The Iran war has revealed both the enduring military predominance of the US and the limits of that power in shaping political outcomes.

States are over-securitizing inputs and under-governing outputs, leaving the most consequential domains of AI power largely unregulated and open to capture.

Since the outbreak of the war, Ukraine has assembled the most combat-tested air defense network in the world, drawing important lessons for future conflicts.

India’s deepening engagement in the Mediterranean demonstrates the birth of a uniquely 21st-century kind of statecraft: deterrence by association.

Warnings of ‘rearmament’ in Germany and Japan might make for an easy analogy but they miss the point: The question is not whether these countries are increasing military capabilities, but why they are. And here is where the historical comparisons start to fall apart.

The debacle surrounding the launch of Fable by Anthropic is only the tip of the iceberg of dual-use AI. If effective safeguards are not established, the AI arms race ensures that dangerous models will fall into the hands of bad actors.

The UK and Spain celebrate the deal as a historic pact, yet the dispute over Gibraltar sovereignty persists.

Washington and Tehran agree on a memorandum of understanding, but the Iran war is far from over; Europeans are souring on trans-Atlantic relations just as the Trump administration rotates military assets away from the continent; and Ukraine’s FP-5 Flamingo has scored an early operational success deep within Russia.

The Ukraine war revealed a Russian military that was far more fragile than assumed, and these weaknesses have multiplied as limited resources are funneled toward the immediate demands of the battlefield. When the dust has finally settled, Moscow will face tough questions over whether to rebuild its military capacity as a superpower or a middle power.

Water infrastructure has emerged as a strategic target in the Iran war, signaling a possible trend for future conflicts.

New strikes on Israel show how the line between attacks on Iran and attacks on Iran’s strategic ecosystem is becoming blurred, resulting in new risks, new calculations, and a more complex regional security environment going forward.

The institutional framework governing the Thai-Cambodian maritime dispute collapsed with Bangkok’s recent withdrawal from MOU 44. Here’s what the new process might look like.

DP World’s vision of a Brazil-Africa Corridor signals the steady extension of Gulf logistics control into the South Atlantic. But the project, which would alter supply chains for food, energy, and minerals, is far from geopolitically neutral.

Pressure mounts on the Iran war ceasefire; Taiwan and China face off at a disputed atoll in the South China Sea; a supercharged El Niño threatens to compound an already dire food security outlook; and the House GOP defies President Trump on the Ukraine war.

Armenians head to the polls on June 7. The election outcome will affect not just domestic governance, but Armenia’s geopolitical orientation going forward, with consequences for the peace process with Azerbaijan and wider stability across the South Caucasus.

The risk faced by the United States in the Strait of Hormuz mirrors Israel’s War of Attrition against Egypt: What presents as a contained skirmish may actually be setting the stage for a future regional war.

Russia has re-invented its long-range strike capabilities over the course of the Ukraine war, moving from import dependency and exhausted stockpiles to a domestic production capacity that is now eclipsing NATO.

The World Cup has afforded space for Mexico’s President Sheinbaum to play a constructive role in defusing Middle East tensions, but asymmetric realities will make it hard to repeat the trick on Cuba or the cartels.

Southeast Asia is not moving towards China. It is moving away from US dependence.

Geoengineering risks transforming the climate itself into an arena of geopolitical competition, where the atmosphere, sunlight, and weather systems become objects of strategic control.