From global think tanks
The analyses published here do not necessarily reflect the strategic thinking of The Global Eye.
Today’s about: Armenia-Azerbaijan; India-China; Israel-Qatar; Radicalization online; Russia; Russia-Azerbaijan; Russia-Ukraine; Russia-West; Space security; Sri Lanka; UN
Armenia – Azerbaijan
(Crisis Group) A conflict-ending accord between Armenia and Azerbaijan sits ready for signature. Peace would be a boon for both countries and their common vision of regional economic integration. With help from outside partners, Baku and Yerevan should find middle ground that lets them seal the deal. – Armenia and Azerbaijan: The Hard Road to a Lasting Peace | International Crisis Group
India – China
(Crisis Group) A late August summit has showcased the two Asian giants’ desire to ease recent tensions and hail a new era in relations. In this Q&A, Crisis Group expert Praveen Donthi explores New Delhi’s efforts to reset with Beijing amid a trade spat with Washington. – India Rekindles Its China Ties as Trump’s Tariffs Bite | International Crisis Group
Israel – Qatar
(Mona Yacoubian and Will Todman – Center for Strategic & International Studies) On September 9, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) announced that the Israeli Air Force conducted an assassination attempt against Hamas leaders in Doha. Hamas negotiators had reportedly gathered to discuss their response to the Trump administration’s latest ceasefire proposal for Gaza. In a statement, Hamas officials said that its leadership team survived. The attack follows a string of Israeli strikes on Middle Eastern capitals in recent months, including Tehran, Beirut, Damascus, and Sana’a. – Israel Strikes Hamas in Qatar
(Steven A. Cook – Council on Foreign Relations – 9 September 2025) Israel targeted senior Hamas officials in a strike on Doha, Qatar, on Tuesday. The Qataris, close U.S. allies who have acted as mediators between Israel and Hamas, quickly condemned the act and accused Israel of attacking “its security and sovereignty.”. The Israeli Defense Forces have said that they were targeting Hamas’ remaining leadership, including individuals “directly responsible for the brutal October 7 massacre,” While Hamas has confirmed that several of its members as well as a Qatari security official were killed, it maintains that those Israel intended to target survived the strike. – Israel Risks a Gaza Ceasefire in Strike on Doha—and Hamas | Council on Foreign Relations
(Atlantic Council) “Israel initiated it, Israel conducted it, and Israel takes full responsibility.” That’s what Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Tuesday after launching strikes targeting senior members of Hamas’s political leadership in Doha, Qatar. The unprecedented Israeli attack in Qatari territory comes as Israel is preparing to launch a full-scale invasion of Gaza City and the Trump administration is pressing Hamas to accept US terms for a cease-fire and hostage-release deal. US President Donald Trump criticized the Doha strike as not helpful to US or Israeli goals, as Hamas indicated that its top leadership survived the attack. So what’s next for Israel’s campaign against Hamas? And how will Qatar, a key mediator between Israel and Hamas, respond to the attack? – Israel just struck Hamas leadership in Qatar. What’s next? – Atlantic Council
Radicalization online
(The Soufan Center) The online radicalization of youth worldwide is a growing problem that policymakers and government officials continue to grapple with. Youth radicalization is not only a problem in the United States and Europe but also in Asia, particularly in South Korea, India, the Philippines, and Singapore. Social media platforms like TikTok, X, and Facebook enable violent extremists to recruit youths more expediently than in-person; algorithms channel those youths to more emotionally charged content; and online gaming enables both isolation and community building; each of these has a radicalizing effect. A public health approach where practitioners work to “inoculate” youths against extremism by providing knowledge, alternative narratives, and community is beginning to bear fruit, but funding cuts could challenge the initiatives. – The Online Radicalization of Youth Remains a Growing Problem Worldwide – The Soufan Center
Russia
(Vadim Shtepa – The Jamestown Foundation) In early August, the Kremlin began discussing a project to move approximately 170 large state corporations from Moscow to the regions where they extract profits, primarily from natural resources. Putin’s “de-Moscowization” moves remain nominal, as state corporations maintain executive offices in Moscow and resist relocating to resource-producing regions, continuing to siphon regional natural wealth while the regime neglects local infrastructure like Sakha-Yakutia’s Lena River bridge in favor of expansionist spending projects. The Kremlin is taking symbolic but insincere steps to decentralize state corporations in an attempt to appease regional critics, while avoiding genuine economic federalism, which would threaten Kremlin power by enabling regional political autonomy. – Kremlin Takes Insincere Steps to Decentralize State Corporations – Jamestown
(Paul Globe – The Jamestown Foundation) Russian President Vladimir Putin has opened the way for memorials to Soviet leader Joseph Stalin by praising his role in the Soviet victory in World War II and silencing any discussion of Stalin’s repressions. The push to restore Stalin to a position of honor is both a top-down and bottom-up phenomenon, with many outside Moscow and in nominally opposition parties, such as the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF), taking the lead in attacking critics of Stalin, confident that they will not get in trouble given Putin’s pro-Stalin rhetoric. Putin benefits from the grassroots origins of re-Stalinization as long as he is perceived as taking a position close to theirs, but could be in trouble if he is perceived as deviating too far from his political base among Russians outside major cities. – Putin’s Needs and Russian Attitudes Driving Re-Stalinization – Jamestown
Russia – Azerbaijan
