Advertise on podcast: The Foreign Affairs Interview

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is facing his biggest challenge since taking office in 2014. But in an essay in Foreign Affairs, Pratap Bhanu Mehta argues that the youth protests that have swept New Delhi don’t just pose a test for Modi’s authority—they may also mark an inflection point for India itself. “The future of Indian democracy,” Mehta writes, “hinges on whether this contest opens up more democratic space or leads to greater repression.” Deputy Editor Kanishk Tharoor spoke with Mehta, an analyst of Indian politics and University Lecturer at Princeton University, on October 19 about Modi’s power, about what these protests can and cannot achieve, and about what the battle in India means for the future of liberal democracy around the world.  You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

Nearly eight months since it began, the war in Iran has settled into a grim stalemate. Two essays in the new issue of Foreign Affairs consider just how long this stalemate could continue—and what decision-makers in Tehran think they can achieve in the coming months. In “The New Forever War,” Ali Vaez of the International Crisis Group argues that Iran prefers deadlock to any plausible compromise with Washington. In “Why Iran Escalates,” Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar of Texas A&M argues that Tehran will pursue a more ambitious goal: forcing the United States out of the Middle East altogether. Senior Editor Daniel Block spoke with Tabaar and Vaez on Monday, October 12 to discuss U.S. and Iranian strategies, the future of Iran’s Axis of Resistance, and the durability of a regime that Western policymakers have often underestimated. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

Since the start of the war in Ukraine almost five years ago, Russia has mounted ever more aggressive attacks in Europe, far from the battlefield. These attacks were long talked about as a form of “hybrid warfare.” But as Julianne Smith, the former U.S. ambassador to NATO, notes in a new piece in Foreign Affairs, they have reached a level of risk and flagrancy where that label may no longer apply. And these attacks come in the context of escalation in Ukraine and dissension in the transatlantic alliance, as the Trump administration calls into question basic commitments to Europe. Smith has warned of the dangers of Russian escalation and urged NATO to do more in response. Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke to her on Tuesday, October 6, about the options for raising the cost on Russia—as well as about the future of the war in Ukraine and the prospects for the United States and Europe in the wake of President Donald Trump. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

Over the course of just a few months, artificial intelligence has become one of the most central issues, and one of the most fraught issues, in the relationship between the United States and China. Policymakers in Washington and in Beijing simultaneously worry about which country’s tech sector has the advantage and wonder whether the search for advantage will itself lead to catastrophe for both countries and everyone else. Recent bilateral meetings, including the one last week between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping, have yielded only minimal progress toward cooperation—agreement to start talking about talking about AI. Kyle Chan is a fellow at the Brookings Institution. Helen Toner is executive director of Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology. Both fairly uniquely combine deep knowledge of AI and deep knowledge of China, which they bring to their work in Foreign Affairs and beyond. Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke with Chan and Toner about how the two countries think and approach AI, with real differences as well as some new convergences; what it means to compete; and what it will take for the United States and China to find some way to reduce the biggest risks. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

By all accounts, Iran’s neighbors, even those long at odds with the Islamic Republic, opposed the U.S.-Israeli war that began on February 28. Yet it is those Middle Eastern states that have paid some of the highest costs in the months since. As their governments grapple with the consequences of a war that is still far from settled, they are also struggling to shape a new Middle Eastern order. But there is little consensus about what that order should be—or what it should mean for relationships with the United States and China, for future economic models, or for the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Anwar Gargash is one of the region’s most experienced diplomats and foreign policymakers. He long served as the minister of state for foreign affairs in the United Arab Emirates, and is now diplomatic adviser to the UAE’s president. Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke with Gargash on Monday, September 21, about the war in Iran and where it may end; the UAE’s rift with Saudi Arabia and approach to Israel, Gaza, Sudan, and more; and what a new, better Middle Eastern order might look like. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

