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 isn't winning in Ukraine, says US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan
Filmed live before an audience at New York City’s iconic 92nd Street Y, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan sat down for an in-depth conversation with Ian Bremmer as part of GZERO World, Bremmer's PBS global affairs TV series. Marking one of his final public interviews as President Biden's top foreign policy advisor, Sullivan offered a candid assessment of global geopolitics, with a sharp focus on the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and its broader implications.
In a striking moment, Sullivan dismantled the perception of Russian success in Ukraine: “They set out on a strategic objective of taking the capital Kyiv, wiping Ukraine as we know it off the map... and they have failed in that. And they will fail in that,” he declared. Sullivan emphasized that while the war imposes profound costs on Ukraine, the resilience of its people and the steadfast support of allies have kept the nation standing.
The revealing conversation also touched on the shifting dynamics within NATO, the economic strain on authoritarian regimes, and the critical path toward a just peace for Ukraine. Reflecting on the broader picture, Sullivan noted, “We tend, as democracies, to think, ‘Oh, we’re not doing so great.’ But let’s not forget: Kyiv stands. Ukraine stands. Ukraine will stand at the end of this.”
Watch the full interview with Jake Sullivan on GZERO World with Ian Bremmer on US public television beginning this Friday, December 20. 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 (🔔).
Russia and Iran just lost their "crown jewel" in the Middle East - Kim Ghattas
Was Assad ever truly a stabilizing force? On GZERO World, Kim Ghattas, a contributing editor at the Financial Times and author of Black Wave, unpacks Syria’s collapse, Iran and Russia’s strained influence, and what’s next for Tehran on the global stage.
Ghattas challenges the notion that Iran and Russia willingly abandoned Syria in the days before Assad's fall, arguing instead that their diminished capacities forced their retreat. "The Islamic Republic of Iran and the Russians don’t give up easily on the crown jewel of their influence in the Mediterranean," she asserts, explaining how the war in Ukraine has strained Russia’s resources. Similarly, Iran's "axis of resistance," a cornerstone of its regional strategy, is faltering as the country faces internal transitions and external threats. “They’ve stretched themselves too thin… from Yemen to Syria, their investments are crumbling,” Ghattas observes.
As the discussion pivots to Iran’s next steps, Bremmer asks whether the Islamic Republic will seek engagement with adversaries or double down on its nuclear ambitions. Ghattas believes both paths are possible, emphasizing that Iran is grappling with profound internal changes. “They want to be accepted by the international community,” she notes, referencing Iran’s historical yearning for legitimacy. However, with its proxy forces unraveling and vulnerabilities exposed, Tehran’s future remains precarious. “This is, in essence, the end of Iran's strategy of proxy militias around the region,” Ghattas says.
Watch full episode: Syria after Assad.
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 (🔔).
People celebrate after fighters of the ruling Syrian body ousted Syria's Bashar al-Assad, in Aleppo, Syria, December 13, 2024.
From Assad to Uncertainty
Syria’s new leadership claims it wants to prioritize stability and reconstruction over further conflict – but will that be possible? With Israel fortifying the Golan Heights, Turkey expanding its influence, and Russia retreating, we’re watching this week if Syria and its neighbours will manage to get along — and how allies and adversaries will react.
No new confrontation – for now. Inan interview given on Saturday to Syria TV, Ahmad al-Sharaa — formerly known by his nom de guerre “Abu Mohammed al-Golani” — the leader of the HTS, stated that despite Israel having “clearly crossed the lines of engagement in Syria”, the country’s war-weary condition “does not allow for new confrontations.” Instead, Al-Sharaa stated that HTS’ priorities are reconstruction and stability and called for diplomatic solutions to ensure Syria’s security.
Israel is still wary. Despite al-Sharaa’s moderate tone, Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katzmaintained that security threats to Israel have not diminished. Israeli forces remain present in the buffer zone inside Syria and continue to conduct strikes on military targets. On Sunday, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced plans todouble the Israeli population of the Golan Heights as a defensive measure against the “new front” that had opened up in the wake of Assad’s ouster, but says his country has "no interest in a conflict with Syria."
