From global think tanks
The analyses published here do not necessarily reflect the strategic thinking of The Global Eye
Today’s about: Belarus-Russia-Ukraine-US; China; Egypt-Middle East; Europe; Europe-China; Russia; Syria-Israel-Türkiye; US; US-China; US-Iran
Belarus – Russia – Ukraine – US
(Artyom Shraibman – Carnegie Russia-Eurasia) Contested Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko spied an opportunity when talks over ending the war in Ukraine got under way earlier this year between the United States and Russia. Predictably, the talks have subsequently stalled because of the Kremlin’s maximalist demands, as well as qualms in Europe over U.S. President Donald Trump’s desire to reach a quick deal with Moscow at almost any cost. As the diplomatic push slowly dies on the vine, Belarus could end up in an even worse position than it is now. Lukashenko likes to talk about the negotiations on Ukraine as though his main priority is to get personally involved, or even for talks to be physically moved to Belarus. During a March visit to Russia, Lukashenko urged Russian President Vladimir Putin to bring Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to Minsk. – Lukashenko Seeks to Piggyback on U.S.-Russia Rapprochement | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
China
(Erik Green, Meia Nouwens – IISS) Since his inauguration in January, United States President Donald Trump’s controversial decisions to cut US Agency for International Development funding and, more recently, introduce 10% tariffs on over 180 countries have risked alienating many US allies. The United States’ standing in Southeast Asia, the Middle East and Africa could be particularly damaged at a time when China continues to leverage narratives of a Western (and in particular US) decline in power to further its agenda. This has sparked questions over whether China can exploit this opportunity to strengthen relationships with states in these regions and fill the space vacated by the US under the Trump administration. China has already made considerable efforts to cultivate support amongst those nations often labelled as part of the ‘Global South’, utilising a range of economic, political and socio-cultural approaches. Since 2017, it has outlined an alternative world order that can appeal to Global South countries. To promote this order, Beijing has drawn upon its decades of infrastructure investment and loans to much of the Global South, but diplomacy also plays a crucial part in Beijing’s efforts. From 2023 onwards, Beijing has engaged in an increasing number of bilateral meetings with heads of state from across these regions. This not only demonstrates the importance placed by China’s senior leadership on its Global South diplomacy but also the extent of the relationships and support that it has already cultivated. Notably, in addition to heads-of-state meetings, the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) Central Military Commission (CMC) also plays a significant defence-diplomacy role to bolster support for China’s Global Security Initiative, launched in 2022. – China’s head-of-state and defence diplomacy
Egypt – Middle East
(Mohamed Nabil El Bendary – Stimson Center) Egypt is facing complex new geopolitical challenges amid the ongoing Gaza war and significant shifts to the international system since President Donald Trump’s return to the White House. In January 2025, the U.S. president adopted an unconventional approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, calling for the removal of Gaza’s two million residents and the enclave’s improbable conversion into a luxury resort. Israeli leaders have shared support for this approach as they continue a campaign against the militant group Hamas that has claimed more than 51,000 lives since Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, 2023. Meanwhile, Egypt is seeking to balance its strategic interests by maintaining its historic close relationship with Washington, which includes substantial military and economic aid, while strongly opposing displacement plans that conflict with Cairo’s support of Palestinian rights. This challenge comes at a particularly sensitive time for Egyptian-Israeli relations, which are also witnessing heightened tensions along their border, potentially threatening the stability of the 46-year-old U.S.-brokered peace agreement between the two countries. – Egypt’s Delicate Balance: Maintaining US Support While Confronting Gaza Challenges • Stimson Center
Europe
