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 }}
Trump's plans for policy & personnel
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: A Quick Take to kick off your week. Everyone, of course, talking about the incoming Trump administration. What it's going to mean in terms of personnel and in terms of policy. The latter, more important, but informed very significantly by the former. Couple of things I would say.
First of all, on the personnel side, clearly most important point here and very different from the first administration is that loyalty matters immensely. Trump is angriest not at Democrats, angriest at people that used to work for him who have now flipped, who are calling him a fascist. Some of the worst things that have been said about Trump in the first administration came from senior people that he put in that weren't loyal. They may have been long-term establishment Republicans and adults, but now he couldn't be bothered with them in the slightest and wants them to know it.
And that's why nobody really expected, that was talking to the Trump team, that Pompeo or Haley were going to be appointed. But the fact that Trump came out immediately before even making other appointments to a cabinet and saying, "No, you two, thanks, but no thanks. You can go get on with the rest of your lives." Because he sees them as not loyal. Nikki said all sorts of horrible things about Trump, and Pompeo was feeling around with other candidates and didn't endorse until way too late. And Trump was angry about that at the time, and he holds that grudge.
So you're going to see a team that I think is much more consolidated around Trump. And that doesn't mean there won't be different constellations, groups of people that are more aligned with each other, but when Trump has something he wants done, everyone's going to run alongside him.
And I think that's true for JD Vance too. The idea that there's going to be a shadow cabinet that is run by Vance, and he's the Project 2025 guy. No, if that happens, Trump will be angry. If there's any large meeting internally, Trump wants to be the star. And he expects Vance to do his bidding and to be effective at it and to run other things that he doesn't care as much about. And that is, I think, the role that Vance will play.
Is it going to be more populist on some issues? Sure, but not necessarily on as many as you'd think. Why? Because there are going to be a lot of billionaires who are interested in their business interests, their investment interests around the Trump team. There will be CEOs. There'll be a lot of people that aren't globalists in name; they've been thoroughly repudiated, but globalists in more policy than you would think.
Now here, China policy is extremely interesting because on the one hand, Trump really wants to see higher tariffs on China and has talked about that. Robert Lighthizer, who was US trade rep for Trump last time around, very professional, very capable in that role, clearly playing a very significant role in running trade and maybe other things economically for Trump this time around. He is pushing for more jobs in the United States, more investment in the United States, decoupling from China. Very comfortable with a new Cold War between the US and China.
You know who isn't? Elon Musk. Has massive investments on the ground in China, wants a more comfortable relationship there, and has basically told the Chinese that he's very interested in helping to be an interlocutor. Kissinger is dead. And the one person who's out there that could be a conduit of information and potentially better relations between the two most powerful countries in the world is Elon. Will he be effective? A technology policy is kind of interesting because Trump first time around didn't do technology policy. Remember the CHIPS Act? That was Biden. Semiconductors, export controls, that was Biden. Wasn't something Trump was focused on. He was focused on trade, on the trade deficit, on tariffs, on those issues, intellectual property theft, those issues. Not as focused on technology. Elon will be, and he's going to want people he wants to be appointed in relevant positions in the Trump administration. So if that happens, maybe it's true that US-China relations become more functional than they otherwise might've been. But this is an untested proposition, something very interesting to watch.
A couple other places that are really important, Russia-Ukraine. Did Trump, did Trump not have a conversation already with Putin? Kremlin's saying no, that means absolutely nothing. But clearly he is very interested in pushing Zelensky, who is on the back foot militarily right now, to end this war. And the likelihood of a near-term ceasefire has gone way up because of Trump. Orbán of course, already been saying that from Hungary. Robert Fico from Slovakia wasn't saying that before Trump was elected. Now he is. Are we going to see that from Giorgia Meloni in Italy, for example, who's ideologically disposed to Trump, but has been much more anti-Russia in her policies? Watch that very, very carefully. Other countries that aren't on the front lines.
