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 }}
Putin's strategy in Ukraine ahead of Trump's return
Putin has been warning them not to do that. They decided they were going to, the Russian response has been to formally change their nuclear doctrine so that they would be considered to be in a state of war legally against any country that allowed Ukraine to use their missiles against Russia. In other words, essentially, Russia is claiming that they're now at war with France, with the UK, with the United States. And also, the Russians used a medium range missile hypersonic nuclear capable directly against the Ukrainian target in Dnipro.
In other words, what we're seeing from Putin is, "I'm showing you what you're doing is moving towards World War III, and that's how I'm responding." Does that mean that Putin is actually escalating towards direct war with NATO allies? The answer to that is no. He wasn't doing that when he was losing the battle in Ukraine in the early months. He's certainly not doing it now that he's winning.
And he is winning. He has more troops on the front lines, including those from North Korea, those from Yemen, those that he's getting from other countries. Also, he's taking more territory on the ground in Ukraine at a faster pace now, more significant amounts of territory in Southeast Ukraine than at any point since the opening months of the war. Plus Trump is President-elect. Trump has said, "I want to end this war." And he is coming in just in a couple of months.
So what Putin is doing is not threatening World War III. He's instead showing off just how bad this Biden policy is, this existing NATO policy is. He's making it easier for Trump to pivot away and say, "I'm the peacemaker. We were heading towards World War III, this horrible escalation. I'm the guy that got the great deal done and look how brilliant I am." Putin is facilitating that.
Now, of course, to make that happen Trump still has to give Putin something that he wants. He has to give an outcome that is acceptable to Putin. And Putin's made clear, at least thus far, that he's not going to give up any territory that he has. That he's not prepared to accept that Ukraine would be able to join NATO. He's also said that Ukraine can't continue to have a functional armed forces which is something that would be completely unacceptable to Ukraine.
The devil's going to be in the details here. There clearly is an opportunity for Trump to end the war. He's promised he's going to end the war, and I think he can. I think he can create a ceasefire. The Ukrainian leadership has already made clear that they are supportive of ending the war, but they're not just going to listen. There has to be a back and forth conversation with the Americans. Seeing what it is that Trump is prepared to put forward, and whether or not the Russians are capable of accepting it, are willing to accept it. Even though it will look like a win for Russia compared to where they would've been under Biden, under Harris, or at any other point in the last couple of years.
Still, if you are Putin, there is an open question. You're taking land right now. The Ukrainians don't have the people to continue to put up a strong defense. Why wouldn't you delay this out for another three, another six months? Take more land. Try to get all the territory that you have formally annexed over the course of the war. Why not settle the war on your terms? A lot easier to do if you're winning than losing. And the question there will be to what extent Trump is willing to cause material punishment to Putin if he doesn't say yes.
And that's an open question. Trump historically has been willing to take easy wins that don't necessarily play well over the long term. Look at Afghanistan. He wanted to get the Americans out. He cut a deal with the Taliban. It was a deal that was clearly very advantageous from a military and from a governance perspective for the Taliban than it was for the United States. He cut that despite the fact that the allies were not supportive or coordinating. That undermined the US deeply. Biden then continued with that plan. And it was one of the biggest losses that the US has experienced over the last four years.
Now, that of course, was a loss that ultimately fell on Biden. This would be a loss that would ultimately fall on Trump. And so does he want to risk that? That's a very interesting question. And of course, you also have to look at Trump's staff because he can make a phone call with Zelensky and with Putin, but ultimately, it is the secretary of state, the national security advisor and others that are going to have to work out the details of that agreement. And those people, at least thus far, are not people that are oriented towards giving away the store to Putin. They're people-oriented towards mistrust of Putin, towards a hard line against the Russians, towards support of Ukraine.
I am thinking here that number one, there's a reasonably high chance that Trump can get the win that he wants, but number two, this isn't likely to be a walk in the park for the Russian president. The Europeans need to play here as well. And what will be important, there's been a few formulated conversations thus far between President-elect Trump and some of the European leaders.
They haven't gone very far, but they've also not blown up the bilateral relationships. Their ability to work with Trump advisors on Trump, and on a greater coordination of what an ultimate solution or settlement of the Russian-Ukraine war would be, will make a dramatic difference as to what extent this is sustainable. To what extent this leads to not only Ukraine that can continue to defend itself and the territory that it is left with, but also can integrate into Europe, can be politically successful as a democracy over time. And that NATO will stay strong and stay together and stay aligned with the United States because they don't have another choice. There is no autonomous European military capacity. It's either NATO sticks together or it fragments.
Those are all things that we're going to watch very carefully over the course of the next couple months. But for now, an escalatory period. And it's all performative and it's all oriented towards what happens when Trump becomes president. That's it for me, and I'll talk to you all real soon.