By some measures, there is more war in the world today than at any point since World War II. Today’s wars have brought a level of destruction, disruption, and global risk that would have been hard to imagine not long ago, often in places where such combat seemed a thing of the past. Policymakers once again worry about nuclear use, and military planners once again contemplate war between great powers, including the United States and China, and NATO and Russia. And all of this comes as the Trump administration dismantles key pieces of the international system and technology scrambles expectations about how wars start, unfold, and end.  No one has left a greater mark on our understanding of wars past and present than Lawrence Freedman. Freedman has written a slew of definitive books on military strategy and history, and he has offered some of the most penetrating analysis of Iran, Ukraine, and more, in Foreign Affairs and elsewhere. He is emeritus professor of war studies at King’s College London.   Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke with Freedman on Monday, September 14, about the course of today’s conflicts; about what is and is not changing in the nature of war; and about why policymakers, military officers, and strategists so often start wars based on bad assumptions—and how those bad assumptions explain some of the biggest calamities in global security today.  You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

When Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz six months ago, the world seemed on the verge of an energy crisis that would upend economies, governments, and much else. It was, as Meghan O’Sullivan and Jason Bordoff pointed out in Foreign Affairs at the time, the largest disruption of global energy flow in history. The world’s ability to manage that disruption has been surprising—the crisis many expected has not come. But in just the last few years, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the fits and starts of the green transition, and the AI buildout have remade energy markets and the politics undergirding them—and shown energy to be a devastating economic weapon. Bordoff and O’Sullivan have mapped out this new energy order across a series of essays for Foreign Affairs. They warn that the relative stability of recent months cannot be cause for complacency. Bordoff is director of Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy and was senior energy adviser in the Obama administration. O’Sullivan is director of Harvard University’s Belfer Center and was the deputy national security adviser in the George W. Bush administration. Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke to them on Tuesday, September 8, about the future of the Strait of Hormuz; China’s clean-energy dominance and the Trump administration’s Venezuela oil deal; and how the return of the energy weapon is transforming geopolitics and national security. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

There has been no shortage of dizzying shifts in American foreign policy since Donald Trump returned to the White House last year. But perhaps none have been as surprising as the shift on China. In his first term, Trump helped create a hard-line consensus centered on fears of a growing threat. Now, he seems much more interested in striking deals—as he presumably will be when Xi Jinping comes to Washington later this month. Many analysts of U.S. China policy have reacted to this reversal with dismay. But Jessica Chen Weiss sees it as an opportunity to forge a more sensible approach. Weiss, a professor and the faculty director of the Institute for America, China, and the Future of Global Affairs at Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies and a former State Department official, has warned of the dangers of zero-sum thinking about China in a series of essays for Foreign Affairs. Her most recent essay, in the September/October issue, focuses on the myth and the reality of China’s critical mineral dominance. Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke to Weiss on August 31 about what China wants—which is also the title of her forthcoming book—and what U.S. foreign policy can do to meet those ambitions without resorting to dangerous confrontation. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

Five years ago this month, the United States ended its war in Afghanistan. Washington’s exit was chaotic; as Taliban forces swept through the country and the U.S.-backed government collapsed, officials scrambled to evacuate tens of thousands of Afghans who might fall victim to repression and retribution. In the years since, Afghanistan has practically vanished from American foreign policy discussion. But the situation in the country remains dire, and the collective forgetting of the United States’ longest war carries costs of its own. Laurel Miller and Graeme Smith have each spent many years working on and within Afghanistan. Miller, now president of the Asia Foundation, was a longtime U.S. diplomat who became a top official focused on Afghanistan from 2013 to 2017. Smith worked as a political affairs officer for the United Nations in Afghanistan from 2015 to 2018 before serving as an Afghanistan analyst for the International Crisis Group. Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke to Miller and Smith on Tuesday, August 25, about the lessons and legacy of the American war in Afghanistan, how the country has changed under Taliban rule, and the questions that U.S. policymakers should grapple with moving forward. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

Ever since Donald Trump returned to the White House last year, a big question has loomed over any discussion of global politics: How much of the change he has brought to U.S. foreign policy, and to the international system, will endure beyond this presidential term? Two essays that open the new issue of Foreign Affairs offer different answers to that question. Kurt Campbell and Rush Doshi, two senior officials in the Biden administration, argue that the U.S. alliance system will not just survive Trump but can emerge stronger, even better suited to countering China and its partners. Mark Leonard, the director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, argues that policymakers in allied capitals and beyond must accept that the United States has fundamentally changed—and get ready to survive a more turbulent and contested world.  Dan Kurtz-Phelan wanted to bring Campbell, Doshi, and Leonard together in one conversation to lay out and test these contrasting arguments. They spoke on August 12 about possible futures for U.S. foreign policy—and what those paths mean for a global order built by a very different United States. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