So it's going to be a lot of pressure on the Ukrainians, an opportunity for Putin, if he wants it, though he's doing well militarily, so he's going to probably drive a harder bargain on even a short-term ceasefire than he might have three months ago, six months ago. And he knows Trump wants to get this done. And then we need to see what the Europeans do. Do they hang together under a relatively strong and aligned European Union leadership, or do we start to see a real split among a whole bunch of European individual government leaders that are a lot weaker? Super interesting.
And then of course, you have the Middle East. And on the Middle East policies are even stronger than Biden's pro-Israel policies. And you've seen a lot of support for going after Iran. Might the Israelis now do that? Oil prices are low. China's not demanding much energy. Hitting the Iranians nuclear and energy capabilities wouldn't bring oil as high as they would've been 6 months ago, 12 months ago. Depends on what the Iranians do in response, how disruptive they want to be. But right now they're reaching out to everyone. The Europeans, the Iranians are reaching out to the Saudis. They just did some low level military exercises with the Saudis. This is a country that is basically saying, "We don't want a big fight. We know that we're going to lose if we have one." Easy time for Trump to press in the Middle East. Last time he was president, first place he went was Saudi Arabia, then Israel. Wouldn't surprise me at all if he does that again. Though he probably flips it this time around in terms of the order.
Okay, so much to talk about, so much to watch. I hope you find this interesting. We'll be on top of it and we'll talk to you all real soon.
- Trump lays the groundwork to contest the election ›
- Viewpoint: Trump to overshadow UN climate conference ›
- How Trump won – and what it means for the world ›
- How will Trump 2.0 approach foreign policy? ›
- How a second Trump term could reshape global politics ›
- Global leaders scramble to align with Trump - GZERO Media ›
Trump's America: How MAGA came out on top
On this episode of GZERO World, Ian Bremmer unpacks the implications of Donald Trump’s decisive election win, marking his historic return to office and the GOP's comprehensive control over government (assuming they hold onto the House). Despite polls suggesting a razor-close election, Trump won with strong support across critical swing states, including Pennsylvania, where voter shifts were significant even in traditionally Democratic strongholds like Philadelphia. Bremmer discusses Nov 5 and its wide range of implications with Vanderbilt historian Nicole Hemmer and Wall Street Journal correspondent Molly Ball. How did Trump’s return signal a change election? How much of it was driven by voters' discontent with inflation and immigration, and how much was simply the appeal of a populist alternative to the status quo.
The conversation highlights Trump’s longstanding opposition to globalism and his strategy to reshape America’s place on the world stage. With the GOP controlling the presidency, Senate, and likely the House, Trump's second term could bring sweeping policy changes, including a push to consolidate executive power and reduce judicial and institutional independence. Reflecting on the stakes, Molly Ball comments, “If there are not those barriers before him, what is he willing to do? What norms and traditions, not to say laws, is he willing to violate in order to pursue his goals?” Hemmer adds, “The erosion of representative democracy…has accelerated over the past 10 years,” emphasizing the risks of unchecked power. They also examine the Democratic Party’s struggle to resonate with working-class voters across racial lines and its internal debate over progressive versus centrist policies. With both parties facing pressure, there remains an enduring tension between America's democratic ideals and the growing appetite for anti-establishment reform.
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 (🔔).
Ian Bremmer on Trump’s win
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: A Quick Take to kick off your post-election morning. And Trump is back as president. Should not be a shock to people. Certainly, was not to us. Anyone looking at elections around the world this year has seen incumbents underperform. We saw that in the United Kingdom. We saw it across Europe in the EU parliamentary elections. As well as in Germany, in France, everywhere, Austria, you name it, Portugal, in Japan in the last couple of weeks, in India, in South Africa. Soon in Canada, as Trudeau will be forced out and very likely Conservative Party leader, Pierre Poilievre will be the next Canadian prime minister.