(Kassie Corelli – The Jamestown Foundation) Relations between Russia and Azerbaijan have degenerated over the past several months, but until recently, the two countries aimed to keep the crisis under control. Moscow’s aggressive rhetoric regarding Baku has turned into action, including the bombing of Azerbaijani oil depots in Ukraine. The Kremlin is trying to preserve its influence in the South Caucasus through force or threat, but has only managed to win insignificant concessions so far, losing its leverage over the region in the process. – Azerbaijan–Russia Relations Continue to Deteriorate – Jamestown
Russia – Ukraine
(Benjamin Jensen and Yasir Atalan – Center for Strategic & International Studies) Russia unleashed its largest aerial barrage of the war over the weekend of September 7–8, striking Kyiv and multiple regions across Ukraine in an unprecedented display of firepower. More than 800 munitions—primarily Shahed drones supported by a smaller number of cruise and ballistic missiles—were launched in coordinated waves, overwhelming air defense systems and inflicting widespread damage. The attack killed at least four civilians and set ablaze Ukraine’s Cabinet of Ministers building, marking the first time Russia directly targeted the government’s seat of power. This strike, exceeding even the massive May assault in scope, highlights Moscow’s continued reliance on a punishment campaign and using massed drone-missile saturation to coerce Ukraine and test Western resolve. It is Putin’s preferred theory of victory and a substitute for a largely static frontline with little opportunity for an operational breakthrough by Russian ground forces. – Russia’s Massed Strikes: The Strategy of Coercion by Salvo
Russia – West
(HCSS) On 24 February 2022, Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Despite months of military buildup and increasingly aggressive rhetoric from the Kremlin, many Western governments were caught off guard. Why were so many clear warning signs ignored? The new HCSS report Blinded by Bias: Western Policymakers and Their Perceptions of Russia before 24 February 2022 offers an in-depth investigation into this crucial question. Its core finding: Western policymakers were not just unprepared — they were blinded by bias. Based on 44 interviews with senior officials from NATO Headquarters, France, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States, including advisers to presidents, prime ministers and secretary-generals, as well as analysis of media reports, academic literature and official documents, the study examines how entrenched psychological and cognitive biases shaped the perception of the Russian threat — and, in turn, the (lack of) responses prior to the invasion. Despite Russia fulfilling all the traditional indicators of a credible threat — a clear interest in subjugating Ukraine, the military capability to do so, and a track record of aggression — many Western governments simply couldn’t imagine a large-scale war returning to the European continent. Countries such as the UK and US identified the danger early on and responded more forcefully. Others, including Germany, France and the Netherlands, dismissed the risk of full-scale war as unlikely, irrational, or potentially self-provoked by stronger support to Ukraine. – Blinded By Bias: Western Policymakers and Their Perceptions of Russia before 24 February 2022 – HCSS
Space security
(Victoria Samson, Jessica West – CIGI) In July, diplomats met in Geneva to confront one of the most difficult questions in global security: how to prevent conflict and weapons from spilling into outer space. However, they made only cautious progress. Procedural compromises and narrowed debates kept the process alive, but silences on key threats and limits on civil society participation underscored its fragility. Yet with convergence built into its 2026 agenda, the working group tasked with these questions still holds the potential to move from survival to substance — if states are willing to connect principles with practice. The UN open-ended working group (OEWG) on the prevention of an arms race in outer space (PAROS) in all its aspects is one of the few fora where governments grapple with how to keep orbit peaceful and secure. Its mandate is broad — to develop rules of responsible behaviour and consider legally binding agreements to prevent an arms race in outer space — making it a rare venue for tackling the complexity of space security, from blurred civilian–military uses, to the rise of commercial actors and counterspace capabilities. More than 50 states took the floor in July, showing strong interest, but progress remained hampered by procedural wrangling and political tug-of-war. – Space Security in Geneva: Between Constraint and Convergence – Centre for International Governance Innovation
Sri Lanka
(Alan Keenan – Crisis Group) The election of President Anura Kumara Dissanayake in September 2024, and the landslide parliamentary victory of his National People’s Power (NPP) alliance two months later, ignited hope throughout Sri Lanka. Elected on a mandate to eliminate the widely reported large-scale corruption, nepotism and abuse of power that contributed to the country’s economic collapse in 2022, the NPP appealed to voters in large part because it lacked experience in office and was distant from the elite-dominated parties that had ruled Sri Lanka since independence in 1948. Among their more soaring goals, Dissanayake and the NPP pledged to fight impunity and establish a “new political culture”. This culture would, among other things, end the divisive ethno-religious politics that led to 30 years of war and foster peaceful coexistence among all Sri Lankans – Tamils, Muslims and the Sinhalese Buddhist majority. The government’s first year in power, however, has been something of a letdown for constituencies that hoped to see concrete moves toward this promised new culture. Disappointment is particularly strong among Tamils and Muslims living in the northern and eastern provinces, who see little tangible progress on the confidence-building measures Dissanayake and the NPP promised. – Sri Lanka’s National People’s Power Faces the Legacy of Civil War | International Crisis Group
UN
(Crisis Group) As the annual high-level meeting of the General Assembly at the UN approaches, the organisation faces severe political and financial challenges. But it can still use sanctions, peace operations and aid to address mounting crises. – Ten Challenges for the UN in 2025-2026 | International Crisis Group