At the end of last year, editor Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke with the historian Odd Arne Westad about China’s complicated past and how that history shapes the way Chinese leaders see their country’s place in the world today.  Policymakers and analysts argue over the implications of China’s rise, the extent of its ambitions, the nature of its economic influence, and the meaning of its growing military strength. Underlying these arguments is a widespread sense that where Beijing once seemed likely to slot comfortably into a U.S.-led international order, China now poses a profound challenge to American interests. And as leaders in Beijing watch Washington struggle against Iran, rankle allies and partners, and retreat from the international system it built, they sense a moment of opportunity—and are looking to their own history for the lessons, or warnings, it might hold.  No one brings more perspective to these arguments than Westad. In a series of essays in Foreign Affairs over the past few years, Westad has explored the drivers of China’s foreign policy, its approach to global power, and its fraught ties with the United States. He sees in the long arc of Chinese and global history a stark warning about the potential for greater conflict, including a war between China and the United States. He also, however, sees lessons for policymakers today about how to avert such an outcome. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

It’s been nearly 15 years since Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta warned of a “cyber–Pearl Harbor.” Since then, most people have become fairly inured to such a risk. That’s true even as there’s been a steady clip of cyberattacks on the United States and other countries, some of them quite alarming, and even as a new, more powerful AI model is released by an American or Chinese lab seemingly every week. Jen Easterly has spent much of the past 20 years defending U.S. cyberspace against such threats. She has been both a military officer and a top civilian official, most recently running the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. Now, she warns, the danger is about to get much worse. For all the talk of AI-enabled cyberattacks, and the attention on scarily powerful models from American labs like Anthropic and OpenAI and from their Chinese counterparts, Easterly worries that the world still fails to appreciate both the magnitude of the threat and the speed with which a true crisis could be approaching. Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke to Easterly on Thursday, July 30. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

Almost no one in the last several decades has done more to change the American approach to trade than Robert Lighthizer. Lighthizer was the U.S. trade representative in President Donald Trump’s first term. In that role, he set out to reverse Washington’s long-standing commitment to a global trading system. It was a crusade—using tariffs, among other tools—that targeted China above all but also any other country that, as he saw it, benefited from that system at the expense of the United States. Lighthizer recently laid out his vision for a new trade order in Foreign Affairs. With Trump levying tariffs and wielding American economic power against both allies and adversaries, Lighthizer argues that the free trade system should be thrown out, replaced with one that is more balanced, sovereign, and transparent. Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke with Lighthizer on the sidelines of the Aspen Security Forum on Wednesday, July 15. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

In the nine months since a cease-fire ended full-on war in Gaza, the world’s attention has in many ways moved on. That has been especially true since February, with the start of the war in Iran. But the situation in Gaza remains grim and unsettled, and the state of affairs in the West Bank has become increasingly fraught. Meanwhile, the way forward for Palestinian politics is murky, and the prospect of any durable resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict seems more remote than ever. Salam Fayyad served as Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority from 2007 to 2013, after a long career at the International Monetary Fund. In many capitals, including Washington, Fayyad is still considered one of the most effective Palestinian leaders of recent decades. Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke with him on July 15, on the sidelines of the Aspen Security Forum, about his proposals for building a Palestinian state, delivering humane and effective governance in Gaza, and finding a viable way forward for the Palestinian cause. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

The war in Iran pitted two of the world’s mightiest militaries against one weakened by years of strikes, sanctions, and sabotage. And yet it was the smaller country that appears to have emerged with the advantage. In Ukraine, similarly, Russia expected an easy victory, only to be repeatedly thwarted by apparently outmatched Ukrainian forces. These outcomes may seem surprising. But Paul Scharre argues that they should not be. The innovations that have in recent years transformed battlefields have also leveled the playing field between powers great and small. And as Scharre wrote in a recent essay in Foreign Affairs, the U.S. military is unprepared for a new age of warfare in which drones, AI, and other emerging technologies undercut the dominance it has become used to. Scharre, the executive vice president of the Center for a New American Security, served as an Army Ranger in Iraq and Afghanistan and then went on to craft Pentagon policy on drones and autonomous weapons systems. Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke with him about what the wars in Iran and Ukraine should tell us about the future of warfare more generally, about what China is learning from those wars, and about what the United States must do to adapt. You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.