So, this was an election that Harris had a significantly uphill battle. That's not usually the case with incumbents, but it is in this cycle. Why? Inflation. And yes, inflation numbers were coming down, but from a high baseline. And anyone in power is seen as responsible for that. You're vice president, you don't get to say it was somebody else. I think the numbers coming down are still from a high baseline. Those prices aren't coming down. You're still paying them. Immigration, and more recently, immigration numbers also illegally coming down, but from a high level. And the illegal immigrants in the United States are still here. And a lot of those that were in red states have also moved or were moved to blue states. And that certainly had an impact. I saw that Trump did better in New York City, my own city, than he had ever before by a large margin. He didn't win, but he got a lot. He was over 30%.
And why is that? Well, because a lot of New Yorkers aren't happy about those things, not so different from the rest of the country. And so, inflation, immigration and disinformation. Disinformation because the country is not having a single conversation about policy. It's having two very different political conversations and you are in your bubble. So, there were very, very few votes that were actually up for grabs. It was more a question of who you could get out, who you could turn out. If there's a surprise, it's that women did not turn out in droves despite the abortion issue, despite the fact that there was a woman on the ticket. And despite the fact that Trump has lots of challenges appealing to women historically. But women overall, white women turned out in favor of Trump.
He also outperformed overall with African-Americans and with Hispanics. And again, this is something that looked pretty clear in earlier polls, but the polls could easily be wrong. And the biggest poll that was wrong, of course, was that Iowa outlier, which wasn't just wrong, it was spectacularly wrong. And I don't know what they got wrong with the methodology, but there you have it. So, that is the point, Trump will be coming back. As of right now, as of I'm taping this, Kamala Harris has not yet conceded, but I have literally no doubt in my mind that she will. That is essential. It's important for the country that everyone agrees on who actually won the election.
There wasn't a lot of uncertainty around the balloting process itself. I've said that before. The US has a gold standard in terms of the way it conducts its elections. That is the case here. There was a lot more effort at disinformation, most notably all of these bomb threats that were called in, particularly in Georgia, in lower income and black polling neighborhoods, that would've hit the Dems but didn't have an impact overall on the election. We'll see whether or not that was Russia that was behind it. I don't think we have any definitive information there. But again, the level of disinformation externally from Russian, from Chinese, from Iranian sources, a nuisance and irritation.
But the problems of the US political system are overwhelmingly domestic problems of the US political system. And that will continue to be the case going forward. Internationally, of course, this is a really big deal because a Trump administration is going to look very different to other countries around the world than a Harris administration would have. I think the biggest question mark out there is for the Europeans. Trump has consistently said that he's going to end this war between Russia and Ukraine in 24 hours. Wouldn't even need to wait until he was president. So, hey, in the next few weeks, it could happen.
Zelensky, Ukrainian President immediately putting out a congratulations to Trump. What a great meeting bilaterally they just had when Zelensky was in the United States, all of that. He has no choice. It's political reality. It's what he needs to do. But when Trump says he wants to end the war, what he means, of course, is that the Ukrainians don't get to keep fighting. The Russians don't get to keep fighting. It means that where the territory lines are right now, that's where they're going to get frozen. And furthermore, that the Trump administration is not going to coordinate with the Europeans. They're going to unilaterally reach out to Zelensky and Putin, and try to dictate those terms.
Might well succeed. It is possible. Zelensky will be under massively greater pressure. But how the Europeans will play that, both with Ukraine themselves as well as inside NATO, inside the European Union. A very big question, a very big problem. Especially as the Europeans who are economically not performing well will also be facing higher tariffs from a Trump administration. Will they align with the United States as they have in the last couple of years? Will they support the United States on China or will they hedge? That's a huge question mark.
The Middle East, there's a war going on right now. Netanyahu just got rid of his Defense Minister. Fired him. He is riding high right now, riding high in terms of internal popularity compared to months ago, in terms of how his war efforts are going in killing the leadership of Hamas, both political and military, as well as major gains with Hezbollah. Netanyahu has a lot of support from Trump. They don't love each other, but they are aligned with each other. And Trump has said he would go harder against Israel's adversaries. He criticized Biden for not giving enough support to the Israelis. Will that embolden Netanyahu to try to take on Iranian nuclear facilities? That's a very interesting question we should watch carefully over the coming weeks.
