World Review: Iran - Strike or Talk. Is Peace a Real Possibility in Ukraine. Middle Powers and Trade.
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.
Yesterday, February 6, we discussed the talks underway in Oman between the United States and Iran, the latest round of negotiations between Ukraine and Russia, and Europe’s accelerating push to de-risk from the United States. Joining me this week were Catherine Philp, World Affairs Editor at The Times, Suzanne Lynch, Brussels Bureau Chief of Bloomberg News, and Jamie Dettmer, Opinion Editor and Foreign Affairs Columnist of Politico Europe.
“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
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:
Trump’s armada is steaming toward the Gulf as negotiators meet in Oman, but the basic question remains unsettled: is Washington trying to bargain over the nuclear program, rewrite Iran’s regional posture, or keep the door open to regime change through intimidation? Catherine noted that Tehran’s first small win was procedural, shifting the talks from Istanbul to Oman to keep the agenda tight and centered on the nuclear issue and sanctions relief, rather than the laundry list Washington would prefer. Jamie’s point was that the ambiguity is not only between capitals but also within Washington, where parts of the coalition around Trump remain deeply skeptical of another war, even as the President continues his maximal demands. As Suzanne pointed out, without a clear strategy, America’s allies remain concerned about what the President’s plans for a quick win in the region might entail.
The second round of direct talks between Ukrainians and Russians matters, but it should not be mistaken for a turning point. Jamie reported a notable change in tone: fewer ideological lectures from the Kremlin negotiators, more practical and technical discussions, and different faces at the table. Yet the central question remains: what are Putin’s intentions? Is this a genuine negotiation, or an attempt to buy time while Russia presses its advantage on the battlefield and, above all, in the energy war? The sticking points have not moved. Territory is still the core dispute, and security guarantees remain the political price Kyiv would need to pay to sell any compromise at home, especially amid war weariness increasing and a military that could view concessions as betrayal. Europe is trying to keep Ukraine afloat financially and politically, agreeing on more funding and another sanctions package, but as Suzanne noted, Europeans are still effectively on the outside of the peace talks that would shape their own security. Meanwhile, as temperatures plunge, strikes on Ukrainian energy infrastructure continue. What I found most notable is the contrast between the three discussions that seem to be taking place simultaneously: The negotiation in Abu Dhabi is about not provoking Trump, the conversation in Brussels is about replacing an American role that has faded, and the conversation in Kyiv is about survival. As Catherine pointed out, as the discussions continue, we are settling into a long war of attrition, accompanied by a diplomatic process that exists mainly to manage one man’s temper.
Europe is beginning to talk about the United States the way it used to talk about China: as a dependency to be reduced rather than a partner to be trusted. Suzanne argued the mood has changed significantly since the Greenland crisis, especially as President Trump threatened tariffs as punishment for allies who would not line up behind Washington’s position. In response, European leaders have adopted a sharper rhetoric, focused on strategic autonomy, buying European, and digital sovereignty. As Europe seeks to increase its resilience and diversify its markets, a conflict has emerged over tech. European leaders are looking to use their regulatory muscle to limit the power of American tech companies, which the Trump administration is framing as an assault on free speech. As Europe aims to de-risk, Jamie warned that its key challenge is that it is falling behind in the tech and AI race. The old model appears to be failing in three directions at once: cheap Russian energy is gone, open Chinese markets are uncertain, and American security is no longer something Europe can rely on.
Those are my quick takes on this week’s episode here on World Review. To get the full story, please listen to the episode itself.