Number of results to display per page
Search Results
102. Net assessments for Australia
- Author:
- Andrew Carr
- Publication Date:
- 06-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Lowy Institute for International Policy
- Abstract:
- Established in 2023 in the Australian Department of Defence, net assessments will play an increasingly important role in shaping the future of the Australian Defence Force, disciplining long-term capability decisions to a series of key scenarios of concern. With Australia’s security requirements ranging across many more domains — and dependent on careful analysis of trends and networks beyond its shores — four additional Directorates of Net Assessment should be established, in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Department of Home Affairs, Treasury, and the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. Net assessments will help Ministers better understand key strategic problems as well as potential conflict scenarios and outcomes, assisting them to make effective decisions to improve Australia’s competitive position and prepare the nation for any conflict in its region.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Armed Forces, Training, and Assessment
- Political Geography:
- Australia
103. Somali Federal and State Interior Ministries: How to Enable Popular Participation in Transitional Justice
- Author:
- Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR)
- Publication Date:
- 01-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR)
- Abstract:
- After years of conflict and instability, Somalia is entering a period where transitional justice is possible. Three decades of experience in Africa shows that transitional justice processes are more likely to be effective if they are rooted in popular participation, particularly of victims/survivors and communities affected by violence. While the Somali government has not yet launched a truth commission, prosecutions, reparations or other formal mechanisms usually associated with dealing with the past, different types of measures have emerged in the country that are precursors to – or even themselves forms of – transitional justice. Drawing lessons from formal, state-led measures like the National Reconciliation Framework and non-formal, civil society-led measures like the Peace and Development Forum, this policy brief provides actionable guidance for the Ministry of Interior, Federal Affairs and Reconciliation and the Interior Ministries of federal member states on how to enable popular participation for a locally relevant and sustainable national transitional justice process.
- Topic:
- Government, Transitional Justice, Reconciliation, and Political Participation
- Political Geography:
- Africa and Somalia
104. The African Union and Member States: How to Mainstream Participation in Transitional Justice
- Author:
- Mary Izobo
- Publication Date:
- 02-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR)
- Abstract:
- The 2019 African Union Transitional Justice Policy (AUTJP) advances a unique transitional justice approach based on the principles of national and local ownership, African shared values, inclusiveness, equity and non-discrimination. These principles highlight the importance of popular participation and provide a framework for mainstreaming participation in a meaningful way. This policy brief outlines how the AUTJP provides for participation, explains the value of participation, and identifies key challenges, before providing actionable recommendations for the African Union and its member states on partnering with a wide range of stakeholders to enhance popular participation. By doing so, the AU and member states can ensure that transitional justice is a transformative tool for sustainable peace, reconciliation and good governance at the regional and national levels in Africa.
- Topic:
- Transitional Justice, African Union, and Regional Politics
- Political Geography:
- Africa
105. The Gambian Government and Political Participation in Post-TRRC Transitional Justice
- Author:
- Jasmina Brankovic, Simon Robins, Fatou Baldeh, and Lena Houma
- Publication Date:
- 02-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR)
- Abstract:
- The government of Gambia has committed to implementing the recommendations of the Truth, Reconciliation, and Reparations Commission (TRRC) through further transitional justice measures. Three decades of experience in Africa show that a transitional justice process as a whole is more likely to be effective if it is rooted in popular participation, particularly of victims/survivors and communities affected by violence. This policy brief is written for the Steering Committee leading the implementation process and for the Ministry of Justice and other government ministries and agencies supporting implementation efforts. The brief provides actionable guidance on how to ensure post-TRRC transitional justice measures – including reparations, justice and accountability, and institutional reforms – are inclusive and participatory. In line with the African Union Transitional Justice Policy, the brief emphasizes the value of both formal, state-run measures and non-formal, civil society-led measures, especially in combination. It is based on lessons from the TRRC's efforts to promote participation, as well as those of non-formal measures like the Listening Circles created by Women in Liberation and Leadership.
