A civil-military relations crisis in the U.S. is actually the latest in a recent series of similar crises affecting the world’s major powers, including Russia and China. That raises the question: Is this simply a random series of unconnected events that all just happen to center around defense ministers? Or is there a deeper cause?
Several recent articles have questioned the validity of the concept of the “Global South” and even call for the retirement of the term altogether. But instead of dismissing the term, it’s important to clarify what the Global South is and is not, and to demonstrate the shortcomings of the most widely used arguments against the concept.
Earlier this year, the global economy experienced an important milestone that, though it went largely unnoticed, scholars may look back on as a marker of the beginning of a new era, with economic but also geopolitical significance: For the first four months of 2023, Mexico surpassed China as the top trade partner of the United States.
Former U.S. President Donald Trump upended what was once a relatively staid global economic and trade system. For all of the upheaval he created, though, Trump left office with only one clear-cut accomplishment: an updated NAFTA deal. And even as Trump sowed chaos in America’s trade relationships, most of the world reinforced its commitment to trade liberalization.
Ahead of next week’s SDG Summit, the outlook for realizing the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development is discouraging. Recent cascading crises threaten to reverse the progress made on several goals. They have also exacerbated one of the most significant challenges to realizing the SDGs: financing gaps.
President Joe Biden took office with an ambitious foreign policy agenda summed up by his favorite campaign tagline: “America is back.” Above all, that will mean repairing the damage done to America’s global standing by his predecessor, former President Donald Trump.
The debate over how to reduce the risk of nuclear catastrophe focuses on nuclear weapons as a Doomsday threat. That impedes an alternative view of the relationship between the nuclear era and global human security—namely, that peaceful nuclear technology can be a solution to a global security threat: the climate crisis.
Resource extraction continues to be a major source of revenue for both developing countries and wealthier nations alike. But the windfalls don’t come without risks. Meanwhile, the environmental impact of fossil fuels is driving the development of renewable energy sources. But the transition is slow to develop.
As temperatures rise due to global warming, it’s all too easy to see the policy worlds of climate and health as separate and even competing sectors. But climate and health cannot be separated from each other. Only by bringing together sharp political and research minds in both sectors will we be able to weather the storms ahead.
Competition over maritime resources and territorial disputes over maritime borders highlight the tensions between national sovereignty and transnational challenges in the maritime domain. While often ignored in coverage of international affairs, it features prominently in bilateral, regional and multilateral diplomacy.
A group of five will soon be a concert of eleven. At last week’s summit of the BRICS nations, Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa agreed to invite Ethiopia, Argentina, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates to officially join the group on Jan. 1, 2024. The expanded BRICS shows its members’ dissatisfaction with the Western-led economic and political order.