➡️ Watch the full interview ad-free, join a community of geopolitics enthusiasts and gain access to exclusive content on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingGeopolitics

➡️ Sign up to my free geopolitics newsletter: https://stationzero.substack.com/This is a conversation with Andrias Kubilius - the European Union’s Commissioner for Defense and Space. 

For those not that familiar with the European Union - a commissioner is kind of like a minister in a nation state, a top politician, responsible for a particular area. Historically the EU has never had a Defence Commissioner because it is not a military organization but since the invasion of Ukraine that has changed quite radically and in 2023, Andrias became the first ever EU Defense commissioner, responsible primarily for rebuilding the European defense industry, rearming Europe and making it ready and able to defend itself. Needles to say, it’s a pretty important role and as the European Union is trying to act more as an independent geopolitical actor, it’s only becoming more important. And for how important his role is, he was extremely open and transparent in this conversation. 

We talked about how to make Europe prepared to survive in an increasingly dangerous world and defend itself on its own, without anyone coming to save it. Both about what is he doing to make that happen but also how the European Union needs to change to make it possible , including why he believes that we need a true European army. 

We talk a lot about the complicated relationship with the United States - about why and how Europe needs to immediately prepare for United States withdrawing from Europe, about what will be the future of NATO once that happens and whether the EU could replace it, and how would Europe respond if the United States decide to take Greenland by force and  how destructive that would be for everyone. And about his views on the new US National Security Strategy - which he is very critical of and which frames the very institution he represents - the European Union - as an opposition to the interests of the United States and something that the US should try to dismantle. 

And of course we talk about Russia - about how likely is the threat of a Russian aggression against EU and NATO or how prepared Europe is right now to face it. And much more. 

➡️ Watch the full interview ad-free, join a community of geopolitics enthusiasts and gain access to exclusive content on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingGeopolitics

➡️ Sign up to my free geopolitics newsletter: https://stationzero.substack.com

This is a conversation with Olivier Schmidt, head of research at the Institute for Military Operations at the Royal Danish Defence College and expert on military strategy. As you might have noticed, especially if you listen to this podcast, Europe is not having the easiest time when it comes to geopolitics - it’s trying to support in its Ukraine with Russia, rebuild its militaries after decades of hibernation, deal with increasingly unpredictable and sometimes openly hostile United States, all while trying to understand and adapt to the entirely new geopolitical reality we find ourselves in. And from the European perspective, understanding where are we going and how to best adapt to it is both really important and really difficult.

And that’s why I’m speaking with Olivier today. He recently wrote an academic paper that basically lays out the 4 different scenarios that Europe might experience in the coming years - based on how hostile the United States will get and how united Europe manages to stay. It’s an extremely interesting and helpful approach that moves away from abstract anxieties and towards tangible realistic scenarios that help us understand what’s ahead and how to prepare for it. In this conversation we talk about all of them as well as what each of them would mean and what would be the best course of action in each of the four different futures we might find ourselves in. 

➡️ Watch the full interview ad-free, join a community of geopolitics enthusiasts and gain access to exclusive content on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingGeopolitics

➡️ Sign up to my free geopolitics newsletter: https://stationzero.substack.com/This is a conversation with Andrew Badger - a former human intelligence officer at the DIA - the United States Defense Intelligence Agency, a lecturer at Oxford University, an advisor on geopolitics for some of the world’s largest corporations, and an author of an upcoming book on what I think is mostly overlooked but an extremely interesting topic - of how China in the past decades managed to mobilize its vast intelligence apparatus, its citizens living abroad, its private companies and basically everything it has at its disposal to covertly obtain some of the most advanced technology belonging to American companies.

And how this technology helped China to massively develop its economy, its private companies and its military in an extremely short timespan and basically catch up to the United States in a way that otherwise might not have been possible. We talk about how China actually does that on a practical level and why is it so good at it, even though it’s not at all the country doing that or how is the intelligence competition shaping the race for AI dominance and much more.

➡️ Watch the full interview ad-free, join a community of geopolitics enthusiasts and gain access to exclusive content on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingGeopolitics

➡️ Sign up to my free geopolitics newsletter: https://stationzero.substack.com/

This is a conversation with Shashank Joshi, the chief Defence Editor at the Economist and one of the best geopolitical and defence analysts out there.

