Around the world, democracies are suffering from voter apathy, political polarization, anti-establishment sentiment and abuses of majoritarian rule that have facilitated the spread of autocracy. Now countries are increasingly experimenting with a new way forward: citizens’ assemblies put together by random selection.
Turkey’s election results came as a disappointment not only to Turkish voters who wanted to bring an end to President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s 20 years of increasingly autocratic rule. They also dashed the hopes of many outside observers that Turkey would become one of the countries where the global drift to autocracy begins to reverse.
The U.N. recently projected that India will replace China as the world’s most-populous country this year, fueling discussion about whether India’s swelling population could create a “demographic dividend” that would allow it to surpass China economically as well. But India has a lot of ground to cover to meet those expectations.
The aftermath of Romania’s post-communist transition, particularly the struggle to overcome corruption, left a toxic legacy that hampers Bucharest’s ability to exert influence over EU decision-making to this day. But Romania’s reluctance to be proactive in policy debates within both the EU and NATO has now become problematic.
At the annual G-7 summit this week, Western leaders have to decide what vision of global leadership they want to project. Beyond showing unity in opposition to Russia’s war on Ukraine and China’s military and economic assertiveness, it’s unclear what the G-7 will say about resolving the issues currently plaguing non-Western states.
Two of today’s biggest stories in the Western Hemisphere are eliciting starkly different responses: action on migration and inaction on Venezuela’s political and economic crises. Yet, with over 7 million Venezuelans having fled the country, it’s impossible to deal with the first challenge without taking the second more seriously.
The commanders of armed groups in African countries are often portrayed as erratic tyrants with little understanding of the world—in both Hollywood films and in news coverage. Yet as clashes in Sudan escalate into civil war, it is becoming increasingly clear that the geopolitical sophistication of such warlords has been underestimated.
This week, Title 42—the pandemic-era measure curtailing immigration across the U.S. southern border—is expiring. But a new rash of efforts to regulate the flow of asylum-seekers compromises U.S. obligations under both domestic and international law, potentially putting U.S. civil servants implementing these policies at legal risk.
Despite minimal payoff from U.S. President Joe Biden’s visit to the Middle East last summer, Washington has nonetheless scored some diplomatic wins over the past year. But the gains Washington has made have now run into significant yet predictable headwinds, highlighting the difficulties facing Biden’s regional agenda.
The U.S. military commitment to the Middle East has long been a core principle of U.S. foreign policy, stemming from the conviction that it keeps the region from falling into chaos and that a retreat would embolden enemies there and around the world. But the world is changing, and so should U.S. policy toward the Middle East.
The Western Hemisphere is experiencing increased migration, driven by repression, persecution, crime, conflict, poverty and the climate emergency. But thousands of migrants are caught between Washington’s continued closure of the southern border to most asylum-seekers and the dangers they face on the Mexican side of the border.
Few conflicts have been predicted by so many observers, so far in advance, as the fighting that erupted on April 15 in Sudan’s capital, Khartoum. Almost every external and domestic powerbroker that has exerted influence over Sudan’s development over the past four decades shares in the blame for this devastating cycle of violence.
In the U.S. and Europe, the rapid emergence of AI applications like ChatGPT has catalyzed a debate over their implications for the future of work. These concerns are far lower down on Latin America’s agenda. But in a region of stark economic inequality, AI threatens to exacerbate that divide and the political tensions that come with it.