- Topic:
- Transitional Justice, Reconciliation, and Participation
- Political Geography:
- Africa and Gambia
106. Breaking the Silence: The Fight Against Gender-Based Violence in Tanzania
- Author:
- Wilifrida S. John
- Publication Date:
- 07-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Centre for the Study of Violence and Reconciliation (CSVR)
- Abstract:
- This policy brief examines the ongoing issue of gender-based violence (GBV) in Tanzania, despite the country's ratification of comprehensive international, regional, and national legal frameworks. It explores how harmful cultural practices such as unyago, vigodoro, and chagulaga; alongside entrenched patriarchal norms and contradictions between statutory and customary laws, continue to undermine protections for women and girls. The brief argues that legal commitments alone are insufficient without effective enforcement, structural reform, public education, and stronger institutional accountability. It offers evidence-based recommendations to better align the legal system with cultural change, survivor-centred support services, and coordinated, cross-sector responses. By situating Tanzania's case within the wider Sub-Saharan African context, it illustrates how legal pluralism, and socio-cultural dynamics contribute to the persistence of GBV across the region.
- Topic:
- Education, Culture, Reform, Women, Gender Based Violence, and Girls
- Political Geography:
- Africa and Tanzania
107. Mapping India-Pakistan military power
- Author:
- Rajeswari Pillai Rajagopalan and Linus Cohen
- Publication Date:
- 06-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)
- Abstract:
- Security competition between India and Pakistan, rooted in the territorial dispute over Kashmir, has persisted since the partition of British India in 1947. Since the 1990s, Pakistan’s support for insurgent and terrorist groups in Indian-administered Kashmir has posed a persistent challenge to Indian security. While both countries have maintained nuclear arsenals since the late 1980s, the threat of escalation has historically constrained India’s responses. However, India’s posture has shifted in recent years, with a growing willingness to conduct overt cross-border strikes and covert operations targeting terrorist infrastructure in Pakistan. This evolution has been marked by key incidents, including the 2016 Uri attack and India’s surgical strikes, the 2019 Pulwama bombing and Balakot air strike, and the April 2025 Pahalgam attack, which triggered a series of retaliatory strikes by both sides. India’s targeting of major Pakistani air bases in 2025 marked a significant escalation, raising concerns about strategic stability. China’s role further complicates the regional picture. As Pakistan’s close ally and India’s primary military rival, China’s growing involvement—through arms transfers and strategic coordination—has led Indian planners to seriously consider the possibility of a two-front war. This ASPI brief provides a overview of the current military balance between India and Pakistan, with a focus on quantitative comparisons of defence spending, conventional military capabilities, and strategic assets. India has consistently maintained a superior conventional military force, particularly in terms of major equipment categories, shaping the strategic calculus on both sides.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, National Security, Military Affairs, Strategic Competition, and Regional Politics
- Political Geography:
- Pakistan, South Asia, India, and Asia-Pacific
108. The Current State of Energy Security in Europe
- Author:
- Dan Ziebarth, Johannes Späth, and Cengiz Günay
- Publication Date:
- 07-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- This Policy Analysis examines the state of energy security in Europe. The concept of energy security has been commonly used to refer to the ability to securing uninterrupted access to energy and energy supplies at an affordable price (IEA, World Energy Outlook 2022). Energy security is essential for maintaining economic stability, political security, and social well-being. Although, the classic approach energy security is reducing dependencies through the diversification of energy sources and supplies, energy security also requires robust and resilient infrastructure, political and bureaucratic will, market conditions and cooperation. Building for energy security also entails the right assessment of the existing realities. Europe‘s energy security faces multiple threats and risks. This policy analysis identifies four major threat domains to energy security: (1) geopolitical coercion and cyberattacks; (2) infrastructural and systemic weaknesses; (3) resource scarcity and critical mineral dependency; and (4) political/regulatory fragmentation. The paper argues that over-reliance on diversification (e.g., of imports such as replacing Russian gas with Qatari LNG and diversifying the energy mix through an increase in renewable energy) won‘t be enough. The EU also needs to invest in innovative technologies and infrastructure. The blackout in Spain highlighted the vulnerability of grids to high levels of renewable energy without the necessary adaptations. European energy security requites inclusive and integrated resilience strategies with a whole-of-society approach, technological innovation and cooperation, investment in infrastructure, bureaucratic coordination, and political unity.