2024-01-10 Vilnius Lithuania. President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky visits Lithuania on Wednesday 10 of January 2024. Lithuanian foreign minister Gabrielius Landsbergis meets Zelensky in airport.No Use Lithuania. No Use Estonia. No Use Latvia.
Russia’s escalation sparks NATO anxiety
NATO and Ukrainewill hold emergency talks on Tuesday after Russia attacked a military facility near the Ukrainian city of Dnipro with a hypersonic missile last Thursday. The attack came in retaliation forUkraine striking Russia earlier in the week with US-made ATACMS, after US President Joe Biden greenlit the use of the weapons.
Upping the ante. Russian President Vladimir Putin claims Moscow’snewly developed “Oreshnik” missile is “unstoppable” by western defense systems, travels at 10 times the speed of sound, and that even with conventional warheads, “the massive use of the weapon would be comparable in effect to the use of nuclear weapons.” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky described the use of the Oreshnikas a “clear and severe escalation” in the nearly three-year-old war.
But it also represents a new threat to continental Europe. Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk expressed concern. “The war in the east is entering a decisive phase, we feel that the unknown is approaching,” he said, whileHungary’s Prime Minister Viktor Orbán — a long-standing pal to Putin — said Russia’s threat of additional strikes should be taken seriously and warned “there will be consequences.” We’ll be watching how NATO leaders balance bolstering Ukraine’s defenses with increasing its offensive capability, given how Putin reacted to long-range strikes.Attendees gather near tactical ballistic missile launchers during a ceremonial event to mark the delivery of new tactical ballistic missiles to North Korean troops at an undisclosed location in North Korea, August 4, 2024 in this photo released by North Korea's official Korean Central News Agency.
North Korea sends troops abroad and builds walls at home
It was barely 24 hours ago when we asked whether North Korea was really sending troops to fight alongside Russia in Ukraine. The answer appears to be yes, according to South Korean and Ukrainian sources.
They say there are several dozen North Koreans already in Ukraine, helping to operate the launchers for North Korean ballistic missile systems that Pyongyang has supplied to Moscow.
Western governments have long accused North Korea of supplying artillery and other munitions to Russia, but the presence of troops in the theater of combat would mark a substantial deepening of the Moscow-Pyongyang partnership. North Korea and Russia have denied any of this is happening.
Meanwhile, closer to home, North Korea has for the first time acknowledged that it is building a border wall that will completely sever road and rail ties with the South. The project, which had previously been spotted by satellite images, comes as relations between the two Koreas have been steadily deteriorating.
Earlier this year, North Korean Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un for the first time openly rejected the goal of an eventual reconciliation or reunification between the two countries. Now he is backing up words with actual walls.FILE PHOTO: Senior Hezbollah official Hashem Safieddine speaks during the funeral of Mohammed Nasser, a senior Hezbollah commander who was killed by what security sources say was an Israel strike on Wednesday, in Beirut's southern suburbs, Lebanon July 4, 2024.
Israel says presumed successor to Nasrallah has been killed
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tuesday that Hashem Safieddine, the presumed successor to slain Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, had died in an airstrike in Beirut, but it has not been confirmed by Hezbollah. News of the purported assassination came the same day that the Israeli military deployed the 146th Division “Ha-Mapatz” to its invasion of southern Lebanon, where it joined three other divisions in attempting to push Hezbollah back from the border area.
Netanyahu reiterated his priority of enabling 60,000 Israeli civilians evacuated from the North to return home. He also warned that Lebanon faces “destruction and suffering like we see in Gaza” if the Lebanese people do not “free” themselves of Hezbollah. Israel has urged Lebanese civilians to flee north of the Awali River, about 15 miles north of the border.
The number of troops committed — full-strength Israeli divisions number 10,000 - 15,000 soldiers, though entire divisions are not always deployed simultaneously — tells Eurasia Group’s Cliff Kupchan that Israel is determined to completely scour out a buffer zone, some of which they may occupy.
“Whatever northern boundary they pick, they really want to destroy any Hezbollah infrastructure or potential for presence within that boundary,” he says. “I think the number of troops reflects the difficulty of the challenge and Israeli goals to absolutely dismantle any potential threat Hezbollah could use the buffer area to shell northern Israel.”
The future of modern warfare
Technology in Ukraine is transforming the battlefield in real time. How will it change the US national security strategy? And could what's happening in Ukraine shift China’s President Xi Jinping’s future plans in Taiwan? Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander Admiral James Stravridis joins Ian Bremmer on GZERO World to talk about how technology is creating a “new triad” of warfare, i.e., unmanned systems, cyber and artificial intelligence, and special forces.
