What the Hell Is Going On

Over the weekend, President Trump launched Operation Epic Fury, the most ambitious US military operation in decades. In the wake of the 2025 12-Day War, Iran again worked to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program and its missile arsenal. These threats, in combination with the massacre of tens of thousands of Iranians in January, brought the US to the brink of war. The operation has targeted IRGC command, missile defense systems, and senior regime leadership, including the Supreme Leader and his successors. Secretary Hegseth has stated that nothing is off the table, including the possible deployment of ground forces, an option potentially necessary to secure Iran’s nuclear materials. Our guest, David Albright, warns that failing to secure those materials will ultimately undermine the operation’s success. In the weeks ahead, what indicators will signal whether the regime is truly at risk of collapse? Beyond military targets, what political considerations must be addressed to ensure lasting success once combat operations cease?David Albright is the founder and President of the non-profit Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, D.C. He has written numerous assessments on secret nuclear weapons programs throughout the world, has authored or co-authored nine books and briefed policymakers on non-proliferation policy making.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

Yesterday marked the fourth anniversary of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Four years of war in which Russian forces have occupied roughly one and a half percent of Ukraine’s territory at the cost of approximately half a million lives. Our guest, Frederick W. Kagan, and his team at the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) and the Critical Threats Project (CTP) assess that Russia’s strategy is to win at the negotiating table what it cannot seize on the battlefield. Putin’s theory of victory rests on the assumption that Russian forces will continue grinding forward indefinitely, regardless of the cost, and that he will be able to persuade the West to abandon Ukraine, ultimately forcing Kyiv to concede more than it already has. Successful negotiation requires changing Putin’s calculus. Over the past four years, Ukrainians have made their position unmistakably clear: “We would rather die than be part of Russia.” So, what will drive this tipping point toward peace? Would a global inflection point against malign actors and axis partners change Putin's negotiating position? And what security guarantees from the West would be sufficient to sustain this hypothetical peace? Frederick W. Kagan is a senior fellow and the director of the Critical Threats Project (CTP) at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). He edits CTP’s and the Institute for the Study of War’s (ISW) daily updates on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He was previously an associate professor of military history at West Point, and he earned the Distinguished Public Service Award for his volunteer service in Afghanistan. Dr. Kagan coauthored the report Defining Success in Afghanistan and is the author of the “Choosing Victory” report series, which recommended and monitored the US military surge in Iraq.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

Blame it on American individualism or a political aversion to regulation, but the United States has become a striking outlier in its failure to regulate the assisted reproductive technology industry. As a result, individuals from other countries have begun engaging in quasi–birth tourism through American surrogacy contracts, and not in small numbers. Chinese billionaire Xu Bo, for example, has reportedly fathered more than 100 American children through surrogacy and has been involved in legal battles over custody, describing them as part of his “business legacy". Beyond clear international abuses of U.S. surrogacy laws, there are also numerous domestic practices that warrant greater oversight and protection. The central question is why? What do they want these children for? Who, if anyone, is regulating these contracts? And why have lawmakers declined to address this rapidly growing industry?Charles Hilu is a reporter for The Dispatch based in Washington, D.C. Before joining the company in 2024, he was the Collegiate Network Fellow at the Washington Free Beacon and interned at both National Review and the Washington Examiner. He attended the University of Michigan, earning a Bachelor’s in Political Science, where he was editor in chief of The Michigan Review and chairman of Young Americans for Freedom.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

In addition to the media blitz over Greenland triggered by President Trump, American presidents going back a century have agreed on the strategic importance of the island due to its fundamental geography, proximity, and critical sea lines. China and Russia’s Arctic ambitions require greater defensive efforts by the (now sovereign) Danes and strong resistance to coercion should Greenlanders continue on their path to independence. Our guest sheds light on the various precedents underlying these concerns and the so-called "Cyprus Model" for the US's role. What does that roadmap look like? Do we need sovereignty to achieve our goals? If and when Greenland gains independence, what economic and security agreements will need to be made? And what impact, negative or positive, does Trump's rhetoric have on the conversation?Alexander Gray is the Chief Executive Officer of American Global Strategies LLC, an international strategic advisory firm that he co-founded with former U.S. National Security Advisor Robert C. O’Brien. Mr. Gray most recently served as Deputy Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff of the White House National Security Council (NSC), where he directed the daily operations of the National Security Advisor’s immediate office, as well as the budget, personnel, and security functions of the NSC, as well as positions within the State Department and the Hill. Mr. Gray concurrently serves as Term Member of the Council on Foreign Relations, is a Senior Fellow at the American Foreign Policy Council (AFPC); a Senior Nonresident Fellow at the Global Taiwan Institute (GTI); and a Senior Nonresident Fellow in the GeoStrategy Initiative at The Atlantic Council.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