- Topic:
- Infrastructure, Renewable Energy, Resilience, and Energy Security
- Political Geography:
- Europe
109. Flawed by Design: What al-Sisi’s Egypt Reveals About the Myth of Authoritarian Efficiency
- Author:
- Johannes Späth
- Publication Date:
- 07-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- This policy analysis challenges the rising narrative that authoritarian regimes, despite their repressive nature, offer superior governance efficiency and contribute to regional stability. Using Egypt under President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi as a case study, it argues that the perception of authoritarian efficiency is not only analytically flawed but dangerously misleading for international policymakers. European and Western engagement with Egypt continues to rely on flawed assumptions about authoritarian capacity and stability. Financial support, arms sales, and diplomatic legitimacy are extended largely unconditionally, under the illusion that al-Sisi’s regime can deliver long-term order. This approach ignores the structural fragility baked into Egypt’s political economy, and risks enabling a trajectory toward fiscal implosion and social unrest. The paper argues for a strategic recalibration. European policymakers should shift from regime-centered engagement to resilience-centered investment, focusing on areas like education, climate adaptation, and local economic empowerment that outlast regime cycles. Europe’s current approach risks buying short-term quiet at the cost of long-term instability. A policy recalibration grounded in realism, not regime accommodation, is both necessary and overdue.
- Topic:
- Political Economy, Bilateral Relations, Authoritarianism, European Union, Regime Security, Regional Stability, and Regime Legitimation
- Political Geography:
- Europe, North America, and Egypt
110. NATO is safe, but for how long? What needs to be taken from the Hague Summit
- Author:
- Sophie Draeger and Loïc Simonet
- Publication Date:
- 07-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- The Hague NATO Summit was a success – on the paper. Mark Rutte’s first test as Secretary-General may have avoided the chaos of Trump’s first term, but the outcome reveals deep contradictions in the Alliance. The agreed 5% defence spending target is historic and the final communiqué strikingly short, yet these moves mask rather than resolve NATO’s structural vulnerability. Trump’s transactional view of Article 5 remains the Alliance’s Damocles sword, as America’s long-term commitment to Europe remains in question. The EU, meanwhile, is facing a strategic and identity crossroads. While Trump’s pressure spurs long-overdue momentum toward a stronger European defence posture, it also risks accelerating Europe’s militarization at the expense of its founding peace project. The 'phoney transatlantic bargain' – Europe promises to spend, Trump promises to stay – may hold for now, but cannot guarantee NATO’s credibility in the long run. Amid economic risks and political fragmentation, the EU must act fast to assert its own roadmap, including tying EU funds to defence efforts and planning for U.S. retrenchment. Without this, Europe may find itself simultaneously more militarized and more vulnerable.
- Topic:
- NATO, European Union, Alliance, and Transatlantic Relations
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Ukraine, and United States of America
111. The ‘geopolitical’ European Union and the new Transatlantic relation 100 days after Donald Trump’s inauguration: How to navigate the storm?
- Author:
- Loïc Simonet
- Publication Date:
- 05-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- Donald Trump’s second administration is a test for the “geopolitical” EU. It comes at a time of morosity and decline in Europe, both in terms of hard and soft power, and reveals EU’s major structural deficiencies and dependencies. In Ukraine, “Europe’s era is over”, former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev cynically assessed. At the same time, Donald Trump’s contemptuous foreign policy plays an accelerating role for the EU’s long-awaited strategic autonomy. The narrative is rapidly changing and the Commission’s first initiatives are promising, but the EU needs not only competitiveness but also political ambition. New ‘coalitions of the willing’ are emerging in Europe across old borders such as Brexit-related divisions or rivalries between the EU and NATO, reviving the concept of ‘concentric circles’. They might provide Europe with much needed impulse, but also enhance divisions and internal quarrels, which is in Trump’s strategy. Trump.2 also accelerates the ‘de-Westernisation’ of the world and leaves Europe alone versus ‘the Rest’. With EU’s more assertive stance and strategic quantum leap, it might also question and jeopardize Europe’s original peace project.
