Are we on the brink of a new cold war? | GZERO World with Ian Bremmer

David Sanger, Pulitzer prize-winning national security correspondent for The New York Times, joins Ian Bremmer on GZERO World to offer a clear-eyed take on America’s adversaries. The takeaway: we’re entering a new and increasingly unstable era of geopolitics where the US, China, and Russia will be vying for power and influence like never before.
Check the comments for more about Ian's insights, and let us know what you think!
Subscribe to GZERO on KZbin and turn on notifications (🔔): / @gzeromedia
Sign up for GZERO Daily (free newsletter on global politics): rebrand.ly/gzeronewsletter
“We are back in a period of superpower competition that will probably go on for decades. And that, if we're lucky, remains a cold war.” David Sanger, a Pulitzer prize-winning national security correspondent for The New York Times, joins Ian Bremmer on a new episode of GZERO World to offer a clear-eyed take on America’s adversaries. He’s out with a new book called "New Cold Wars: China's Rise, Russia's Invasion, and America's Struggle to Defend the West." The takeaway: we’re entering a new and increasingly unstable era of geopolitics where the US, China, and Russia will be vying for power and influence like never before. China's rise as a world leader and economic powerhouse, along with Russia's nuclear saber-rattling and increasing military cooperation, poses an unprecedented challenge to US dominance.
But unlike the Cold War that dominated the 20th century, where the US and the Soviet Union could operate essentially independently from each other, the world today is far more connected. "It's a cold war that bears almost no resemblance to the one that you and I are old enough to remember, because in that Cold War, we had a single competitor, and we weren't dependent on them, nor they on us for very much."
Sanger also talks about America’s missed opportunities and misjudgments in dealing with Russia and China. There were early hopes of engagement with Russia under Yeltsin's presidency, which quickly eroded when Putin came to power. Similarly, there was a belief that integrating China into the global economy would lead to political reform. However, this bet did not play out as expected, with the Communist Party using digital forces for explicit repression techniques. "It became pretty evident, pretty clearly that the Communist party had learned how to take these same digital forces and use them for the most explicitly designed repression techniques we have ever seen.”
But one area where both Russia and China have a shared interest? Pitting Americans against each other. “They have every incentive, both Russia and China, to be subtle actors in the background of this coming presidential election,” Sanger tells Bremmer. “And that's one area where if they are not cooperating, it would pay them off considerably to coordinate.”
Want to know more about global news and why it matters? Follow us on:
Instagram: / gzeromedia
Twitter: / gzeromedia
TikTok: / gzeromedia
Facebook: / gzeromedia
LinkedIn: / gzeromedia
Threads: threads.net/@gzeromedia
Subscribe to our KZbin channel and turn on notifications (🔔): / @gzeromedia
Sign up for GZERO Daily (free newsletter on global politics): rebrand.ly/gzeronewsletter
Subscribe to the GZERO podcast: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
GZERO Media is a multimedia publisher providing news, insights and commentary on the events shaping our world. Our properties include GZERO World with Ian Bremmer, our newsletter GZERO Daily, Puppet Regime, the GZERO World Podcast, In 60 Seconds and GZEROMedia.com
#GZEROWorld #China #Russia

[@GZEROMedia]

Why are Russia and China hoping for a Trump win in the 2024 US election? Why do America's biggest adversaries even care about November's outcome? Ian Bremmer explains here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/d5nUh5yshrRqpLs

[@MgWynn]

Did you not watch Putin interview? Putin said he prefer Joe Biden over Trump. China said both are the same. China is not stupid. So your assumption is wrong. Just watch Geopolitical Economy Report n then you will be well informed.

[@chillxxx241]

They aren’t. They just want Americans to fight amongst each other thinking that these countries support one country or another. They just don’t want Americans working together. That is their only goal. They also want other countries to see the turmoil in America and choose their socialist model over Capitalism. This has worked recently in Africa, but it has failed in Argentina for now.

[@dogood8750]

I wouldn't say a new Cold War like the US and USSR but a new era of great power competition

[@Zainiology]

Great Power competition = Cold War

[@KausikGupta-lv7ho]

West was also doing the same thing with democracies of global south though media & NGOs. 😒

[@slowtine]

Cold War is better than a hot war

[@tjk3430]

Such a waste of resources though.

[@olderchin1558]

I doubt it will stay cold. The US is losing economically and it will want to start a hot war just to distract from the rot at home. How else are the prospective presidential candidates going to differentiate themselves. None could do anything about the runaway doom train at home so it will be about threats abroad.

[@guesswho-og2wv]

You're in cuckooland my friend

[@felipe-vibor]

It's getting hot in Europe and warming in south east Asia.