Kremlinology has made its way east as analysts try to make sense of dramatic PLA purges under Xi Jinping. The CCP regime appears to be clearing house, but what does it all mean? Should there be a reconsideration of a Taiwan contingency for China? Is China even equipped to make threats against its neighbors? At a moment of global turbulence, why reduce military expertise? What does it all mean for the United States? Is Xi going the way of Stalin? So many questions; join us for the answers.John Garnaut is the founder of Garnaut Global, where he provides strategic advice and risk management services to global finance and corporate clients as an authority on Chinese elite politics and Chinese Communist Party interference. John was previously Fairfax's China correspondent and Asia-Pacific Editor, Senior Advisor to Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull, and Principal Advisor at the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet, where he led the government's analysis and policy response to authoritarian interference. He regularly presents to departments and agencies in Australia and the United States and serves as a Senior Fellow at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

With regime change brewing in Venezuela, Cuba, and Iran, and the Russian war of attrition still marching on, Cold War déjà vu shapes our understanding of what happens when regimes do fall and offers a hopeful conclusion. Former Soviet states that have joined the EU have experienced an average tenfold increase in GDP since 1990, while Russia and its non-EU neighbors have grown only fourfold. Like the stark contrast of the Berlin Wall, if Ukraine is free to continue to prosper economically, people in Russia’s border regions will begin to work out that the problem isn’t NATO, the problem isn’t ideology, the problem is the failure of the system in Russia to deliver. And in addition to the huge costs of the war already waged, that’s something Putin cannot afford. So, will Putin try to wait it out? What choices does he have to avoid failure? We asked an investment banker for his theory and the numbers are enlightening…Michael Tory is a co-founder and Chairman of the financial advisory firm Ondra Partners. Tory is also an outspoken advocate for and supports several NGO efforts in Ukraine. Previously, he served as head of UK investment banking for Lehman Brothers Inc. and has been a Senior UK investment banker of Lehman Brothers Holdings. Michael previously served as Morgan Stanley’s head of investment banking in the UK and worked in their New York office for over a decade. Tory is also principal of Turning the Page, which develops and publishes ideas for rebuilding the UK’s domestic capital markets and savings systems.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

The so-called “pro-Israel lobby” in Washington, D.C., has long been a target for antisemites and for fringe voices on both sides of the aisle. Contrary to conventional wisdom, however, support for Israel in the United States is not a predominantly Jewish cause. Once a Democratic hallmark, its strongest base today is Evangelical Christians, whose theology and values profoundly shape their political advocacy for the Jewish people and their homeland. Yet antisemitism and hostility toward Israel persist, with October 7th exposing eroded support across the political spectrum. What ideology drives these attitudes? How can the generational divide over Israel be bridged? And what do these trends reveal about America’s values?Ralph Reed is the founder and chairman of the Faith & Freedom Coalition and is the chairman and CEO of Century Strategies, a public relations and public affairs firm. Prior to founding the Faith & Freedom Coalition, Ralph served as Executive Director of the Christian Coalition where he built one of the most effective public policy organizations. Reed also served as a senior advisor to the 2000 and 2004 Bush-Cheney presidential campaigns and was chairman of the Southeast Region for Bush-Cheney 2004. As chairman of the Georgia Republican Party, he helped elect the first Republican Governor and third U.S. Senator since Reconstruction. Reed has worked on seven presidential campaigns and has advised 88 campaigns for U.S. Senate, Governor, and Congress across 24 states. He is the best-selling author and editor of seven books, including his latest novel, Awakening.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

The world is watching as protests rage across Iran amid nationwide internet blackouts, state-sponsored propaganda, and lethal security force crackdowns. Despite reports suggesting that hundreds, possibly thousands, have been killed at the time of this writing, Iranians are taking their future in their hands with extraordinary courage. For Tehran, what makes this wave of unrest different from those before it? Should civil war breakout, will we finally see a free Iran? Will President Trump enforce the red line he has drawn for the regime, and if so, what military options exist without deploying boots on the ground? Will President Trump ignore the eleventh-hour, desperate promises of diplomacy from Islamist leaders? He’ll need to if he intends to continue his administration’s legacy of freedom.Michael Rubin is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, where he specializes in Iran, Turkey, and the broader Middle East. He also currently serves as director of policy analysis at the Middle East Forum. A former Pentagon official, Dr. Rubin has lived in post-revolution Iran, Yemen, and both pre- and postwar Iraq. He also spent time with the Taliban before 9/11. For more than a decade, he taught classes at sea about the Horn of Africa and Middle East conflicts, culture, and terrorism, to deployed US Navy and Marine units. Dr. Rubin is the author, coauthor, and coeditor of several books exploring diplomacy, Iranian history, Arab culture, Kurdish studies, and Shi’ite politics.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