- Topic:
- European Union, Geopolitics, Transatlantic Relations, Donald Trump, and Inauguration
- Political Geography:
- Europe and United States of America
112. Brave New World – The Future of China-US relations
- Author:
- Thomas Eder
- Publication Date:
- 05-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- The US’s diminished leverage and Beijing’s reticence to engage an erratic US president mean that a new trade deal will likely take longer than in Donald Trump’s first administration, if it materializes at all. Prolonged trade tensions are unlikely to spiral into a security crisis in the Pacific. Both sides have economic priorities, US allies and partners lose trust in Washington, and Beijing will be loath to upset a trend towards a more accommodating region. The US-China trade and technology war will challenge the EU and its member states more than before but also provide Europe with leverage as the US and China gradually lose their economic partnership.
- Topic:
- Economics, Treaties and Agreements, Bilateral Relations, European Union, and Trade
- Political Geography:
- China, Asia, North America, and United States of America
113. Navigating neutrality: How to find the best match between NATO and its four remaining neutral Western European Partners (WEP4)?
- Author:
- Loïc Simonet
- Publication Date:
- 05-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- “Is small still beautiful?” (Gebhard, 2013). Is NATO still interested in the remaining four neutral countries in Europe (Austria, Ireland, Malta and Switzerland)? Can these WEP4 benefit from the Alliance’s ‘return to Europe’ in the aftermath of the Russian invasion of Ukraine? On the opposite, might the Alliance’s ‘war’ approach, with high focus on defence and deterrence, risk marginalizing them and evidencing “the limits of partnership for deterrence” (Aronsson & Swaney, 2022, 5)? Using the opportunity of the current geopolitical crisis as well as rapidly shifting alliance constellations, this paper aims to assess the current partnership between NATO and the WEP4 and to provide with a framework for its redefinition in light of the new security context in Europe. While keeping Trump.2 ‘after-shock’, the current turmoil of the new Transatlantic relation as well as NATO’s existential crisis on the way to its summit in The Hague in June 2025, as a background, this paper tries to isolate the question of the WEP4 from the ‘elephant in the room’ and to address it as a per se challenge.
- Topic:
- NATO, Deterrence, Transatlantic Relations, and Neutrality
- Political Geography:
- Europe
114. From Belgrade to Tbilisi: How the EU Views Civil Protests
- Author:
- Ljiljana Kolarski
- Publication Date:
- 02-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- From Belgrade to Tbilisi: How the EU Views Civil Protests The European Union (EU) has long positioned itself as a promoter of democratic values, human rights, and media freedom. However, its stance on opposition protests in different countries is often influenced by a complex interplay of geopolitical considerations and pragmatic interests. This paper examines the EU’s contrasting reactions to anti-government protests in Serbia and Georgia in 2024, emphasizing how these responses are shaped by the political alignments of the respective governments. On the one hand, the EU has brought a strong support to opposition in Georgia, whose government maintains close ties with its northern neighbor, Russia. On the other hand, Brussels has failed to actively support opposition groups in Serbia, which has visibly distanced itself from Moscow since the war began without moving towards greater democratization.