[@hsk2k8]

Is this the best strategist that West has?? I am so disappointed

[@danielm5161]

I wish these interviews were longer. They are only like 10 minutes after the intro

[@dylanthomas12321]

Ian is fully capable of doing deep-dish, long-form discussions that would elucidate the public discussion. But clearly he has decided to use social media, KZbin most notably, as a marketing strategy. He has the wherewithall to be a great public intellectual on the scale of some French philosophers, but sadly wastes his talents. It's sad, really.

[@gangeshkale536]

These were totally one sided answers, when he was talking about putin and bush he didn't even mention NATO expansion to Russia's borders, NATO desire to add Georgia and directly jumped to the 2007 Munich conference.

[@hydroac9387]

Good conversation. It's hard to argue with any of it.

[@IAm-NotHear]

If isolationism takes hold in the United States, standby to watch the world tear itself apart

[@kamalabuhenamostafa]

NOBODY LIKES US & WEST HEGEMONY AS MAFIA DON.

[@TEKANNON-bz9fm]

What to take home from a very good interview? We have to realize that autocratic regimes have got the capacity to run with the ball and score touchdowns, but if they win the game, the world changes the rules forever on its existence.

[@WackadoodleMalarkey]

Party It's what you choose. Wild and wicked, you abuse Well fuck it No need to heed The hell with caution increase the speed Push it Impress the west Run up and tell you ain't bought the dress You crazy Don't care about nuttin We'll see when that coffee's shuttin _Mighty Death Pop,_ Insane Clown Posse

[@danwelterweight4137]

Autocratic regimes🤣 He says Your American presidents get selected by electorate college even when they get less votes than the other candidates Your American legislative bodies only have 2 parties who have passed all sorts or election regulations, rules and laws at the state level that block all other 3rd parties from gaining any representation or seats in your congress or senate. Putin stands as an independent candidate. He belongs to no political party. There are 5 different parties in the Duma encompassing every political thought and ideological background. Russian presidents get elected by the popular vote by the Russian people. Your number one ally, the UK has an unelected hereditary king as their head of state with the power to summon and dismiss the prime minister. All members of parliament, military servicemen, judges and civil servants in the UK are forced to pledge personal allegiance to him his heirs, his descendants and their family. This king also has the power to appoint who sits in the house of lords. His prime Minister was never elected by the British people. All your allies have approval ratings in their high 20% to low 30%s whole Russia and China leaders have approval ratings in their high 80%s

[@bobwilk5155]

In America, law describing "GUILTY" Person or Entities who KNOWINGLY PROVIDE any form of "Help" like money, Wapons, housings, transportation, documents to the Killers.

[@user-ey9eu1zb5f]

Thank you for sharing.

[@SeverusAlexanderAugustus]

Gzero is geopolitics without conspiracy theories. Much appreciated!

[@dzxy314]

Biden and Xi both said that we need cooperation, not confrontation

[@emmeadowmitbbs3537]

Biden lied.

[@angliccivilization1346]

There were plenty of voices that cautioned about China's rise, but people ignored them and even were hostile to the very notion. We reap what we have sown.

[@jimgaston9863]

Ok ok we get it your Trump deranged,he’s living rent free in all your heads 😂😂😂😂

[@Potatotron10000]

Absolutely, but it wasn't something as simple as "people ignored them". What we're really reaping here is the culmination of decades of foreign, domestic, and economic policy which was all driven by systems and ideals we continue to cling to as infallible. We didn't just permit China to rise because we were distracted. It's not some oopsy we can brush off. People need to understand that we're not perfect, and that the right thing isn't always the easy or most agreeable thing. Why is society so divided? Why are people so prone to manipulation? It's nice and easy to blame it on modern technology, and it's not entirely wrong, but it's a neat and convenient answer that brushes aside a myriad of other contributing factors. Why didn't our educational systems better prepare people to navigate lies and half truths? Why do people consume all of their news from short format social media platforms? Why do people so strongly identify with political parties? The answers here aren't ones we're willing to hear, let alone discuss. To admit that maybe our culture and society has decayed thanks to our very own beliefs is our modern day equivalent of herecy. Look at something like Star Trek, or forward looking parodies from generations prior, and then look at our world today. Has the developed world moved closer to an idealistic future such as one portrayed in Star Trek, strictly from a social perspective, or do we more closer resemble the parodies? Well, I know plenty would disagree with me, but I think an arbeys ad being aired over live coverage of Russia's invasion of Ukraine on CNN is very much so indicative of where we are today, and how we got here.

[@chillxxx241]

Influence operations don’t support candidates or parties. The purpose is to create distrust in the American political system. They need Americans to fight among each other, because together they are unstoppable.