And then, of course, China, which has an economy that is really underperforming. They're going to feel very defensive right now, reaching out to both people like Robert Lighthizer, who has been pushing hard for more tariffs on all Chinese exports to the US, as well as through third countries. And also reaching out to Elon Musk who's traveled to China, who has a lot of business in China, who's clearly very close to Trump, and who the Chinese will hope is someone they can facilitate an easier, softer relationship with. Will Trump support that? What will that mean for the GOP and Congress, given that you're likely to see a GOP wave across both Senate, clearly they've taken, as well as likely the House at this point. That's also an interesting question. The biggest challenge here is that the backdrop for the Trump administration incoming is a far, far more dangerous world.
Two major wars going on. US, China relations in a more challenging place, though better than they were a year ago. Lots and lots of seriously moving and dangerous pieces geopolitically. And so, in that regard, definitely you would expect that Trump is going to get some wins because he will be the president of the most powerful country in the world. And therefore what he says, countries will listen to more than they would other people when they disagree. But the potential for things to go wrong, if that happens, they'll go much more badly wrong than they did or would have in his first administration.
So, that's where we are. And there's a lot to talk about. Certainly, everything geopolitical is going to be much more uncertain and volatile in the coming months. And I expect to be focused on it closely and chatting with you about it as we go through. That's it for me, and I hope everyone's doing well. Breathe. Very important for people to breathe and I'll talk to you real soon.
Ian Bremmer on the 2024 US election ahead
Ian Bremmer's Quick Take: A Quick Take to kick off your US election week. I'd say happy Election Day, but it seems more a matter of stress and anxiety for most Americans I know. And frankly for most non-Americans I know that are watching it. And in many ways this is really not the election that we want to be having. Not because there's a problem with the electoral process itself, though you wouldn't know that from watching people online. There have been a lot of studies and audits on non-citizens voting, for example, which has gotten a huge amount of attention in Congress recently and on Twitter recently. And virtually no non-citizens are ever on rolls or vote. There was recently a Georgia audit, did a full audit of 8 million people registered and 20 of them, 20, were non-citizens.
You've never had an election remotely swing ... Of illegal voters going to the polls. There are no cyber issues because you're not allowed to vote online. That would be one of the most vulnerable parts of a US election if that wasn't the case. You can track your mail, your vote if you are voting by mail, as I did for example. In almost every state, just in a few non-swing states is it not possible to track exactly the state of your vote. I mean, in many, many ways, this is the kind of an election that you want to have, but people don't believe in it. And by people, I mean Americans and I mean Americans across the political spectrum. And I think there are lots of reasons for that. Why not?
Well one is because $10 billion has been spent on it, $3.5 billion on the presidential election itself. Over 1 billion in Pennsylvania and only a few states matter because this isn't about every vote counting equally. It's an electoral college where only votes in states that could actually swing one way or the other will determine the outcome. And so a lot of people feel like their vote doesn't matter, feel like it's an enormous money suck in spend, and that people that have that influence are the ones that are going to end up mattering and getting the policies that they want and capturing the system so they don't really believe in their democracy.
Then secondly, one of the candidates shouldn't be running. I feel strongly about this. It's only because impeachment no longer functions as a check on executive power that Trump is able to run right now. And he certainly doesn't believe in a free and fair outcome unless he wins. And I think that should be table stakes for an election that both people that are running have to be prepared to accept the outcome no matter what happens. Certainly, I would accept the outcome. I did in 2016 when Trump won and I considered him my president. And I did in 2020 when Biden won and I considered him my president too. And it doesn't really matter if I like the outcome or not. The point is that's what an election is all about. But increasingly, not in the United States and certainly not this time around. And that is a very big concern.