(Federico Santopinto – Institut de Relations Internationales et Stratégiques) Depuis plusieurs semaines, les discussions sur le financement de la défense européenne battent leur plein. Elles sont régulièrement alimentées par de nouvelles propositions techniques venant de toutes parts, au risque de créer une certaine confusion et parfois même des tensions. Le débat sur le sujet, pourtant, est loin d’être purement technique. Derrière chaque solution proposée se cachent des visions politiques et des choix géopolitiques divergents au sujet du rôle de l’Europe dans le monde et plus particulièrement de l’Union européenne dans les affaires militaires. La dernière proposition en date en la matière, concernant la création d’une banque européenne du réarmement en dehors de l’Union, est en cela emblématique. Jusqu’à présent, les enjeux relatifs au financement de la défense européenne pouvaient être divisés en trois groupes : ceux concernant le financement direct par l’UE de la coopération militaro-industrielle, ceux concernant les incitations que l’UE peut offrir aux États membres pour qu’ils augmentent leurs propres budgets nationaux de défense, et ceux concernant les mesures visant à encourager les institutions financières publiques et privées à soutenir l’industrie militaire. Voilà donc que désormais une quatrième proposition, celle relative à la banque du réarmement, a été ajoutée à la liste. – Comprendre le débat sur le financement de la défense européenne et ses implications politiques – IRIS
Europe – China
(Rym Momtaz – Carnegie Europe) U.S. President Donald Trump has initiated a global trade war by imposing tariffs, including on European allies. Given the impact of these measures, should the EU seek to mitigate its losses by deepening economic ties with China? – Taking the Pulse: In Light of Trump’s Tariffs, Should Europe Get Closer to China? | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Russia
(Anna J. Davis – The Jamestown Foundation) Russia has launched this year’s “Icebreaker of Knowledge” program, sending children to the North Pole aboard a nuclear-powered icebreaker as part of Moscow’s broader Arctic strategy. The expedition blends education with geopolitical messaging about Russia’s leadership in Arctic affairs as other states, including the United States and the People’s Republic of China, seek to expand their icebreaker capabilities. Taking children on educational expeditions to the North Pole may serve to distract from broader problems with Russia’s icebreaker fleet and slow progress in developing new icebreakers. – Russia Sends Children to North Pole on Nuclear-Powered Icebreakers – Jamestown
(Valentin Châtelet – Atlantic Council) Over the last three years of its war in Ukraine, Russia has expanded, developed, and tailored an influence campaign targeting much of the world, spreading its content in Wikipedia articles and in popular artificial intelligence (AI) tools. As election campaigns in Romania and Moldova took place, or as political discussions between US President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy unfolded, a network of inauthentic pro-Russian portals ramped up its activity, laundering content from sanctioned news outlets and aligning global information sources with the Kremlin narrative machine. – Exposing Pravda: How pro-Kremlin forces are poisoning AI models and rewriting Wikipedia – Atlantic Council
Syria – Israel – Türkiye
(The Soufan Center) Israel and Türkiye met in Azerbaijan last week in an effort to de-escalate rising tensions over each country’s growing military presence in Syria, where both states are competing for influence. While Israel is relieved to see a drastically reduced Iranian footprint in Syria, it also likely views Türkiye as the long-term pacing threat and is preparing accordingly. The U.S. reportedly informed Israel that it will begin a phased withdrawal from Syria within two months, stoking Israeli fears that such a move will embolden Turkish ambitions and potentially provide space for a resurgent Islamic State. Whether the Azerbaijan meeting results in a sustained de-escalation between Türkiye and Israel remains to be seen, as the countries’ competing interests may potentially stifle mediation efforts. – Are Israel and Türkiye on a Collision Course in Syria? – The Soufan Center
US
(Marie-Cécile Naves – Institut de Relations Internationales et Stratégiques) Si le retour de Donald Trump à la présidence des États-Unis était déjà perçu comme une menace pour les droits des minorités sexuelles et de genre, la rapidité de la mise en œuvre des politiques d’exclusion et l’extrémisme des discours à leur égard marquent une véritable rupture. Dans quelle histoire des États-Unis ce projet politique et idéologique s’inscrit-il et comment le qualifier ? Avec quels impacts sur la société américaine ? – Trump 2 et les minorités de genre : quelles ruptures ? – IRIS