For many Americans, Operation Absolute Resolve, which brought Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro to trial in New York, was an unexpected New Year’s surprise. For others who have endured the corruption of his regime and watched as American adversaries have turned Venezuela and Cuba into platforms for illicit investment, arms trafficking, and narcotics, it is a long-awaited moment of vindication. It appears Chávez’s henchmen are finally facing the music. But why now? Our guest, Roger Noriega, cites institutional issues within the U.S. government and severe counterintelligence failures of the past, obstacles he argues have been overcome under Marco Rubio’s leadership and with President Trump’s resolve. So, what’s next? Will the opposition win a democratic election? And what is the Cuban play here? Could their regime be at risk?Roger Noriega is the founder and managing director of the consultant firm, Vision Americas LLC, which has teams in Washington and Bogotá. Ambassador (ret.) Roger F. Noriega has more than three decades of public policy experience focusing on U.S. interests in the Western Hemisphere. After a 10-year career on Capitol Hill with Senate Foreign Relations and House Foreign Affairs, he was appointed by President George W. Bush to senior State Department posts including Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere affairs and a U.S. ambassador to the Organization of American States. He also coordinated the American Enterprise Institute's program on Latin America as a visiting Fellow for 15 years.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

It is officially 2026, which means America is turning 250 this year. Our question on this semiquincentennial looks back to America’s founding and the constitutional framework that gave birth to our nation. America is the only nation founded not on blood or soil, but on a creed. Established by the Declaration of Independence, this creed, now more than ever, should be viewed through Jefferson’s words as a unifying force in our country as we continue to confront the challenges of a multicultural society. Both sides of the aisle have factions that seek to blame American democracy for our difficulties. Still, Professor Wood assures us that Americans are better positioned than any other people to mitigate these challenges because of our creedal identity. So what is the source of our strength? Is civic education the key to protecting our ideals? And how important are a free society and assimilation in preserving them?Gordon Wood is a renowned and highly awarded historian and Professor of History Emeritus at Brown University. He is the author of the Creation of the American Republic which won the Bancroft Prize and the John H. Dunning Prize, and The Radicalism of the American Revolution, which won the Pulitzer Prize for History and the Ralph Waldo Emerson Prize, among many other written works. In 2011 he was awarded a National Humanities Medal by President Obama and the Churchill Bell by Colonial Williamsburg. He is largely regarded as a leading scholar of Early American history, known specifically for his masterful prose and transformative understanding of true radicalism of the American Revolution. The American Enterprise Institute most recently awarded him the Irving Kristol Award.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

While we celebrate the remarkable achievement of 250 years of the US military being a bulwark of democracy, it is important to understand the intentionally laid foundations on which America’s civil military relations tradition rests. Military deference to civilian authority and the legislature is a principle pioneered and championed by General George Washington, setting a powerful precedent for commanding officers to follow… with some instructive exceptions. As we look toward the New Year, and wearily at the political posturing of some military leaders, Kori Schake reminds us of a central theme from her new book, The State and the Soldier (Polity, 2025): “We want a military that's not partisan. We want a military that is subordinate to whatever lunatics the American public see fit to put into high office.” How are military leaders inherently political? How do we avoid forcing them to make partisan choices? And, as we have discussed all year, why does Congress refuse to exercise the powers it has, even in this realm?Kori Schake is a senior fellow and the Director of Foreign and Defense Policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. Before joining AEI, Dr. Schake was the deputy director-general of the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. She has had a distinguished career in government, working at the US State Department, the US Department of Defense, and the National Security Council at the White House. She was also senior policy advisor on the 2008 McCain campaign. She has taught at Stanford, West Point, Johns Hopkins, and the University of Maryland. Dr. Schake is the author of 5 books, with her newest titled “The State and the Soldier: A History of Civil-Military Relations in the United States.”Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.Find The State and the Soldier here.