We discuss one thing in this conversation - the new United States National Security Strategy - that was publicly announced in December 2025, that is in many ways completely unprecedented and that has triggered an immense wave of attention, backlash and worry among U.S. allies as well much more positive reaction from U.S. adversaries like Russia.

We talk about why that is - what is actually included in the strategy and what makes it such a big departure from the previous decades of US foreign policy and why it is such a big deal. How to read it between the lines in not just what it says but how it says it or what it doesn't say - and what it tells us about the foreign policy priorities of this US administration.

About why this document is bad news for Europe and why it should genuinely be concerned or about the reports that there is another version of this document - a not public one - that is significantly worse for Europe and why it might not be just rumours. What it means for the rest of the world - for China, Taiwan, Asia, Latin America, Middle East and what this document tells us about what the next years will look like - and much more.

➡️ Watch the full interview ad-free, join a community of geopolitics enthusiasts and gain access to exclusive content on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingGeopolitics

➡️ Sign up to my free geopolitics newsletter: https://stationzero.substack.com/

This is a conversation with Steven Everts, a former EU diplomat and the director of the EU Institute for Security Studies. Steven recently wrote a really interesting article that went sort of viral in European policy circles where he argued that at the heart of Europe's geopolitical problems is what he calls its "Psychology of Weakness” and called out what he says is the failing strategy of European leaders. 

I thought it was really interesting since it managed to cut to the core of the chaos, uncertainty and anxiety that dominates Europe these days as we find ourselves stuck between pressure from Donald Trump’s America and Putin’s Russia. But since it only touched on many things that deserved more more attention, I wanted to have a proper discussion about it.

And so we talk about all of it: about what is Europe’s Psychology of Weakness and why it’s putting Europe in such an uncomfortable spot. About why there is often a big difference between what European leaders say and what they actually do. About what is Europe going to do with the frozen Russian assets, how it should and could stand up to the US or what could change the failing strategy and psychology it has today.

➡️ Watch the full interview ad-free, join a community of geopolitics enthusiasts and gain access to exclusive content on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingGeopolitics

➡️ Sign up to my free geopolitics newsletter: https://stationzero.substack.com/

This is a conversation with Chun Han Wong, a reporter at the Wall Street Journal, author of the book Party of One covering how Xi Jinping transformed China and its political system and an expert on China’s internal insider politics. Few people understand what actually goes on inside China’s politics better than him - how decisions and policies are made and what drives those who make them. 

We talk about what does Xi and other people in the communist party leadership actually believe in, what do they want, what are their deepest fears and what do they really want to achieve. About how China changed by Xi dismantling the collective decision making system, about whether China has a grand strategy to become the number one superpower or whether it’s just improvising, how Beijing thinks about confrontation with the United States or what the purges in the Chinese military reveal about its confidence and preparedness to take military action - and much more. 

➡️ Watch the full interview ad-free, join a community of geopolitics enthusiasts and gain access to exclusive content on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingGeopolitics

➡️ Sign up to my free geopolitics newsletter: https://stationzero.substack.com/

This is a conversation with Linas Kojala - the director of the Geopolitics and Security Studies Center - and an associate professor of international relations at Vilnius University. Linas is from Lithuania and an expert on Baltic security among other things - and so this is what we talk about. 

About what have the past 4 years looked like from the perspective of NATO’s frontline states - three countries with small populations that are often spoken about as the primary and most likely target for any potential Russian escalation towards NATO. How much more real does that threat feel here compared to Western Europe, how have they spent the 4 years since the war in Ukraine began to prepare and how prepared are they today. How do they view the possible departure of United States from Europe and why Germany is starting to become an alternative security provider in the region instead - and much more.

