World Review: Brexit Turns 10. Iran's No-Deal Deal. Ukraine's Tipping Point.
A synopsis of this week's edition of World Review
Each week, I host a video podcast called World Review with Ivo Daalder where journalists from major news outlets around the world join me to discuss the latest global news stories of the week.
World Review can now be heard on Sundays, at 7:00 a.m. Central Time, on Chicago’s NPR station, WBEZ, or on the WBEZ app. We’ll still tape the show on Fridays, and post the video on YouTube and the audio version on Apple Podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.
“World Review is always fascinating. I love the fact that you can get journalists from around the world to participate since zoom is the medium.”
— A Subscriber to America Abroad
Now, on to this week’s show. Ten years of Brexit, a nuclear deal that may not be a deal, and Ukraine’s new campaign to make Crimea ungovernable. Joining me were Catherine Philp, World Affairs Editor of The Times; Yannis Palaiologos, correspondent-at-large for Kathimerini; and Yaroslav Trofimov, Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent of The Wall Street Journal.
While I encourage you to watch or listen to the episode (and subscribe wherever you get your podcasts!), here are a few interesting things I took away from our discussion
A Decade of Self-Inflicted Wounds
The Brexit referendum turned ten this week. The verdict is in — and it isn’t flattering. Catherine reminded us that Britain is now on its sixth prime minister since the vote, and will soon have a seventh. In the previous two decades, there were three. Causation or correlation? Catherine’s answer was essentially: does it matter?
The polling is striking. Three-quarters of British voters now want a closer relationship with Europe. Sixty-three percent would accept freedom of movement — the very issue that drove the Leave campaign. Young voters, who’ve come of age since 2016, favor rejoining the EU by six to one. Yet Yannis cautioned that Brussels wants Britain back, but on its own terms. No cherry-picking. No bespoke arrangements. And no appetite to reopen negotiations until there’s genuine cross-party consensus in London.
Yaroslav added a geopolitical dimension. Britain still matters — as a nuclear power, as a headquarters for the Nordic-Baltic Joint Expeditionary Force, as a bilateral partner with France on extending a European nuclear umbrella. But full EU membership, he suggested, is widely seen in European capitals as more trouble than it’s worth. The new incoming Prime Minister, Andy Burnham, is untested on foreign policy. Catherine wasn’t sure he’d prioritize Europe. The question may answer itself — eventually.
The Art of the No-Deal Deal
Negotiators in Switzerland are trying to turn the Iran framework agreement into something durable. So far, the two sides can’t agree on what they’ve actually agreed to. Vice President Vance says one thing. Tehran says the opposite.
Yannis laid out the dynamic: the United States, having achieved tactical success in the air campaign, has been giving things away. Sanctions on Iranian oil have been suspended for the first time since 1980. Assets are being unfrozen. Meanwhile, the nuclear file — centrifuges, enriched stockpiles, inspections — remains entirely unresolved. Iran has every incentive to drag things out. Trump has zero appetite to return to military action, especially as midterms approach.
Yaroslav coined the phrase that stuck: Pax Iranica. Iran won the war. A Singaporean vessel was fired on in Omani territorial waters — and Washington said nothing. The stick is broken. The carrot has already been handed over. Catherine suggested the carrots aren’t fully disbursed yet, but the point stands: America’s leverage is gone. The most likely outcome is that talks continue indefinitely — not because they’re succeeding, but because their failure would be worse. Lebanon remains the wild card. And Yannis couldn’t resist noting that a side deal on Iranian purchases of American soybeans may end up being the headline win.
Crimea on the Edge
Ukraine’s campaign against Crimea is reshaping the war. Yaroslav put it plainly: what was once Putin’s signature achievement has become a liability. Rolling blackouts. Closed gas stations. Water shortages. Empty supermarket shelves. ATMs down. A state of emergency declared in Sevastopol. Railway bridges inside the peninsula destroyed. Ferries knocked out. The Kerch Bridge — structurally damaged and restricted to passenger traffic — is the last link to mainland Russia. And the Ukrainians are keeping it open deliberately: they want settlers, military families, and tourists to leave.
Catherine, just back from the front, described what drone warfare actually feels like on the ground. It looks nothing like World War I from a bunker full of operators staring at screens. But for the soldier walking twenty miles through a kill zone, sheltering under trees, not having left the front line in six months — it feels exactly like it.
Yannis asked Yaroslav whether officials inside Russia were finally giving Putin an accurate picture of the situation. Yaroslav’s answer: some are, particularly on the economy. But the FSB, which holds the cards, still believes victory is within sight. Putin has three options — mass mobilization, nuclear escalation, or doing nothing. He appears to be choosing the third. Ukraine is taking full advantage.
The broader lesson, I suggested in closing, is one this war keeps teaching. A smaller, nimbler power — with innovative tactics, long-range strikes, and drone warfare that is fundamentally rewriting the rules of engagement — can outmaneuver a larger but less adaptable one. We saw it with Iran and the United States. We are seeing it now in Ukraine.
Those are my quick takes on this week’s episode of World Review. To get the full story, please listen to the episode itself.