The Reagan National Defense Survey has again illuminated the MAGA world: MAGA Republicans are not isolationists, nor are the majority of Americans. Despite what those in Washington assert Americans believe, the latest polling reveals that 64 percent of Americans support U.S. leadership on the world stage, with eight in ten self-identified MAGA Republicans driving that figure. So why do we see this dissonance on the Right? Who gets to speak for “America First,” and what does it really mean? Why are figures within Trump’s ranks convincing him that his base opposes intervention and a strong foreign policy? The latest polling reminds us that the American people know who our enemies are, and they are telling us how they want to deal with them. Who’s going to listen?Roger Zakheim serves as the Washington Director of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute. He previously practiced law at Covington & Burling LLP where he led the firm’s Public Policy and Government Affairs practice group. Before joining Covington, he was General Counsel and Deputy Staff Director of the U.S. House Armed Services Committee. Mr. Zakheim also served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense where he supported the department’s policies and programs related to Iraq and Afghanistan coalition affairs. Mr. Zakheim also currently serves on the Board of Directors of the United States Institute of Peace and is a Commissioner on the Congressional Commission on the National Defense Strategy of the United States.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

If you were in your twenties and could choose to be born at any point in human history, would you be insane to choose any other time to be alive than right now? Our guest says yes, and the statistics back him up. Regardless of perception, shaped in part by politicians and populists, the average person today is richer than John D. Rockefeller simply by virtue of being alive in 2025. And yet, the “anxious generation” of Gen Z and Gen Alpha seem unaware of their own financial wellbeing and appear confused as to why they aren’t instantly as well off as their parents in providing for themselves. Many believe homeownership is impossible, that they will never pay off their loans, and that the cost of living is unmanageable. Is this belief based in any reality? Was life truly better for their parents? Or is this a generational cycle of perception? And who benefits from peddling this fear?Norbert Michel is the Vice President and Director of the Cato Institute’s Center for Monetary and Financial Alternatives, where he specializes on issues pertaining to financial markets and monetary policy. Michel was most recently the Director for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation where he edited and contributed chapters to multiple books. Michel is also the author of the book “Crushing Capitalism: How the Stagnation Narrative is Threatening the American Dream”, and coauthor of “Financing Opportunity: How Financial Markets Have Fueled American Prosperity for More than Two Centuries”. Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

Over the last decade, China has carried out the largest illicit transfer of capital, innovation, data, and technology in human history. One of the most overlooked elements of this heist is the role of industrial espionage and the theft of corporate secrets. The government-backed intelligence apparatus designed to clone American technology has strengthened Chinese competition across all industries and, most notably, enabled advances in military hardware, microchips, pharmaceuticals, and telecommunications. In his newest book, The Great Heist: China’s Epic Campaign to Steal America’s Secrets (Harper Collins, 2025), David Shedd, with Andrew Badger, exposes the CCP’s campaign and presents a counterstrategy informed by his distinguished career in intelligence. But what exactly are they stealing and how are they carrying it out? Why is the IC so silent on this? And why do we insist on bringing more Chinese nationals into our universities? David Shedd is the former deputy director and acting director of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA). He also served as chief of staff for the director of national intelligence and National Security Council senior director and as special assistant to the president for intelligence under George W. Bush. He began his intelligence career in 1982 immediately after his studies at Geneva College and Georgetown University, and served nearly thirty-three years in a number of capacities in the DNI, National Security Council, CIA, and in U.S. embassies overseas. Since leaving the federal government, he has worked at The Heritage Foundation and as an adjunct professor and is currently working as an independent national security consultant.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.Find The Great Heist here.

Between the pardoned turkeys and those running loose on Capitol Hill, controversy over insubordination and sedition seem to be on the menu this holiday. The six Democrats who posted a video addressed to service members sowed chaos and confusion about the proper chain of command and lawful military orders. It is crucial to understand the constitutional framework that distinguish lawful military action, legislative and executive powers, crime, and war. In today’s politics, rhetoric can make it difficult to discern the line between war and crime. John Yoo reminds us that not everything that harms society constitutes a war or justifies the use of military tools. That being said, where is the line drawn, and who draws it? And what is the proper role for members of Congress?John Yoo is a nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, the Emanuel S. Heller Professor of Law at the University of California, Berkeley, and a Senior Research Fellow at the Civitas Institute at the University of Texas at Austin. Professor Yoo has served in all three branches of government. He was an official in the U.S. Department of Justice, where he worked on national security and terrorism issues after the 9/11 attacks. He served as general counsel of the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. He has been a law clerk for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and federal appeals Judge Laurence Silberman. Professor Yoo has published almost 100 scholarly articles on subjects including national security, constitutional law, international law, and the Supreme Court. Professor Yoo’s latest book is The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Supreme Court. Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

