Follow us on social

Shutterstock_634594754-scaled

Climate talk invite the one good thing this week in US-Russia-China relations

Future cooperation between these major carbon producing powers is essential, and frankly, would be refreshing.

Asia-Pacific

President Biden's invitation to the Chinese and Russian presidents to attend climate talks is welcome news. Global climate cooperation among all of the world's major economies and carbon emitters is absolutely essential if the world is to realize its goals of limiting global warming below catastrophic levels.

Furthermore, Biden's invitation to Putin and Xi accompanies his emphasis on climate change progress in discussions with allies and partners, including the Quad nations of Japan, India, and Australia. It is encouraging that Biden is not counterproductively dividing the world into democracies and autocracies in the context of vital coordination on a globally shared interest such as climate change.

Moving forward, the United States should combine multilateral coordination and negotiation with bilateral initiatives between the United States and other major economic powers, especially China, given that country's status as the largest emitter of new carbon dioxide. Such initiatives should include efforts by the U.S. and China to coordinate joint carbon emissions reduction and clean transportation targets, as well as to pledge joint investments in research, development, and deployment of deep decarbonization technologies that will help the developing world to grow their economies in a less carbon-intensive way.

The climate change regime is one of the many aspects of the global order where U.S.-China coordination and cooperation is essential, as a means of ensuring that economic competition remains healthy and constructive, rather than devolving into beggar-thy-neighbor trade restrictions that actually inhibit innovation in green technology.


Asia-Pacific
Mark Levin
Top photo credit: Erick Stakelbeck on TBN/Screengrab

The great fade out: Neocon influencers rage as they diminish

Media

Mark Levin appears to be having a meltdown.

The veteran neoconservative talk host is repulsed by reports that President Donald Trump might be inching closer to an Iranian nuclear deal, reducing the likelihood of war. In addition to his rants on how this would hurt Israel, Levin has been howling to anyone who will listen that any deal with Iran needs approval from Congress (funny he doesn’t have the same attitude for waging war, only for making peace).

keep readingShow less
american military missiles
Top photo credit: Fogcatcher/Shutterstock

5 ways the military industrial complex is a killer

Latest

Congress is on track to finish work on the fiscal year 2025 Pentagon budget this week, and odds are that it will add $150 billion to its funding for the next few years beyond what the department even asked for. Meanwhile, President Trump has announced a goal of over $1 trillion for the Pentagon for fiscal year 2026.

With these immense sums flying out the door, it’s a good time to take a critical look at the Pentagon budget, from the rationales given to justify near record levels of spending to the impact of that spending in the real world. Here are five things you should know about the Pentagon budget and the military-industrial complex that keeps the churn going.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig

Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Africa

Recent weeks events have dramatically cast the Sudanese civil war back into the international spotlight, drawing renewed scrutiny to the role of external actors, particularly the United Arab Emirates.

This shift has been driven by Sudan's accusations at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) against the UAE concerning violations of the Genocide Convention, alongside drone strikes on Port Sudan that Khartoum vociferously attributes to direct Emirati participation. Concurrently, Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly reaffirmed the UAE's deep entanglement in the conflict at a Senate hearing last week.

From Washington, another significant and sudden development also surfaced last week: the imposition of U.S. sanctions on the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) for alleged chemical weapons use. This dramatic accusation was met by an immediate denial from Sudan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which vehemently dismissed the claims as "unfounded" and criticized the U.S. for bypassing the proper international mechanisms, specifically the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, despite Sudan's active membership on its Executive Council.

Despite the gravity of such an accusation, corroboration for the use of chemical agents in Sudan’s war remains conspicuously absent from public debate or reporting, save for a January 2025 New York Times article citing unnamed U.S. officials. That report itself contained a curious disclaimer: "Officials briefed on the intelligence said the information did not come from the United Arab Emirates, an American ally that is also a staunch supporter of the R.S.F."

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.