Iran steps out, Turkey steps in. Assad’s fall dealta severe blow to Tehran’s influence in Syria, a vacuum Ankara is only too happy to fill. Turkey has now offered toprovide military training to Syria's new administration if requested, and will maintain troops in several cities in northern Syria, where it has been conducting military operations since 2016. Turkish Defence Minister Yasar Güler said his country’s priority remains the elimination of Kurdish militias, which enjoy US backing but are considered terrorists by Turkey.
What about Russia? The other big loser in Syriais Moscow, which had heavily backed Assad’s regime for years, in exchange for strategic positions within the country including the Khmeimim Air Base and Tartus Naval Base. Recent satellite imagery has shown Russian forcespacking up military equipment and preparing for transport. The Kremlin has confirmed that Moscow isin discussions with HTS about retaining its two bases, but has withdrawn troops from frontline positions.
Will the United States fill the gap? US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Saturday that Washington has beenactively engaging with Syria's new leadership but gave no details on when or at what level. Blinken met over the weekend with regional leaders in Jordan to discuss Syria’s future as well as seek the return of Austin Tice, an American journalist detained a decade ago in Syria.
Blinken also emphasized the importance of destroying chemical weapons and rejecting terrorism, warning that “This is a moment of vulnerability in which ISIS will seek to regroup.”
Could US policy change under Trump? When Assad’s government fell, President-elect Donald Trumpposted “THIS IS NOT OUR FIGHT. LET IT PLAY OUT. DO NOT GET INVOLVED!"
Mike Waltz, Trump's nominee for national security adviser, told Fox News last week that Trump was elected with an overwhelming mandate to keep the United States out of regional wars, and that America's"core interests" remain ISIS, Israel and "our Gulf Arab allies". There are no indications that Trump or his team have reached out to HTS, but the President-elect has reportedly spoken with Netanyahuabout Israel’s plans to expand settlements in the Golan Heights.
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.
How Trump forced Europe's hand on Ukraine
Trump’s return to power—amid global wars, strained alliances, and economic tensions—could radically reshape the world order. It threatens to deepen rifts with Europe, complicate Middle Eastern conflicts, and push US-China relations to a breaking point. That might not be a bad thing, according to Ian Bremmer. He breaks it down on Ian Explains.
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 (🔔).
Ukraine fires US missiles into Russia. What's next?
Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on World In :60.
Ukraine has launched US-made long-range missiles into Russia for the first time. Will this change the course of the war?
I don't think so. First of all, the reason the Americans were dragging their feet for so long is because they didn't believe it would have any strategic impact in the war to give that permissioning to the Ukrainians and they were worried that it might lead to Russian escalation. That escalation is less likely given that Trump has been elected and he's going to be in power in just a couple of months, so the Russians basically have to deal with it, and they'll probably end up hitting more Ukrainian sites in the next couple of months. But I don't think it's really going to help the Ukrainians. I don't think it's going to hurt the Russians that much. What I do think is that the Russians are more likely to give better weapons, more capable weapons, to the Houthis, for example. So, if the Americans are going to arm proxies better, then the Russians will arm proxies better, and that could lead to bigger problems in the Gulf.
How likely will Trump be able to carry out mass deportations when he's in office?
I think he will be capable. He certainly was elected in part on that intention, on that promise. This is something that Biden really did not pay attention to until way too late and he lost a lot of votes in blue cities where people felt like there were just far too many illegal immigrants and the costs were great, and the security concerns were real. And so, the fact that he says he's going to use the military, that's potentially a Supreme Court question, but especially when you talk about people that have committed crimes in the United States, why they should still be in the US is a very serious question. And I wouldn't be surprised at all if 300,000, 500,000 deported in the first year. In other words, a hell of a lot higher than you've seen under Biden. There will be an inflation cost there, but it's one that I don't think Trump is going to take a big hit for.
Will there be political fallout from Hong Kong's decision to jail pro-democracy activists?
Not really, because China has changed the national security law. They've completely integrated Hong Kong into the Chinese political system and the pro-democracy activists don't have anyone that's willing to support them, not the UK, not the United States. I mean, they're human rights organizations, and you'll see members of Congress on the Democrat and Republican side that'll complain about it, but they won't do anything. So on balance, I don't think it matters, and that means, or I should say, it doesn't matter for China, which means very little blowback.