I am worried about the state of America's political institutions, not about the state of democracy everywhere around the world. I don't think this is a problem, a structural problem in most democracies. I think Canada is just fine. The UK and Germany and Japan and South Korea and Australia and New Zealand, plenty of democracies around the world that function well. The United States, we are watching these institutions erode real time. The legitimacy that American citizens hold for their elections, for their executive, for Congress, even for their court system, the Supreme Court, certainly for the media. Basically for anyone and any institution that is in a position of a authority and power, increasingly the belief that American citizens have in those institutions is eroding.
And that has led to a long, particularly divisive electoral cycle where Americans might as well exist in two different planets in terms of what they do and don't believe about the candidates and about the vote. And I think it's a real problem. I think that's been true for the coverage that we've seen over the past week. Some of you may have seen me go after so many of the media institutions for saying that Trump had announced that he wanted Liz Cheney killed or executed at a firing squad, which he didn't say and which was complete crap. It was garbage. And this was a major headline for two days across the mainstream media. And if you think mainstream media is bad, social media is even worse. The amount of active disinformation, lying, fake news that's being algorithmically promoted, including particularly by Elon Musk, the owner of Twitter, X, which is where a lot of people get their political information. And don't even get me started on citizen journalism, which is even more biased than actual journalism, just without any of the expertise.
And as a consequence of that, almost everyone I know today believes some things about politics that are clearly not true. Now, I am not going to tell you who to vote for. I'm not going to make an endorsement. I think that, you, the voters get to make up your mind for yourself. I will tell you who I voted for. I voted for Kamala Harris. This probably does not surprise people. I am not a Democrat. I have never been a member of any political party and certainly pre-Trump, I have voted for Democrats and Republicans and I continue to vote for people on the basis of who I think they are as candidates. But I am unprepared to accept someone that is unwilling to accept a democratic process, the outcome of a free and fair election. I am convinced, completely convinced that whether Harris wins or loses, she will accept the outcome. I'm completely convinced of that. And I am also convinced that if Trump loses, he will not accept the outcome.
And that for me is foundational, irrespective of what I think about their policies on other things. In part because I think the presidency is constrained, and in part because I think at this point American institutions are increasingly vulnerable. So in other words, I think those things matter. Look, I clearly would make a lot more money under Trump. First time around, Trump reduced corporate taxes, he reduced taxes on the wealthy, he reduced regulatory restrictions in lots of ways. I mean, private equity firms did really well and real estate companies. And as someone who started my own company and has built it up globally, Trump is great from a financial perspective. I don't care. Also, he's great for political risk. I mean, there's more international uncertainty and volatility. And so my firm, Eurasia Group that is focused on that would do better in that environment. I don't care. That is not the point.
I consider Trump to be the most unfit person for office I have ever encountered with political ambitions. I felt that way when he was a Democrat. I feel that way now that he is a Republican. I don't think the party affiliation matters. He certainly isn't ideological. It's just about him. And for me, that is a serious, serious problem. But whatever you do, you can agree with me, you can disagree with me. As you would know, I don't mind if you disagree with me. It's not a problem. It's not fundamental. Doesn't mean you can't be my friend, certainly doesn't mean you can't follow me. But whatever you do, if you're in the United States and you're a citizen, do not opt out of the process. Our ancestors, my grandmother, grandfathers, did everything they could to get to this country. Heck, historically, some of them, many of them committed unspeakable atrocities to clear the land of the folks that were actually living here before.
Do not dishonor all of that by thinking that you don't need to put in any work, that it doesn't matter. There's a lot of things that are broken about the US political system, but none that are so broken that we can give up ... And none that you can wash your hands of it and say, "There's nothing I can do. My voice doesn't matter. I'm giving up. I'm not putting in any work."
And the most limited amount of work that you can possibly put in is voting. And I think that voting with your heart and with your head is the absolute minimum obligation that we all have as citizens. I am proud and patriotic to exercise mine as I always do. And you should be yours too. And again, you heard who I'm voting for. You can tell me who you're voting for if you want or you cannot. Again, it's a secret ballot and this is a free country. And the important thing is that you speak your mind and when you agree or disagree, you tell people that too. So happy Election Day, for what it's worth, I'm sure this too shall pass and I'll talk to you all on the other side. Take care.
