“America always does the right thing, after exhausting all other possibilities.” Those words, attributed to Winston Churchill, perfectly capture what finally transpired late last week, when the U.S. Congress finally passed a series of supplemental defense spending bills earmarking military aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan.
Iran’s massive strike on Israel two weeks ago turned into something of a gift. Some of the benefits will accrue personally to embattled Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, but those are likely to fade. But the boost Iran gave to Israel collectively has already had important repercussions, some of which could be lasting.
Sudanese women were at the forefront of the country’s April 2019 pro-democracy protests. Today, they play pivotal roles as peacebuilders in Sudan’s ongoing civil war. But they have been entirely sidelined in decision-making and efforts to end the violence. After a year of war, it’s time to include women at the negotiating table.
A $61 billion aid package to help Ukraine was finally passed in Congress and will be signed into law. But questions still linger over Washington’s ability to act as a reliable partner to its friends and a determined adversary to its foes.
More than a week later, there remains considerable uncertainty about Iran’s unprecedented attack on Israel using its long-range strike capabilities. As more information becomes public, it is important to be mindful of three important considerations to understand the attack’s implications on military dynamics across the Middle East.
Israel’s use of an automated system to identify targets in Gaza has raised alarm over the advent of autonomous weapons systems. But the fact that Israeli soldiers were “in the loop” in this case gives the concept of AI-powered “Killer Robots” new meaning, while also potentially giving campaigners a new direction for advocacy efforts.
Any repression is horrifying, especially the killing of a political opponent. But the fact that Venezuela’s regime had a political dissident murdered in Chile should be considered a massive violation of sovereignty and international norms. Amid numerous other regional crises, however, the reaction has been underwhelming thus far.
During his visit to Washington last week, Japanese Prime Minister Kishida Fumio suggested the U.S. may be feeling “self-doubt” when it comes to its global leadership role. His remarks point to an underappreciated aspect of global politics: In addition to being willing and able to act, a hegemon must also believe it can get the job done.
For more than a century, the ability to project naval strength on a massive scale has been the crucial lynchpin of U.S. global hegemony. Yet a structural crisis that is now overwhelming the U.S. Navy presents as much of a threat to Washington’s geopolitical position as the isolationist populism fueled by the rise of Donald Trump.
U.S. President Joe Biden hosted the leaders of Japan and the Philippines yesterday, in a meeting centered on shared security interests with an eye toward China’s increasing regional and global influence. This narrow focus, however, highlights the lack of seriousness paid to the escalating crisis in Myanmar.
The out-in-the-open friction between German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and French President Emmanuel Macron offers an unsettling glimpse into the complicated political landscape faced by Kyiv and the Ukrainian people as Russia’s assault, now in its third year, makes steady gains ahead of a potentially decisive summer offensive.
Around the world, militaries have begun to embrace AI as the latest technological silver bullet. This trend, and its pitfalls, has been on prominent display in Gaza, where the Israeli military’s use of AI-driven models for targeting decisions has had a devastating impact on civilians in exchange for limited strategic results.
Last week, at the ISA’s annual conference, a roundtable discussion examined how much the nuclear taboo had been weakened by the war in Ukraine and Russia’s nuclear brinksmanship. While the answer was varied, the scholars agreed on one thing: Putin’s threats themselves are not a great barometer of any change in the nuclear taboo.
This chatbot was trained on more than 80 articles on global migration published by World Politics Review from March 23, 2018, to Feb. 1, 2024. Ask it questions about events and trends related to global migration over the last few years and get answers drawn straight from WPR’s expert analysis.
The war in Gaza has reverberated in the West Bank, deepening public anger at Israel. At the same time, Israeli actions in the West Bank continue to energize Palestinian armed groups that are challenging the control of the Palestinian Authority. Now, the Palestinian political system is heading towards a profound crisis.
Yesterday marked 75 years since NATO’s founding, notable not only as a mark of longevity but also because, unlike most of the years of NATO’s existence, the alliance is immersed in war. That makes NATO as relevant as ever. But does “relevant” necessarily mean “valuable”? Put simply, is NATO still worth it?
Few themes have featured as prominently in Kremlin propaganda about the war in Ukraine as the supposed persecution of Russian speakers there. It is ironic, then, that Russian President Vladimir Putin has done more harm to the language’s standing than perhaps any other leader in at least a century.