- Topic:
- European Union, Democracy, Protests, and Regional Politics
- Political Geography:
- Europe, Serbia, and Georgia
115. Bro-Politics in Action: Trump and the “Personalization” of Foreign Policy
- Author:
- Ádám Csobánci
- Publication Date:
- 02-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- Congratulations poured in from European heads of state and government as soon as it became clear that Donald Trump was turning U.S. battleground states red and winning the presidential election last November. Many presidents and prime ministers posted selfies and pictures with Trump, emphasizing their strong personal relationship and shared history. While congratulations to the new President might seem like standard diplomatic courtesy, the enthusiasm for the upcoming Trump 2.0 administration from Paris, Berlin, and Brussels appears less than sincere, given their rather complicated relationships with the first Trump administration. In contrast, leaders like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who described Trump’s victory as "the biggest comeback in Western political history" and forecasted a golden era in US-Hungarian relations, expressed a strong eagerness to collaborate on shared goals. Similarly, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni praised the "unshakable alliance" between Italy and the U.S., demonstrating clear support for Trump’s win. Recognizing the heightened importance of personal relationships in dealing with Trump and his administration, European leaders are hoping to establish strong personal ties with the President. This trend report predicts how in 2025 further “personalization” of foreign policy is to be expected from the next U.S. administration. I present, through the examples of Orbán and Meloni, that European leaders already possessing close ties with the next U.S. president or his inner circle might have a significant head start to influence Trump’s Europe policy, with far-reaching consequences. Europeans who were not in power during Trump’s first term are pressed for time because the start of his new presidency is expected to bring rapid and aggressive policy changes. With the Republican Party controlling all branches of government, Trump’s administration will likely prioritize advancing its agenda swiftly, particularly before the midterm elections in 2026, when Congressional support could wane. For European leaders who are new to office or lacked strong ties with Trump previously, this creates urgency. They have strong incentives to build closer relations with his administration, whether due to shared ideologies or fears of trade tariffs; however, they face a glaring challenge. They will have to compete for Trump’s very limited time, attention and interest, as European affairs are unlikely to be a top priority for the new administration.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Elections, Domestic Politics, Donald Trump, and Personalization
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America
116. Bridging divides: Saudi Arabia’s Quest for Strategic Autonomy
- Author:
- Yuki Adachi
- Publication Date:
- 01-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- Saudi Arabia’s diplomatic approach after the Gaza outbreak in 2023 reveals its emerging role as a stabilizing force in the Middle East. By balancing regional interests and maintaining its strategic independence, Riyadh is steering away from traditional reliance on Western allies, particularly the U.S., to pursue a more autonomous and multipolar foreign policy. Since his rise to power in the mid-2010s, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) has prioritized regional stability as a cornerstone of Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 economic transformation. This strategy reflects Riyadh’s intent to diversify its oil-dependent economy, attract foreign investment, and enhance its geopolitical influence (Borck, 2025). Traditionally, Saudi Arabia has relied on its alliance with Western powers, particularly the United States, which has provided security assurances in exchange for privileged access to the Kingdom’s abundant oil resources (Adil, 2024). However, under MBS, Saudi Arabia began to engage more openly with regional rivals and non-Western powers, signaling a move towards greater autonomy in its foreign policy. In 2023, Saudi Arabia achieved a historic rapprochement with Iran through China’s mediation, showcasing its pragmatic willingness to engage non-Western actors to stabilize the region. Simultaneously, normalization talks with Israel brokered by the U.S. signaled Riyadh’s strategic intent to recalibrate regional power dynamics. However, the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel disrupted this trajectory, reigniting Israeli and Arab world tensions. Undeterred, Saudi Arabia continued its dialogue with Israel for normalization while distancing itself from overt U.S. security arrangements, underscoring its strategic independence. More recently, Riyadh abandoned its pursuit of a bilateral defense treaty with the U.S., due to the Israeli normalization stalemate (Nakhoul & Magid, 2024). This is because the bilateral defense treaty with the U.S. would require formal recognition of Israel (Nakhoul & Magid, 2024). As Saudi Arabia carves out its role as a credible mediator, its pragmatic and balanced diplomacy could redefine regional power structures in 2025.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Strategic Autonomy, Regional Politics, and Muhammad bin Salman (MBS)
- Political Geography:
- Middle East and Saudi Arabia
117. The Rise and Growing Coordination of The Global South
- Author:
- Veronika Nechaeva
- Publication Date:
- 01-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- The phrase “Global South” is increasingly employed in the information space, which introduces certain modifications to the traditional understanding of the “East-West” division model of the world. While concerns about the global order and the role of the Global South have been debated for decades, China’s assertive ambitions and Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have sparked renewed discussions about the Global South’s geopolitical significance. Some experts even note that it is the representatives of the Global South, as the owners of the “golden share”, who may ultimately decide the fate of the further arrangement of international relations. The term “Global South” was coined to the general public in 1969 by the American political activist Carl Oglesby. It refers to regions of the world often characterized by lower levels of economic development, historical colonial influence, and geographic location predominantly in the Southern Hemisphere. Countries in the Global South are frequently associated with socio-economic challenges such as income inequality, limited industrialization, and weaker political influence in global governance structures. Traditionally, the ‘old’ narratives surrounding the Global South focused on these characteristics, framing these nations primarily as recipients of aid or as dependent economies within a Western-dominated world order. However, the term now carries an ideological component, reflecting new narratives that emphasize the agency, resilience, and aspirations of these nations in shaping the global geopolitical landscape.