➡️ Watch the full interview ad-free, join a community of geopolitics enthusiasts and gain access to exclusive content on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingGeopolitics

➡️ Sign up to my free geopolitics newsletter: https://stationzero.substack.com/

This is a conversation with Gabrielus Landsbergis. Gabrielus is a visiting fellow at the Stanford University’s Institute for International Studies and former minister of foreign affairs of Lithuania - a role that he held between 2020 and 2024. Like many of his Baltic colleagues he held and holds a very hawkish view on Russia, on supporting Ukraine and on European defense and security.But what makes him unique is that he’s also extremely openly critical of European leadership on all these issues - criticizing what he calls Europe’s appeasement of Trump, weak lack of support for Ukraine and indecisiveness in facing Russia - all the while he has personal first-hand experience with the same leadership he’s criticizing. He has been in many of the rooms where the decisions and policies were made and he knows the leaders taking them. 

And so we discuss the ongoing negotiations over the U.S. 28 point peace plan proposal, the European response to it, what’s going to come out of it and what Europe should be doing instead. And we also talk about Europe’s geopolitical strategy or the lack thereof in general - why does Europe seem to be stuck in a strategic impotence unable to take the lead or responsibility for itself, whether it’s starting to change or how it should be dealing with America led by Donald Trump and much more.

➡️ Watch the full interview ad-free, join a community of geopolitics enthusiasts and gain access to exclusive content on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingGeopolitics

➡️ Sign up to my free geopolitics newsletter: https://stationzero.substack.com/

This is a conversation with Victor Davis Hanson - a classics professor, military historian, a Senior Fellow at the Stanford’s University Hoover Institution and one of the most prominent advocates and supporters of Donald Trump, especially within the academic think-tank world. 

If you’ve listened to this podcast before, you probably noticed that I am pretty critical of Donald Trump’s foreign policy. While I don’t reject everything he does, I have some pretty fundamental issues with how he treats Europe, NATO or America’s allies and its international commitments in general. And you also might have noticed that many of my guests are very critical of Donald Trump’s foreign policy as well - just in recent months I spoke with John Bolton, Anne Applebaum, Francis Fukuyama all of whom have been even more critical than me. However, I don't want to close myself off in my own bubble, and I think it’s good to be open to ideas of people with other views, especially if they argue in good faith and if we agree on some basic values.

And that’s why I'm speaking with Victor today. He is a pretty staunch Trump supporter but he also has many views that are not typically associated with Trump - he strongly supports NATO, he is a major supporter of Ukraine, he is hawkish on Russia and advocates for the U.S. to arm and he is overall the type that most Donald Trump supporters might call a “neoconservative” with views that Donald Trump himself has frequently criticized.

And so we speak about how all those things go together. How does protecting the postwar-liberal order go together with Trump talking about annexing Greenland and Canada, why didn't Trump end the war in 24 hours as he promised or whether he was naive in his plan for how to do that, how can Europe be in an alliance with a U.S. president who doesn't believe in alliances or why he thinks that Trump is the most pro-European U.S. president in history.

To clarify, I don't agree with many of the views that Victor has talked about on European or Americans domestic politics but that’s not what the podcast is about and I didn't want to focus on. And I’m still not sure whether I agree with anything that he said - but despite that, I think that it’s a fascinating conversation that I was really glad to have. And I heard a perspective that might not be the same as mine but that I still found to be really interesting - I hope you’ll feel the same way. 

➡️ Watch the full interview ad-free, join a community of geopolitics enthusiasts and gain access to exclusive content on PATREON: https://www.patreon.com/DecodingGeopolitics

➡️ Sign up to my free geopolitics newsletter: https://stationzero.substack.com/

This is a conversation with Francis Fukuyama, a professor and research fellow at Stanford and one of the most famous and influential scholars of political science and international relations of our time. Although he has decades of scholarship behind him, he is by far most well known for one book, titled the “End of History and the Last Man” which is both highly influential and highly misunderstood and in which he argued that following the fall of the Soviet Union in the early 90s, humanity has reached the final stage of human government in the form of liberal democracy. 

We talk about what the argument of the book actually was, why it is so often misunderstood,  and why the End of History did not happen. About why history seems to have taken a turn backwards and why we are witnessing democratic backsliding and return of large scale wars and conflicts, why democracies everywhere seem to be going through major crises and how to fix that, or what - if the history is not ending - is ahead of us now. And what still gives him hope that liberal democracy is not going anywhere just yet.