahead of meeting with new regime
US President Donald Trump announced that he will lift sanctions on Damascus ahead of his meeting with Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa on Wednesday, to help the country “move forward” from its devastating civil war.
Turning a new leaf: Deposed dictator Bashar al-Assad had long been sanctioned for terrorism and human rights abuses. Syria’s new leadership has pushed for those restrictions to end, as they further crippled the Levantine country’s war-ravaged economy.
Why it matters: Trump’s decision paves the way for other Western countries to follow suit.Trump and Khamenei staring at eachother across an Iranian flag.
Will Trump’s Iran strategy actually prevent war?
The United States is ramping up its “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran.
In a letter sent to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in early March, President Donald Trump gave Tehran an ultimatum: reach a new nuclear deal with the US within two months or face direct military action – “bombing the likes of which they have never seen before,” as he told NBC News’ Kristen Welker on Sunday.
The letter proposed mediation by the United Arab Emirates (whose emissaries delivered the missive in question) and expressed Trump’s preference for a diplomatic solution. “I would rather have a peace deal than the other option, but the other option will solve the problem,” the president said.
In the three weeks it took the Iranian leadership to figure out how to respond, the US turned up the temperature.
First came intense airstrikes (of Signalgate fame) against Iran’s last remaining functional ally in the region, the Houthis in Yemen, starting on March 15 and continuing to this day. Then, the US issued its first-ever sanctions against Chinese entities for buying Iranian crude oil, including a “teapot” refinery in Shandong and an import and storage terminal in Guangzhou. And in recent days, the US military deployed a fleet of B-2 stealth bombers – capable of carrying the 30,000-lb. bunker-busting bombs needed to blast through Iran’s hardened enrichment sites – to its Diego Garcia base in the Indian Ocean, in range of both Yemen and Iran. This move was “not unrelated” to Trump’s ultimatum, according to a senior US official.
Iran finally rejected direct negotiations with the US in a formal response to Trump’s letter delivered last Thursday via Oman, its preferred mediator. President Masoud Pezeshkian stated on Sunday that although the Islamic Republic won’t speak directly with the Trump administration while maximum pressure is in place, Tehran is willing to engage with Washington indirectly through the Omanis.
Whether Trump’s two-month deadline was to strike a deal or to begin negotiations remains unclear. Either way, there’s no chance that two sides that deeply mistrust each other – especially after Trump unilaterally withdrew from the original nuclear deal in 2018 – could reach an agreement over issues as complex as Iran’s nuclear program and support for regional proxies in just a couple, or a few, months (let alone a single one).
But does that mean that Trump’s ultimatum is doomed to end in confrontation? Not necessarily. In fact, his “escalate to de-escalate” strategy could be the best hope to avoid a crisis this year.
A ticking time bomb
While US intelligence assesses that Iran is not building a nuclear weapon, it has become a threshold nuclear state with enough 60% enriched uranium to produce six nuclear weapons (if enriched to 90%) and the ability to “dash to a bomb” in about six months (though weaponizing a device would probably take it 1-2 years).
European governments have long made it clear that unless Iran reins in its enrichment activities by this summer, they will “snap back” the UN sanctions that were lifted as part of the 2015 nuclear deal before the agreement expires in October and they can no longer do so.
Iran has vowed to respond to snapback sanctions by withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Given the precedent set by North Korea – whose NPT exit in 2003 was followed by ever-greater steps toward weaponization – and the already advanced state of Tehran’s nuclear program, NPT withdrawal could be the action-forcing event Israel needs to convince Trump to support a joint strike on Iran’s underground nuclear facilities.
Which means that the US and Iran were likely headed for a collision later this year even if Trump hadn’t issued his ultimatum.
Strange bedfellows
And yet, both Trump and Iran’s leadership would much prefer to avoid a military confrontation in the near term.
Trump’s political coalition includes both traditional Republican war hawks and “America First” isolationists who are averse to US involvement in new forever wars. Whereas cabinet officials like Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth advocate for a more combative approach toward the Islamic Republic, none of these prominent national security hawks are in charge of the Iran file – Middle East Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, a Washington outsider and a restrainer, is.