Modern conflict no longer requires huge standing armies to fight effectively; just look at Ukraine’s success in the Black Sea. Smaller militaries are increasingly using drones, satellites, and unmanned systems against larger armies. Stavridis says Taiwan is a “resistance fighter’s dream” because of its geography and resources. Plus, it manufactures about half of the world’s computer chips, which China relies on for its technology infrastructure. But Stavridis also warns the same technology is empowering malefactors and terrorist groups, creating dangerous asymmetrical warfare.
“The US will continue to be the preeminent nation at projecting power. China will make a play to do it. Russia, the lights are going to go out,” the Admiral says, “But it’s acts of terrorism and the ability to use weapons of mass disruption, that’s what you need to worry about.”
For more on technology and the transformation of war, check out Admiral Stavridis’ book "2054: A Novel". His newest book, "The Restless Wave", a historical novel about the rise of new technology in the Pacific during WWII, is out October 8.
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 (🔔).
The future of war: James Stavridis on China, Russia, and the biggest security threats to the US
Technology is rapidly changing how modern wars are being fought, and the United States needs to reevaluate its national security priorities to adapt. Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander, Admiral James Stavridis, joins Ian Bremmer on the GZERO World Podcast to discuss the transformation of war, China’s calculus in Taiwan, and the biggest threats facing the US, both inside the border and abroad. Stavridis warns China is still intent on pursuing its expansionist goals and territorial claims in the South China Sea. He also thinks President Xi Jinping may be looking at Russia’s stalled Ukraine invasion, as well as the global reaction to it, and wondering whether military action in Taiwan is in China’s best interest. Stavridis predicts a “new triad” of warfare–unmanned systems, artificial intelligence, and cyber special forces–will lead armies around the world to shift their focus from personnel and artillery to unmanned systems and AI. While it will lead to reduced costs for traditional militaries, it’s also empowering terrorist groups and malefactors in an increasingly high-stakes game of asymmetrical warfare. Stavridis’ newest book, The Restless Wave, is out October 8.
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.
Why Giles Duley advocates for the forgotten victims of war
In 2011, documentary photographer Giles Duley had what he describes as his “worst day at the office,” a day when he was critically injured by an improvised explosive device in Afghanistan. He lost both of his legs and his left arm, ended up in the hospital for a year, and was operated on 37 times. Duley was told he would never walk again, but 18 months after nearly being killed, he returned to Afghanistan and was back on the job.
“I realized that if I went back to do the work that I did, I would be better at it. I would have that relationship with the people that I documented that nobody else would,” Duley told GZERO this week in a conversation at the SDG Media Zone during the 79th UN General Assembly.
Duley is now the UN’s first global advocate for persons with disabilities in conflict and peacebuilding situations. He’s dedicated his life to documenting and spreading awareness on the long-term impact of war. Through his organization, Legacy of War Foundation, Duley also works to provide vital assistance to civilians affected by conflict.
With civilian casualties from landmines and explosive ordnance on the rise, particularly in places like Ukraine and Myanmar, Duley’s work could not be more pertinent. He’s calling for greater efforts to clear munitions used in present-day conflicts. If more isn’t done in this regard, Duley warns that “children not yet born will die from these wars.”
FILE PHOTO - A Philippine flag flutters from BRP Sierra Madre, a dilapidated Philippine Navy ship that has been aground since 1999 and became a Philippine military detachment on the disputed Second Thomas Shoal, part of the Spratly Islands, in the South China Sea March 29, 2014.
Can the US and Philippines get Beijing to back off?
On Monday, 3,500 US and Filipino troops began what could become their largest-ever annual training exercises on the Philippine island of Luzon. This came a day after major multilateral naval drills in the South China Sea and just ahead of a trilateral US-Philippines-Japan summit in Washington on Thursday.
The message to China? Take the US-Philippines alliance seriously.
How we got here: China’s beef with the Philippines is over control of the South China Sea, which Beijing sees as its territory. Manila deliberately beached a ship on the disputed Second Thomas Shoal in 1999 and has based a small contingent of Marines in the hulk ever since.
But that shell is falling apart, and when Manila tried to send reconstruction supplies last month, Chinese Coast Guard ships blasted the supply vessel with water cannons, immobilizing it and injuring several aboard.
“China is going up to 9 out of 10 of what it can do short of an armed attack on a public vessel, which would likely trigger the US-Philippines Mutual Defense Treaty obligations,” says Jeremy Chan, a senior analyst at the Eurasia Group.
Could it lead to war? Washington hopes displays of allied strength and unity will keep Beijing from crossing the line, but Beijing is equally determined to assert what it sees as sovereign rights.
“This is one of China’s absolute red lines,” says Chan. “The South China Sea is one of their core interests and part of party doctrine, just like Taiwan.”
Thursday’s trilateral will focus on joint efforts to deter China and will likely include announcements of upgraded US-Japan security ties.