- Topic:
- Geopolitics, Global South, International Order, Coordination, and Russia-Ukraine War
- Political Geography:
- Global South
118. The End of an Era: The Decline of Neoliberalism and the Emerging Interregnum
- Author:
- Johannes Späth
- Publication Date:
- 01-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- The era of neoliberal and unconditional globalization, once heralded as the ultimate phase of human history, is in slow but likely irreversible decline. The frameworks and assumptions that underpinned global integration for decades are eroding, leaving behind a fragmented landscape and an uncertain future. Periods of upheaval like this compel us to reconsider the structures that shape our lives. Central to these is the notion of political order. Historian Gary Gerstle, in the U.S. context, defines it as a set of dominant political ideas broadly shared across partisan lines. These ideas persist over significant periods of time and can only be challenged to a certain degree. Contrarian views may simultaneously still exist but remain on the fringes, unable to disrupt the mainstream consensus upheld by the political order. Historically, political orders collapse when crises expose their inability to adapt and adequately respond. These moments of systemic failure pave the way for new paradigms. The stagflation crisis of the 1970s—marked by high inflation and unemployment—marked the end of the New Deal order and its Keynesian economics. In its place emerged a once-radical fringe idea: neoliberalism, soon to become the new dominant order. The "neo" in neoliberalism can be confusing, as this set of ideas is closely aligned with classical liberalism (e.g., Adam Smith’s focus on free markets and limited government). It was labelled "neoliberalism" to distinguish its market-oriented approach from the interventionist liberalism of the mid-20th century, such as New Deal policies, which also identified as liberal.
- Topic:
- Globalization, History, Capitalism, Neoliberalism, and Borders
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
119. The Politics of Misinformation: Social Media, Polarization, and the Geopolitical Landscape in 2025
- Author:
- Ceren Çetinkaya
- Publication Date:
- 01-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- According to the Global Web Index, as of October 2024, 64% of the global population actively uses social media; they spend an average of 2 hours and 19 minutes daily on such platforms. (Chaffey, 2024). This digital transformation has reshaped various domains in our lives, most notably the political sphere. Social media platforms, particularly X (formerly known as Twitter), TikTok, and Facebook have become central hubs for political discourse. Their democratizing potential enables grassroots movements and empowers individuals to communicate with large audiences, bypassing traditional gatekeepers. However, this empowerment has come with significant trade-offs, including the proliferation of disinformation and misinformation, and the reinforcement of ideological echo chambers which contribute to the polarization of society. The World Economic Forum’s 2025 Global Risks Report identifies misinformation as the most critical challenge to political cohesion and societal trust, particularly due to its ability to fracture democratic institutions, in the next two years. As we enter 2025, X has shown its potential to become a platform for political discourse, especially for populist far-right movements, and has been accused of propagating misinformation. Recently, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced that Meta would remove third-party fact-checkers in the US and replace them with a crowd-sourced moderating service like the “community notes” feature on the rival social media platform X, because “the fact-checkers are politically biased”. Given the previous effects of social media in conflicts such as Rohingya humanitarian crisis in 2018, the effect of changes in social media regulations and the big tech-politics axis remains uncertain in a year where the ongoing conflicts seem unlikely to end soon. This report examines the geopolitical implications of misinformation in 2025 and calls for greater global attention to the role of social media in conflict areas.
