Is today's anti-liberalism a new phenomenon in American politics? What might earlier eras in US history have to teach us?

To discuss these questions, we are joined, again, by Robert Kagan, the historian and senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Drawing on his new book, Rebellion: How Antiliberalism Is Tearing America Apart—Again, Kagan argues that we “don’t realize that the [anti-liberal] movement we’re looking at today has been visible in every generation since the founding.” Kagan draws particular attention to the 1920s, when anti-immigration sentiment, white identity politics, and sympathy for authoritarian figures were prevalent in America. Kagan notes that the MAGA movement can be understood as a part of a long history of anti-liberalism that runs counter to the tradition of the founders, yet remains endemic to American democracy. Liberal democracy in America thus needs to be fought for and cannot simply be assumed.  

Where do things stand in Ukraine? How will the recently-passed aid package help Ukraine on the battlefield? How does the war in Ukraine relate to rising threats from adversaries around the globe?

To discuss these questions we are joined again by Fred Kagan, director of the Critical Threats Project at the American Enterprise Institute. Kagan explains that Ukraine continues to face serious difficulties, in part because of a critical shortage of weapons as a result of the delay in US support. Yet the recently-passed aid package should bolster defenses against Russia’s anticipated assault this summer, and potentially help Ukraine to make gains in a counteroffensive early next year. Reflecting on the war and the world situation more broadly, Kagan points to the rising alliances among Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea as a comprehensive threat to the free world. As he puts it: “These countries disagree about a lot of things. They don’t share a common ideology. But they do share a common enemy: us.… We have to recognize [it] is an entente that aims to take us down, and we have to be resisting every part of it.”

What was it like serving in the Trump administration—and what might a second Trump term look like? To discuss these questions, we are joined by Mark Esper, Secretary of Defense from 2019-2020. In this Conversation, Esper considers Ukraine, China, and other foreign policy challenges facing the United States, and reflects on his experience leading the Department of Defense during the Trump administration. Esper discusses accomplishments of American foreign policy during those years, but also raises deep concern about Trump’s attempts to politicize the military and his placing unsuitable personnel at the center of key foreign policy decision-making. And he argues that these tendencies, which were kept partially under wraps in the first term, could prove to be more alarming in a second—especially considering Trump’s increasing priority of selecting personnel based on personal loyalty. In a time of what he calls “great power competition with Russia and China,” Esper argues it is vital to have a strong foreign policy team in place—and dangerous to have a bad one.

Where do things stand in the 2024 race? What campaign strategies might increase Joe Biden’s chances? How might the economy, the border, wars in Europe and the Middle East, Trump's trials, and third-party campaigns affect the race? To discuss these questions, we are joined by David Axelrod, chief strategist for Barack Obama’s presidential campaigns in 2008 and 2012. Axelrod explains: “I would not count on the shock and dismay of people over the fact that [Trump] is under 91 criminal indictments, or that he engineered an insurrection, and so on. I think you’re going to get that [vote] for free, but it’s not enough to win.” According to Axelrod, the Biden campaign also should not be complacent in thinking that touting Biden’s achievements during his first term will be enough. Instead, he argues, Biden needs to focus on the economic challenges people face today—while framing the election as a contrast between Biden and Trump, and not simply as a referendum on Biden’s presidency. 

What do Joe Biden's successes, failures, and poll numbers reveal about the state of the Democratic Party today? In an era of polarization, can a spirit of moderation and bipartisanship be rediscovered?

To discuss these questions, we are joined by Joe Klein, the veteran reporter, author, and analyst of American politics. Klein reflects on the changes of the Democratic Party over recent decades, including his perspective on the elevation of identity politics over unity. According to Klein, the Biden administration has been reasonably effective, but often has not been able to move the Democrats, or the country, beyond narrow interest-group politics. In the face of demagoguery from the Trump movement, Klein calls for a reinvigorated politics of moderation that can draw on the best traditions of both parties. Klein also shares fascinating personal reflections about reporting on and interacting with leading figures including Bill and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.  

Two years into the war, where do things stand in Ukraine? What are Vladimir Putin’s war aims and how is attempting to undermine American commitment and resolve? 

