World Review with Ivo Daalder

Key TopicsMartin Wolf argues that the Fed’s move is politically significant as much as economically justified, because Donald Trump’s demand for 1 percent rates is, in his words, “insane.”Missy Ryan adds that Trump’s economic focus seems centered less on inflation itself and more on the stock market and the AI boom, especially with the midterms looming.Peter Spiegel links Fed policy to the broader debt and tech borrowing picture, arguing that AI spending may be helping prop up markets even as it pushes rates higher.The panel debates whether higher rates can really fight a global inflation environment shaped by war, oil prices, and supply shocks.On Canada and Europe, Peter Spiegel says Mark Carney’s approach is partly symbolic but politically powerful, since it has helped rally Canadian patriotism against Trump.Missy Ryan stresses that Canada’s stance is rooted in sovereignty and values, but also constrained by how tightly integrated the Canadian and U.S. economies remain.Martin Wolf argues Europe is in a very different position from Canada because most of its trade is internal, and it could survive even a major rupture with the United States.The discussion returns repeatedly to the question of permanence: is Trump’s approach a temporary disruption, or a long-term reordering of U.S. alliances and trade policy?In the Saudi segment, Missy Ryan describes the Houthi conflict and the Iran war as a destabilizing force that has widened old regional fractures and exposed U.S. limits.Peter Spiegel raises the possibility that Gulf states may respond by diversifying security ties and increasing their own defense spending, even if China is not yet able to replace the United States.Martin Wolf suggests that if the United States becomes unreliable, regional powers may eventually move closer to Iran and a broader regional balance of power, rather than count on Washington.The episode closes on oil prices, with Wolf arguing that while the market could still worsen, it has so far adjusted better than expected and may not reach the catastrophic levels many feared.LinksMissy Ryan - https://www.theatlantic.com/author/missy-ryan/Martin Wolf - https://www.ft.com/martin-wolfPeter Spiegel - https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/peter-spiegel/Ivo Daalder - https://www.ivodaalder.com/Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs — belfercenter.orgWorld Review with Ivo Daalder — belfercenter.org/world-review-ivo-daalder

Key TopicsNicholas Burns recounts being the new U.S. ambassador to NATO when the attacks happened and describes the urgent push to invoke Article V for the first time in NATO history.Meghan L. O’Sullivan explains how 9/11 helped push a generation of foreign policy professionals into government and public service, including her own move from Brookings to the State Department.Juliette Kayyem recalls being on maternity leave and on an Amtrak train to New York when the attacks unfolded.The group discusses how 9/11 changed the American national security mindset from treating terrorism as a niche issue to making it a central organizing concern.O’Sullivan breaks down the evolution of the phrases “you’re with us or against us” and “the war on terror,” arguing that both became more problematic over time than they were at the moment they were first used.Burns emphasizes that NATO allies were unified immediately after the attacks and that Canada was the first country to raise the idea of invoking Article V.The guests contrast the diplomatic and alliance-based response to 9/11 with the later turn toward preemption, especially in Afghanistan and Iraq.O’Sullivan explains why the Iraq invasion cannot be understood apart from the post-9/11 atmosphere, even if the Iraq-9/11 connection itself was not proven.Kayyem describes the creation of homeland security as a major structural shift, from fragmented local and federal systems to a more centralized architecture with FEMA, the FBI, state homeland security advisors, and fusion-style coordination.The panel argues that domestic terrorism, political violence, technology, and radicalization now pose different challenges than the international terrorism focus that dominated the years after 9/11.Burns warns that the State Department and broader foreign policy bureaucracy have been weakened, arguing that America needs experienced diplomats and allies more than ever.The conversation closes with a shared lesson: America is strongest when it relies on friends, coordinates across institutions, and resists making the military the sole organizing principle of foreign policy.LinksJuliette Kayyem - https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty/juliette-kayyemMeghan L. O'Sullivan - https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty/meghan-osullivanNicholas Burns - https://www.hks.harvard.edu/faculty/nicholas-burnsIvo Daalder - https://www.ivodaalder.com/Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs — belfercenter.orgWorld Review with Ivo Daalder — belfercenter.org/world-review-ivo-daalder

Key TopicsThe Venezuela oil deal is framed as a huge geopolitical gamble, with claims of 65 billion barrels and a U.S. stake in a private Venezuelan company.Nahal Toosi explains why the deal is surrounded by legal, constitutional, and practical doubts, including questions about infrastructure, financing, and corruption.Alex Ward argues the deal reflects a Trump-era foreign policy that treats oil and regime change as spoils of victory, not just strategic assets.Shashank Joshi notes that Europeans see echoes of earlier resource anxieties, from Greenland to the Falklands, and worry about a broader collapse of principle in U.S. policy.The panel raises the possibility that the Venezuela arrangement could create incentives to delay democratic transition and keep an anti-democratic regime in place.The military segment focuses on the strain caused by extended deployments in the Middle East, especially the impact on munitions stockpiles, carrier availability, and long-term maintenance.Joshi cites the depletion of Patriot interceptors and the ripple effects in Ukraine, where reduced interceptor capacity may be affecting defense against Russian missile attacks.Toosi warns that the U.S. is simultaneously damaging its diplomatic, development, trade, and military advantages, leaving Congress and Pentagon leadership slow to respond.On Russia, Alex Ward says Ratcliffe’s Moscow trip appears to be both a warning and a broader attempt to preserve a back-channel with Russian intelligence.Joshi and Toosi discuss Russian hybrid risk, including the concern that Moscow may test NATO without triggering a classic Article 5-style response.LinksNahal Toosi - https://www.politico.com/staff/nahal-toosiAlexander Ward - https://www.wsj.com/news/author/alexander-wardShashank Joshi - https://mediadirectory.economist.com/people/shashank-joshi/Ivo Daalder - https://www.ivodaalder.com/Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs — belfercenter.orgWorld Review with Ivo Daalder — belfercenter.org/world-review-ivo-daalder

Key Topicas Canada’s resistance to U.S. tariffs and what it means for Prime Minister Mark Carney Whether economic pressure can succeed against Iran where military action has not The weakening of U.S. leverage when allies are no longer willing to cooperate How Trump’s approach is changing the transatlantic relationship What fragmentation in Europe and the Gulf means for future global power Links Prashant Rao - https://www.semafor.com/author/prashant-rao Matina Stevis-Gridneff - https://www.nytimes.com/by/matina-stevis-gridneff Anton La Guardia - https://mediadirectory.economist.com/people/anton-la-guardia/ Ivo Daalder - https://www.ivodaalder.com/ Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs — belfercenter.org World Review with Ivo Daalder — belfercenter.org/world-review-ivo-daalder

Key Topics Artificial intelligence as a world-changing technology The promise and risks of AI AI’s potential to improve science and medicine Power, agency, and democracy in the AI era The US-China race for AI dominance China’s centralized approach to AI development Europe’s role in AI governance and sovereignty Why infrastructure and data centers matter for AI The tension between innovation and regulation Safety concerns from AI lab leaders themselves How AI could affect jobs, markets, and national security The need for transparency, accountability, and public oversight How political backlash could shape future AI policy The possibility of global AI guardrails and coordination Links Sebastian Mallaby — https://www.cfr.org/experts/sebastian-mallaby Evan Osnos — https://www.evanosnos.com/ Marietje Schaake — https://cyber.fsi.stanford.edu/people/marietje-schaake Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs — belfercenter.org World Review with Ivo Daalder — belfercenter.org/world-review-ivo-daalder