For Donald Trump, China has served as a major justification for economic protectionism, highlighting our dependencies and need to onshore products with national security implications. But that’s the talk. The reality is more dismal: a less-than-hawkish trade deal this month, with tariffs that seem to isolate allies and, inversely, reshore production on China’s mainland. For Team Trump, three camps have merged into one contradictory mess within the administration. Members of these camps look to use tariffs as leverage for trade deals, as a source of revenue, and to protect domestic industry. No single tariff can achieve all three and brief, ambiguous trade deals do little to decouple with China, friend-shore, and rebuild American industry. Where do we go from here? How will these tariff camps shake out? And how can we improve our strategic approach to global trade and protect America from the very real China threat?Scott Lincicome is the Vice President of General Economics the Cato Institute’s Herbert A. Stiefel Center for Trade Policy Studies. He writes on international and domestic economic issues, including international trade; subsidies and industrial policy; manufacturing and global supply chains; and economic dynamism. Lincicome also is a senior visiting lecturer at Duke University Law School, where he has taught a course on international trade law. Prior to joining Cato, Lincicome spent two decades practicing international trade law at White & Case LLP, where he litigated national and multilateral trade disputes. He also authors a column for The Dispatch entitled, Capitolism.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

The legislative filibuster is one of the most important guardrails against the tyranny of the majority that exists in the United States Senate. Despite this critical function, both parties have, at various times, entertained the idea of eliminating the filibuster and with it, bipartisan compromise. Such an act of unbelievable shortsightedness would transform the Senate into a mirror image of the House of Representatives. This change would result in drastic policy reversals as party control shifts and could permanently disadvantage Republicans from ever again controlling the chamber. With gridlock and polarization so commonplace, how can we ensure the survival of the filibuster while addressing constructive suggestions for change? How likely might a permanent, constitutionally protected filibuster be? And what would the Senate look like if either party was successful in getting rid of it? Martin B. Gold is a partner with Capitol Counsel, LLC. With over 50 years of legislative and private practice experience, he is a recognized authority and author on matters of congressional rules and parliamentary strategies, and U.S. policy in Asia. He frequently advises senators and their staff and serves on the adjunct faculty at George Washington University. Before business, professional, and academic audiences, he speaks about Congress as well as political and public policy developments. He has authored several publications including, The Legislative Filibuster: Essential to the United States Senate as well as Senate Procedure and Practice, a widely consulted primer on Senate floor procedure.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

The fever swamps of the alt-right have crept upstream. Fringe figures are making their way onto increasingly mainstream platforms, spreading ideological contagion to impressionable young audiences. Having long covered the creeping antisemitism of the Left, the fight now unfolding on the Right is an inspiring and essential one. With his debut WTH appearance, Eli Lake reminds us that this isn’t a question of free speech, it’s a question of policing one’s own coalition with moral clarity. If the Right doesn’t get this right, what will 2028 look like for the Republican Party? Eli Lake is a veteran journalist with expertise in foreign affairs and national security who has reported for Bloomberg, The Daily Beast, and Newsweek. He was the senior national security correspondent for the Daily Beast and covered national security and intelligence for the Washington Times, the New York Sun and UPI. Eli is currently the host of Breaking History, a new history podcast from The Free Press, where he regularly publishes. Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

Europe’s center of gravity has shifted eastward, and few political leaders stand out as capable of leading the necessary changes to revitalize, rather than regulate, the aging West. The Washington Post’s new editorial vision hopes to address these concerns, shaping how we think about ourselves and our allies in the coming years. The first step in avoiding Europe’s fate here at home is confronting the complacency that assumes we could never backslide. And part of that responsibility rests with the media. What can we learn from Europe? Which policies should we avoid imitating? And how will a more diverse editorial page report on them?Adam O’Neal currently serves as the Opinion Editor at the Washington Post. Prior to that, Adam worked as a correspondent for The Economist, as an Executive Editor for the Dispatch, and as a Wall Street Journal editorial page writer. Previously he worked as a Vatican correspondent for Rome Reports and as a political reporter in Washington, D.C. Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.

With just one week until Election Day in New York City, we’re reflecting on the past and future of the Democratic Party, Gracie Mansion, and the political home of mayoral hopeful, Zohran Mamdani. Mamdani is a Democratic Socialist, having campaigned alongside and accepted donations from members of the Democratic Socialists of America, a group with a clear, parasitic strategy towards the Democratic establishment and post-colonial West. What does this mean for our political parties? If successful, what does it mean for New York? And for our country? James Kirchick is a journalist and the New York Times-bestselling author of Secret City: The Hidden History of Gay Washington and The End of Europe: Dictators, Demagogues, and the Coming Dark Age. A contributing opinion writer to the New York Times, a writer at large for Air Mail, and a contributor to the Axel Springer Global Reporters Project, he has reported from over 40 countries and his writing has appeared in many publications including the Atlantic, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal.Read the transcript here.Subscribe to our Substack here.