- Topic:
- Geopolitics, Social Media, Misinformation, and Polarization
- Political Geography:
- Global Focus
120. France – U.S. Relationship under Trump 2.0: No Big Drama or Turbo-Charged Confrontation?
- Author:
- Loïc Simonet
- Publication Date:
- 01-2025
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
- Abstract:
- In 2018, to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the end of the first World War, Emmanuel Macron, the French President, gifted Donald Trump with a young oak tree from Belleau Wood, where 1,800 American soldiers lost their lives during the first World War. The tree soon died. Macron insisted that no analogies to the Franco-American relationship should be drawn, stating, “It’s no big drama, the symbol was to plant it together.” (RFI, 2019). From Lafayette to Tocqueville, from General de Gaulle to Dominique de Villepin, France and the United States are linked by a long history that goes to the heart of their universalist values. But the relationship has not always been simple; rather “a rich drama with many chapters” (Lightfoot & Bel, 2020, 4). France’s dilemma in 2017 was: “Is Trump a revolutionary actor or a noisy status quo president?” (Lightfoot, 2018, 7). Seven years later, the answer remains uncertain. Unlike many EU members and NATO allies, France views Trump’s foreign policy with a certain détachement and regards it as ‘business as usual’—just as it already felt relatively comfortable with Trump’s America in 2017 (Zajac, 2018), On the morning of 6 November 2024, French President Emmanuel Macron was one of the first world leaders to congratulate the president-elect. The Washington Post’s columnist David Ignatius says he found a “surprising mood of acceptance” in Paris. Joe Biden’s presidency has certainly not been the ‘oasis’ of transatlantic harmony that many naively predicted, between the abrupt and uncoordinated U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, the AUKUS humiliation and the Inflation Reduction Act. This might also explain why Benjamin Haddad, France’s Deputy Minister for European Affairs, pragmatically assessed: “We worked with the first Trump administration, and we will work with the second. (…) You have to be emotionally neutral about what’s out of your control” (quoted by Ignatius, 2024). To paraphrase a recent Policy Paper of the Notre Europe Foundation, for France, it is not about the Good (Democrats) or the Bad (Republicans), but just the Ugly (Bertolini & Fabry, 2024). Having said that, Trump’s foreign policy views could hardly be more at odds with France’s current 'global agenda', which emphasizes accelerated green transition, environmental protection initiatives, global finance regulation, and multilateral governance revitalization (Tenenbaum, 2024, 13). Most of these divergences are likely to be turbo-charged during Trump’s second mandate. An opinion poll on 7 November 2024 on “The French and the election of Donald Trump” showed that 62% of French people are worried, with only 12% satisfied. 8 out of 10 French people have a poor image of Donald Trump, including the voters of the far-right Rassemblement National (56%). In both domestic and foreign policy, 85% of French people expect Donald Trump to lead a policy of rupture. 48% of French people think that with the election of Donald Trump, relations between the United States and France will deteriorate, and 44% that they will not change. Only 7% expect relations between the two countries to improve (ELABE, 2024). France, which might well be considered the least ‘Atlanticist’ country in the transatlantic community, with its NATO-skeptic past and its aspiration to European strategic autonomy, has a vested interest in an understanding with Washington. What will it make out of Trump’s victory? A lot will depend on the relationship forged between the two presidents during Trump’s first mandate, since French and American leaders have a long history of using personal diplomacy to reach agreement on divisive issues.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, NATO, Bilateral Relations, European Union, and Donald Trump
- Political Geography:
- Europe, France, North America, and United States of America