Most importantly, Trump ran as a peacemaker and has repeatedly stated his preference for a deal, believing that bombing Iran could mire the US in an unpopular war that’d divert precious resources from his domestic priorities and endanger his friends in the Gulf for little political upside. The solidly MAGA Vice President JD Vance echoed this concern when, in the leaked Signal group chat, he flagged the risk to oil prices from striking the Houthis for the sake of “bailing out” the Europeans.
For its part, Iran is historically vulnerable and eager to negotiate a deal that brings sanctions relief to its battered economy. While capitulating to Trump’s demands is politically dangerous for Khamenei and would weaken the regime’s domestic position, neither he nor other hardliners would welcome a military showdown with the US and Israel.
Take it or leave it
The threat of a crisis later this year creates an opening for Trump to pressure Tehran into offering concessions that allow the US president to claim progress and avoid triggering snapback sanctions.
Last year’s effective destruction of Iran’s regional proxy network – Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Bashar al Assad’s regime in Syria – dealt a blow to the country’s conventional deterrence and heightened the importance of its nuclear program. Iran will therefore resist making any meaningful concessions on this front. If there’s one piece of the nuclear file it could cede ground on, it’s its stockpile of 60% enriched uranium, which Tehran could conceivably agree to freeze.
Where Iran could potentially offer more is in backing away from its proxies, at least temporarily. Though it doesn’t have operational control over the Houthis (unlike the decimated Hezbollah), the Islamic Republic could deprive them of the bulk of the weapons systems and intelligence they rely on to attack Red Sea shipping lanes. It could also instruct Shia militias in Iraq to refrain from targeting US troops.
The regime would find these choices politically and ideologically unpalatable. But with its so-called Axis of Resistance already in shambles and little Tehran can do to rebuild it in the near term, its strategic value is nowhere near what it was a year ago. A chance at avoiding a snapback and US bombing could accordingly be seen as a worthwhile trade.
Less for less
While a breakthrough agreement is highly unlikely to be reached before the summer (or at all), the two sides’ mutual desire to avoid escalation suggests that Trump would be receptive to the relatively minor concessions Tehran could be willing to make – the most it can conceivably offer under the circumstances.
But those concessions would need to come soon, before snapback is triggered. And even this best-case scenario wouldn’t buy Iran any sanctions relief. Instead, they’d get to kick the can on snapback sanctions and possible US military action while negotiations on a more comprehensive – and aspirational – deal are underway.
If, however, Iran’s modest concessions fall short of what Trump deems acceptable, the risk of military escalation this year will rise sharply – either when Trump’s ultimatum comes to a head or when snapback gets triggered, Iran exits the NPT, and Israel considers a strike (whether solo or joint with the US).
Iran has not yet made the decision to build a nuclear weapon. And unless it’s attacked, it remains unlikely to do so, knowing full well that any overt steps toward weaponization would invite certain, immediate, and devastating retaliation. But nothing would make the Islamic Republic dash for a bomb more than getting bombed.
FILE PHOTO: Children eat bread on a street near a flag adopted by the new Syrian rulers, after the ousting of Syria's Bashar al-Assad, in Damascus, Syria, December 24, 2024.
Syria seeks sanction relief
Diplomats and foreign ministers from 17 Arab and EU states convened in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on Sunday to discuss the lifting of economic sanctions on Syria, originally imposed during the rule of ousted president Bashar al-Assad. Removing the sanctions is key to reconstruction efforts for Damascus but will hinge on the new government’s ability to guarantee human rights in the country.
After the meeting, German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock advocated maintaining sanctions against Assad’s allies but alleviating restrictions that affect the general population. Baerbock also pledged an additional $51.2 million in aid for essential services. EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas also announced a meeting of foreign ministers in Brussels on Jan. 27 to discuss further relief measures.
As for the US, while it has not lifted sanctions, last week it issued a six-month exemption for certain transactions with Syrian governing institutions to expedite humanitarian assistance.
We’re watching whether those measures will be extended under the new administration of US President-elect Donald Trump, who in December said that Syria’s change of regime is “not our fight.” Trump also remarked that “Turkey is going to hold the key to Syria” – something that Saudi Arabia may take issue with as it positions itself as a key regional player in Syria’s rebuilding.