Iran's foreign minister is signaling willingness to restart nuclear talks by claiming its enriched uranium is buried 'under the rubble' of bombed sites. This creates a strategic opening for a deal proposing a 'zero weapon' but not 'zero enrichment' policy, effectively using the destruction of its facilities as a new precondition for diplomacy.
Meaningful reform in Iran is unlikely until the succession of the 86-year-old Supreme Leader is resolved. Deep uncertainty over who will hold power paralyzes the political system, preventing any faction from making significant changes and forcing the country into a holding pattern until the leadership transition occurs.
Nations increasingly use sanctions and tariffs as weapons, risking a destructive race to the bottom. A new international doctrine is needed to establish rules of engagement for economic statecraft, much like the Geneva Conventions govern military conflict, to preserve the global economy.
Claiming you will only 'turn down the temperature' after your opponents do is not a strategy for de-escalation; it is a justification for retaliation. This 'counter-punching' approach ensures conflict continues. A genuine desire to reduce societal tension requires leading by example, not waiting for the other side to act first.
Unlike predecessors who acted as "Israel's lawyer," Trump's administration applied coercive pressure to both Israeli and Hamas leadership. According to diplomats, this impartial approach was the key to brokering a peace deal where past efforts failed.
PGIM's Daleep Singh argues that the risk of mutually assured destruction prevents direct military conflict between nuclear powers. This channels confrontation into the economic sphere, using tools like sanctions and trade policy as primary weapons of statecraft.
In global conflicts, a nation's power dictates its actions and outcomes, not moral righteousness. History shows powerful nations, like the U.S. using nuclear weapons, operate beyond conventional moral constraints, making an understanding of power dynamics more critical than moralizing.
Indian refiners are likely to reduce direct purchases from sanctioned Russian entities like Rosneft. This is driven less by the sanctions themselves and more by the desire to protect their reputation and maintain access to the global financial system. The precedent set with Iran, where official imports dropped to zero, suggests a similar pattern.
The only historically effective method to resolve deep-rooted religious and ideological conflicts is to shift focus toward shared economic prosperity. Alliances like the Abraham Accords create tangible incentives for peace that ideology alone cannot, by making life demonstrably better for citizens.
Geopolitical solutions based on earthly incentives like economic development are bound to fail when dealing with an ideology focused on martyrdom. If people believe the ultimate goal is paradise after death, they won't compromise for a better life for their children now.
The latest US-China trade talks signal a shift from unilateral US pressure to a negotiation between equals. China is now effectively using its control over critical exports, like rare earth minerals, as a bargaining chip to compel the U.S. to pause its own restrictions on items like semiconductors.