CISA chief warns of rise of disinformation, election meddling after Nov 5
After January 6, 2021, what once was just a formality became a high-stakes period. Jen Easterly, the nation's top election security official, fears that the real threat to American democracy and stability may come during that crucial period between when votes are cast on Nov 5 and when they're certified, on January 6. "My concern, Ian, is that between November 5th and January 6th—when the Congress is going to certify the vote—our foreign adversaries are going to go hog wild." Easterly, the Director of the Center for Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, spoke with Ian Bremmer on GZERO World.
Watch full episode: Top threats to US election security
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 (🔔).
US election disinformation: How myths like non-citizen voting erode public trust
On GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, US cybersecurity chief Jen Easterly discusses disinformation and its impact on the country. She debunks the myth of non-citizen voting and warns that spreading such conspiracy theories is “corrosive to democracy.
Disinformation is spreading like wildfire ahead of Election Day. The DOJ has spoken about Russia’s efforts to pump lies into the US via fake news. Republicans, Trump, and his allies have repeated some of those narratives to their supporters and party base. In the past few weeks, they have elevated the baseless claim that non-citizens are voting en masse at the polls. These false narratives have sowed doubt about the election and are designed to “pit Americans against one another,” says Jen Easterly. She is the director of Homeland Security's Center for Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA).
Easterly adds that it has led to real-life threats against election officials and essentially “does the work of our foreign adversaries for them.” The real challenge now is rebuilding people’s confidence and trust in the voting process. She assures of the multiple safeguards put in place at the state and local levels. Election security is more about the public’s perception of integrity and fairness than anything else.
Watch full episode: Top threats to US election security
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 (🔔).
- Former Congresswoman Jane Harman on combating distrust in governance ›
- Ian Explains: Does it matter if Americans don't trust the Supreme Court? ›
- Why Clarence Thomas has eroded trust in the US Supreme Court ›
- Trump vs. Harris: A high-stakes election and its risks to democracy ›
- Ian Bremmer on the US election & crisis of democracy ›
Top threats to US election security
As Election Day approaches, US cybersecurity chief Jen Easterly warns that while America’s voting systems are more secure than ever, the period between voting and certification remains vulnerable, with foreign adversaries poised to exploit any internal divisions during this critical time.
In a wide-ranging interview with Ian Bremmer on GZERO World before Election Day, Easterly, the director of Homeland Security's Center for Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, discussed the massive improvements to the nation’s voting systems and emphasized: “with great confidence that election infrastructure has never been more secure.”
However, as for that sensitive period, after votes are counted and reported but before they are officially certified, Easterly is much more concerned. "Between November 5th and January 6th—when the Congress is going to certify the vote—our foreign adversaries are going to go hog wild.” She points to intelligence that Russia, China, Iran, and other US adversaries will be waiting to exploit any internal divisions. But they can only exploit what is already there, and if 2020 taught us anything, it is that the certification of election results is far from a formality. Can we hold it together long enough to peacefully transfer power? Let's hope that this election cycle past is not prologue.
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 (🔔).
- Ian Explains: Will foreign policy decide the 2024 US election? ›
- How Iran is messing with the US election ›
- The US election: Freedom on the ballot ›
- US election: America is at war with itself ›
- Bloc by Bloc: How the youth and senior votes will influence the US election ›
- US Election 2024: Map the Vote! - GZERO Media ›
- 2024 US election: What to look out for - GZERO Media ›
- US election: GOP could win a Trump-led sweep - GZERO Media ›
Ian Explains: Your vote is secure, so why are you still worried?
As Americans head to the polls, election officials face the dual challenge of safeguarding both the voting process and public confidence in it, with foreign adversaries and domestic actors ready to exploit any lingering doubts about election integrity. On Ian Explains, Ian Bremmer discusses the roots of Americans’ mistrust in the security of their votes, even though election systems are indeed secure.
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 (🔔).