To discuss these questions, we are joined by Timothy Snyder, a Yale historian and leading expert on Russia, Ukraine, and Eastern Europe. Noting impressive successes in recent weeks despite the lack of weapons supply from the United States, Snyder argues that “this is still a war that Ukraine can win. But it depends upon whether they have allies who are capable of seeing the political stakes and capable of behaving in a way which is consistent with simple military logic, which is what do you need to do to help your ally to win.” 

Persuading Americans that Ukraine cannot win, or even that a Russian victory would be preferable, is an integral part of Vladimir Putin’s war strategy. According to Snyder, Putin knows he cannot win on the battlefield if the West musters its collective energy to Ukrainian victory, but believes he can win by influencing our political debates about international engagement and support for the war. Defeating Russia, Snyder explains, is vital not only for Ukraine, but also for America and our allies. Kristol and Snyder also discuss how understanding fascism might help us to comprehend contemporary Russian politics and other political developments around the world.

Where does the 2024 presidential race stand? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the candidates, and how might such an unpopular rematch play out? What could happen if it's not Biden and Trump?

To discuss these questions, we are joined again by veteran political strategist Doug Sosnik, former political director in the Clinton White House and author of this week’s important New York Timesop-ed,“Biden Can’t Count on Trump’s Unpopularity Anymore.” According to Sosnik, a Biden campaign strategy of aiming to “disqualify" Trump in the minds of voters is insufficient: Biden also must make an affirmative case for a second term while overcoming doubts about his age and health. Because the polarization in the country remains so intense, another Biden v. Trump race would be a world of “high floors and low ceilings.” According to Sosnik, Trump—now slightly ahead in the polls—is "bumping up to the high end of his ceiling,” while “Biden is bumping up to the bottom of his floor.” Kristol and Sosnik also consider the possible effects of a third-party challenge in a polarized environment, and how the race might take shape if either Trump or Biden is not renominated.

Summing up the state of the 2024 race as we head toward the South Carolina primaries, veteran Republican pollster Whit Ayres says if the election were held today “Trump would win … in the Electoral College.”

Yet despite Trump’s quasi-incumbency, 40-45% of the Republican primary electorate have voted for other candidates to date. According to Ayres, Trump suffers from some major weaknesses as a candidate, which leave an opening for Nikki Haley—and portend problems for Trump in a general election. But Biden may be even weaker. As Ayres puts it, “the vast majority of Americans, including a vast majority of Democrats, think Biden is just too old to serve effectively…and virtually no one in either party thinks Kamala Harris is ready for prime time.” Despite the appearance of stability in the race—the increasing likelihood of a 2020 rematch—Ayres notes that a full 2/3 of Americans are unhappy with the choice between Biden and Trump. Kristol and Ayres consider how, beneath the surface, the 2024 contest may be unstable—with the potential for domestic and geopolitical events to intervene, and third-party challenges that could upend the race.  

What are the latest developments in the US-China relationship? What can we learn from recent elections in Taiwan? How does the CCP view the wars in Ukraine and in the Middle East? 

To discuss these questions, we are joined again by Princeton professor Aaron Friedberg. Considering the situation in Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Eastern Europe, Friedberg argues that we face distinct but overlapping challenges from “increasingly aggressive authoritarian powers.” According to Friedberg, China has supported our rivals out of the belief that “conflict wears us down, deflects our attention from the Indo-Pacific region, and contributes to divisions emerging in this country over foreign policy in a way we haven’t seen in some years.” Kristol and Friedberg also discuss the deepening divisions in the country over foreign policy, and consider how a Republican or Democratic victory in November could affect the global security situation.    

Three months after October 7 and amidst the ongoing war in Gaza, what is the national mood in Israel? How are the partisan divisions which gripped Israel in recent years playing out in wartime? How will this war change Israel?  

To discuss these questions, we are joined by Peter Berkowitz, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution and longtime analyst of Israeli politics and society. Having just returned from Israel, Berkowitz observes that the enormity of the Hamas attack within Israel’s borders threatens a core principle of Zionism, which promised that Jews would be safe in their own homeland. In the face of this, Israelis have displayed a remarkable unity around the cause of defeating Hamas and returning the hostages. Yet the partisan divisions that existed before the war persist, along with a deep trauma and anger stemming from recriminations about the failure to protect the nation from the attack on October 7. Across the political elite and among Israelis more generally, there is a new reckoning about the profound threats Israel faces—not only from Hamas, but also from Hezbollah, and from Tehran.