(Phil McCausland, Matthew C. Waxman – Council on Foreign Relations) The deportation of Kilmar Ábrego García, a twenty-nine-year-old Salvadorian immigrant, from his home in Maryland to an El Salvador mega-prison has set up a legal showdown between President Donald Trump’s administration and the United States’ legal system. It has raised major questions about what oversight the different branches of government have over foreign policy, how the Trump administration will respond to court orders, and what obligations the White House has to protect American due process rights. Ábrego García was one of more than 260 migrants that the United States sent to El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center (CECOT) last month. This mega prison has served as the backbone of a large-scale gang crackdown led by the country’s president, Nayib Bukele, housing thousands of suspects—and now, individuals deported from the United States after the Trump administration struck a deal with the Central American country. – Can the Courts Undo Trump’s Deportation of Ábrego García? | Council on Foreign Relations
(Reed Blakemorem Alexis Harmon – Atlantic Council) Critical minerals have officially entered the tariff spotlight. On Tuesday, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order launching an investigation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to determine whether critical mineral imports impair US national security. The Commerce Department investigation will help determine whether and to what extent the Trump administration will levy tariffs on imports of critical minerals as part of its sweeping global tariff efforts. The United States is over 50 percent import-reliant on forty of fifty designated critical minerals. With China dominating many mineral supply chains from extraction to processing to finished products, US policymakers have spent years trying and largely failing to effectively de-risk supply chains. US critical mineral suppliers face a complex set of challenges: volatile and opaque price signals, Chinese market manipulation through subsidies and dumping that undercut other projects, and the inherently higher costs of US projects due to stricter environmental and labor standards. Now, the Commerce Department has 180 days to assess how imports create vulnerabilities in US critical mineral supply chains, investigate foreign market distortion, and strategize how to boost domestic processing. Tariffs could be highly effective tools in addressing these challenges—but optimal results require a scalpel, not a chainsaw. After all, at the heart of the US critical minerals challenge lies project economics. The administration can streamline permitting processes and prioritize mining on federal land, but investment will still struggle to reach the levels needed for a robust domestic mining sector without increased market certainty. De-risked supply chains need massive capital investment, which only flows when investors can count on predictable returns, reliable and cost-competitive contracts for securing future inputs (intake) and outputs (offtake), and consistent federal support. – Tariffs can help secure US critical mineral supply chains—if they’re done right – Atlantic Council
US – China
(Noah Gordon – Carnegie Endowment for International Peace) The trade war is a fast-moving and chaotic story. At the time of publication, the United States has imposed tariffs of 145 percent on most Chinese imports, and China has responded by slapping 125 percent tariffs on U.S. goods. But Washington has carved out exemptions for some items, such as copper, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, laptops, and smartphones. A Chinese-made lithium-ion battery now faces a tariff at the U.S. border, but putting that battery inside a Chinese-made laptop would exempt it. Washington has also put 25 percent tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from all countries. The exact rates for various countries and sectors could change quickly, as the White House has proven willing to delay tariffs or grant exemptions to suit the politics of the day. But despite the flux, the contours of the new U.S. economic landscape are becoming clear, especially for clean energy industries, where China is the dominant global supplier. Below, we address several key questions on how the trade war could affect the U.S. move toward clean energy. – How the U.S.-China Trade War Could Derail the Energy Transition | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
US – Iran
(Corey Hinderstein – Carnegie Endowment for International Peace) Last weekend in Oman, the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump took the first steps toward a nuclear negotiation with Iran. The indirect discussions went well enough to warrant a second round, held this weekend. As the two sides move toward a substantive negotiation over the future of Tehran’s nuclear program, they should look back at the negotiations to conclude and implement the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2015 and draw five lessons for the current process. – Five Lessons for the Current Iran Nuclear Talks | Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