[@user-ky8pj1bj9o]

The problem with westerners like David Sanger is that they have a very ideological view of the world. Only their democratic political system is legitimate, and other political systems are illegitimate. When western countries promote political change in other countries to be more like their own, it is legitimate. When other countries are seen as interfering with western political process, it is illegitimate. It's a self-centered view that pits the west in perpetual tension and conflict with countries that are not like them. How each country governs itself is their own business, and the rules of how nations interact with each other should apply to all countries regardless of their political system and ideology. Being a liberal democracy does not make a country more entitled in the world, just as a person being smarter and stronger does not make that person entitled to more rights than others. The events in recent years have made it clearer than before that the values and international rules promoted by the West are far from universal. Instead, they are applied selectively to serve western, especially American interests. This is something that many in the west are unable to see or acknowledge. A better international order will be one that is more democratic and gives greater voice to countries outside the west, which includes China, India, Brazil, South Africa, and other global south countries. This vision of global democratic governance is never talked about by western commentators even as they promote democratic governance within other nations.

[@Zainiology]

This is frighteningly sensible

[@kshen7485]

Punching above its weight has been nowadays America’s main character.

[@francoluissotomayor3123]

Bruh I was in 9th grade in 2014 and I knew. I may say it never ended, it just paused and froze

[@seanstansbury5585]

What's the books name?

[@xxoo-lp6vc]

YES, as always lead by the empire

[@reel1tv587]

7:51 it looks like he just punched that dude to the left in the face😂

[@CoolStoryBro455]

Isn't all of this just some kind of sport? I look like my father, watching football

[@jimgaston9863]

Sounds like the people in charge don’t have a clue what’s going on in the world? I. Call bullshit 😢

[@olderchin1558]

Sangar and Bremmer, they could be twin brothers intellectually. Both echoing each other distorted view of world. What the internet really brought to the table is a searchable database accessible to all. And if you look back at both these guys previous comments and prediction, you would know that they weren't analysing or predicting anything. Both were just promoting their projections of their biases and getting it wrong most of the time.

[@HansenSWE]

Shut up, Xi. We know it's you.

[@preachingflamesthepreacher3894]

One thing I've observed about all these geopolitical circuses is that USA is a saint in all instances - which I find rather ridiculous!

[@tjk3430]

We overreact sometimes but at least we don't annex countries.

[@jay-shakeli9761]

@@tjk3430 No, no, no. The state Texas belonged to Mexico. US started a war against Mexico and annexed Texas after they bullied the weaker neighbor.

[@jamestk656]

Putin knows it's doublespeak, Biden does too. Meanwhile, Trump is seething about his friend not wanting him to become president again lol

[@akka2011hk]

We are already in one. Liberal democracies vs autocracies.

[@ZWlify]

"It's all their fault"

[@user-ed9bv9fs4p]

God //head brain three police option first /T.W 50/100 ~vanca/w.h in ~FED /(powell & yellon )~god ~xijinping entry contrution open starting ok 2025.01.01open starting pull option going ok ㅡFED powell and yellon and xijinping and micron ok.

[@preachingflamesthepreacher3894]

I wouldnt say that Russia benefits from chaos around the world. I wouldn't say Russia delight in destruction. These 2 descriptions best explain the US and its NATO accomplices.

[@preachingflamesthepreacher3894]

Talking of carnage left behind, USA has left more carnage than probably even Hitler's Germany.

[@LarryCohen188]

If America economy requires them to generate conflict around the world to sustain it, who is the greatest threat to international peace and security

[@Zahidpiash]

In 2050 China number one India number two And America number three. Get ready.

[@hydroac9387]

China is unlikely to be the hegemon of the 21st century. Reason? Demography. According the the UN, China already lost the mantle of #1 in population to India in 2023. Using Chinese data, the Chinese are already has one of the fastest aging populations and lowest birth rates in the world. Using the medium case scenario, the Chinese will go from 1.4 billion today to 750 million by 2100. The worst case scenario is that they have a population of 650 million by 2100. Additionally, it is projected that they will have more post-65 pensioners than workers by ~2085. Think about the implications of that for a minute. The Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences (a Chinese think tank) estimates that the 2020 Chinese census overcounted their population by 100 million (that is the population of many countries!), and that most of these missing people are under 40 (e.g - reproductive age). Moreover, most of these missing people are women since families preferred sons during One Child. This will make for a severe gender imbalance as men simply can't find mates, which is going to be a problem for less well off Chinese. It is hard to imagine a future China being the dominant power if they have half empty mega cities filled with pensioners. In the meantime, the UN forecasts that the US population will increase from 330 million today to just shy of 400 million by 2100. That is because we have a much healthier demography (our baby boomers generation actually had kids, the rest of the world's boomers by and large didn't) and immigrants want to come here because of economic opportunity. The USA already has on average a younger population than the Chinese, and this imbalance will only get worse for the Chinese as the decades pass.

[@fereydoonbesharati7945]

it seemd to be, you are close.