- No, the US didn’t “provoke” the war in Ukraine ›
- Russia cares more about Ukraine than the US does ›
- US compared to Russia after tanking UN resolution on Gaza ›
- The future of war: James Stavridis on China, Russia, and the biggest security threats to the US ›
- Can the US stay ahead of Russia & China in the space race? ›
Russian President Vladimir Putin chairs a meeting on the situation in Belgorod, Kursk, and Bryansk regions following an incursion of Ukrainian troops, in August 2024.
Putin loosens the muzzle on Russia's nuclear weapons
Just hours after Ukraine fired US-made long-range missiles at a Russian target for the first time, Vladimir Putinsigned a new Kremlin nuclear doctrine that lowers the threshold for Moscow’s use of nukes. They’re now fair game as a response to a conventional weapons attack.
The timing of the signing is clear. The Kremlin has long warned that Ukraine using US long-rangers could provoke a major response and has made not-so-veiled threats to use tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine.
Will that happen? There are at least two ways to look at this, and both revolve around one consideration: In two months, Joe Biden will relinquish power to Donald Trump, who campaigned in part on a pledge to end the war in Ukraine.
One school of thought: Make chaos while the sun shines. Putin now has two months to escalate as much as he likes, knowing that the increased danger will only heighten pressure on Trump to push for a peace deal as soon as he takes office.
The other: If it ain’t broke, don’t nuke it. Putin is on a roll right now, advancing in eastern Ukraine while imported North Korean cannon fodder is handling Kyiv’s forces in Kursk, the Russian border region Ukraine has occupied since August. Why risk the international backlash over a nuclear strike now? Better to retaliate with “hybrid warfare” by arming anti-US proxies elsewhere, or messing with infrastructure in Europe (the mysterious “sabotage” of two Baltic Sea communications cables earlier this week shows the vulnerabilities). In other words, Putin has plenty of options for havoc that fall short of splitting the atom.
The wildcard: Ukraine’s aim. If Kyiv inflicts serious damage on Russia’s military capabilities, that could shape the Kremlin’s thinking. Either way, both sides likely see the next two months as a final act for this phase of the war. The race for leverage is on.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy is embraced by US President Joe Biden in the Oval Office back in September 2023.
Biden green-lights long-range missiles, Russia blasts Ukraine
US President Joe Biden reversed course on Sunday and authorized Ukraine to use US-made long-range ATACMS missiles for limited strikes inside Russia, in response to North Korea’s deployment of thousands of troops to aid Moscow. While hoping to deter Pyongyang from deeper involvement, Biden also wants to bolster Ukraine’s offensive capability before President-elect Donald Trump takes office and makes good on his pledge to cut American aid to Kyiv.
How might Moscow respond? According to Eurasia analyst Alex Brideau, Russian President Vladimir Putin may respond in kind. “Putin indicated over the summer that he would arm US adversaries in response to Western weapons being used on Russian territory. There have been subsequent reports this fall that Russia has offered some support to Houthis attacking shipping in the Red Sea,” Brideau says.
But if the missiles are used to fire deep into Russian territory, the Kremlin warned early Monday that it would see this as an attack from the US, not Ukraine, and said Biden was adding “oil to the fire” with this policy reversal.
Winter warning. Biden’s announcement also follows Russia’s launching of 120 missiles and 90 drones this weekend, its most intense offensive since September. The attacks targeted energy infrastructure across the country ahead of the cold winter months. While Ukrainian forces neutralized 144 of the projectiles, thermal energy plants suffered “significant damage,” resulting in emergency blackouts, and at least two people were killed and several others were injured, including two children. Although Ukraine’s nuclear plants were not directly hit, key electrical substations were. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, only two of Ukraine’s nine reactors are now operating at full capacity.
A response to Scholz? The Russian strikes come two days after German Chancellor Olaf Scholz called President Vladimir Putin for the first time in two years. Though Scholz urged Putin to withdraw his troops, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky slammed the call for opening a “Pandora’s box” that could undermine efforts to isolate Moscow.