For years in U.S. foreign policy circles, discussions of China focused on its growing wealth, power, and ambition, and the fear that it would supplant the United States.

But a few years ago, the conversation took a sharp turn. Rather than fixating on China’s rise, most analysis began to focus on the country’s stagnation and even decline. There were good reasons for this: disappointing post-COVID economic growth, dire demographics, and a foreign policy alienating much of the world. And so a new consensus took hold—that a weakened China might not overtake the United States after all.

In a new essay for Foreign Affairs, Kurt Campbell and Rush Doshi argue that this new consensus dangerously underestimates Chinese power and the challenge it represents for U.S. foreign policy. Washington, they warn, is missing Beijing’s key strategic advantage—an advantage that only a new approach to alliances will offset. As they write, if America goes it alone, “the contest for the next century will be China’s to lose.”

Campbell is the chairman and a co-founder of The Asia Group and served as deputy secretary of state and Indo-Pacific coordinator at the National Security Council during the Biden administration. Doshi is an assistant professor at Georgetown University and director of the China Strategy Initiative at the Council on Foreign Relations, and served as deputy senior director for China and Taiwan affairs at the National Security Council during the Biden administration. They joined Dan Kurtz-Phelan on April 14 to discuss the sources of Chinese power, what U.S. observers of China get wrong, and whether the Trump administration has an endgame in its confrontation with Beijing.

You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

For decades, it has been a trope of foreign policy commentary in the United States that Washington does not pay enough attention to its own hemisphere. But the Trump administration seems to be bucking this trend—though not exactly in the way those complaining about neglect might have wanted.

President Donald Trump’s campaign spent a lot of time focusing on immigration and fentanyl coming from Latin America. And in the early months of his administration, Trump has focused to a surprising degree not just on Mexico and Central America but also on the Panama Canal and Canada and Greenland. There’s even been talk of America’s so-called sphere of influence in the Western Hemisphere. 

Brian Winter, one of the best chroniclers and analysts of Latin America and the longtime editor of Americas Quarterly, was one of the few people who anticipated this focus—as he did in an essay for Foreign Affairs a few weeks before Trump’s inauguration. As Trump unleashes a whirlwind of confrontational policies across the globe—his sweeping tariffs being just the latest example—Latin American leaders are developing their own approach to this challenge. And in Winter’s view, they may be surprisingly well positioned to weather the storm better than their counterparts anywhere else.

He spoke with Dan Kurtz-Phelan on April 8 about how leaders everywhere from Argentina and Brazil to Mexico and Central America are navigating this new reality—and also about whether Latin America’s long tradition of strongman leadership has now come to the United States.

You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

Two months into U.S. President Donald Trump’s second term, the U.S.-Chinese relationship—the most consequential one in the world by a long stretch—faces new uncertainty. Trump has threatened larger tariffs as China has continued its military buildup and activities in the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea. But Trump has also focused his ire on allied capitals, rather than on Beijing, and talked about making a deal with his “very good friend” Xi Jinping.

In a recent essay for Foreign Affairs, Jude Blanchette and Ryan Hass stressed the importance, and highlighted the challenge, of understanding the balance of power with America’s top rival. The biggest risk, they argue, is not that Washington will underestimate China’s strength, but that it will neglect the sources of its own.

Blanchette runs the China Research Center at the RAND Corporation; Hass, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, long worked on China policy at the National Security Council and State Department. They joined editor Dan Kurtz-Phelan to discuss Beijing’s assessment of American power, the prospects for a “grand bargain” between Trump and Xi, and whether fears of American decline risk becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy.

You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

Not even two months into his second term, U.S. President Donald Trump is reshaping U.S.-Russian relations at a critical juncture for the war in Ukraine. As Russian President Vladimir Putin presses his advantage on the battlefield, Trump’s admiration for the Russian leader, and his push for warmer relations with Moscow, is raising alarms across European capitals—in Kyiv most of all.

Fiona Hill spent years studying Putin and Russia as a scholar and U.S. intelligence official before serving, in the first Trump administration, as senior director for European and Russian affairs on the National Security Council. She became a household name during Trump’s first impeachment, when her testimony provided crucial insights into Trump’s dynamic with Putin and his early interactions with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Today, she is a senior fellow at the Center on the United States and Europe at the Brookings Institution and serves as Chancellor of Durham University.

Hill spoke with editor Dan Kurtz-Phelan on the morning of Tuesday, March 11, about Trump’s relationship with Putin, the prospects for peace in Ukraine, and European security in an age of American retreat. Later that afternoon, U.S. and Ukrainian officials unveiled a tentative agreement for a 30-day cease-fire—putting the ball in Putin’s court.

You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

After three years of war, Ukraine is facing intense pressure from Donald Trump to reach a settlement with Russia. Trump has engaged directly with Russian President Vladimir Putin while calling Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky a dictator. His administration has sidelined European allies while joining a handful of Russian partners in voting against a UN resolution condemning Putin’s aggression. And U.S. officials have pressured Ukraine into signing over critical mineral resources.

And yet despite this new geopolitical reality, and despite month after month of grueling fighting that has Russian forces taking territory by the day, Ukrainians themselves remain deeply resistant to accepting an end to the war that would sacrifice their country’s territory and sovereignty.

In a new essay for Foreign Affairs, the Ukrainian journalist Nataliya Gumenyuk explains that Ukrainians’ resistance emerges not only out of a sense of patriotism but also, she writes, “because they know there is little chance of survival under Moscow’s rule.” For years, Gumenyuk has reported from Ukraine’s conflict zones, documenting the brutality and trying to understand the logic of Russian occupation.

She spoke with senior editor Hugh Eakin on February 21 about how Ukrainians are reacting to the shift in U.S. policy, what life is like in the almost 20 percent of their country under Russian control, and where Ukraine goes from here.

You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

A month into U.S. President Donald Trump’s second term in office, many are alarmed by what they see as emerging signs of democratic erosion. In a new essay, called “The Path to American Authoritarianism,” the scholars Steven Levitsky and Lucan Way make the case that such alarm is justified—that the administration’s early moves could herald an irreversible transformation of the U.S. political system, with major implications for global democracy.

Drawing from their research on democratic decline worldwide, Levitsky and Way argue that the United States faces a particular kind of risk that many observers miss—a form of so-called competitive authoritarianism, in which elections continue but the state apparatus is weaponized against opposition.

Levitsky is David Rockefeller Professor of Latin American Studies and Professor of Government at Harvard University and a Senior Fellow for Democracy at the Council on Foreign Relations. Way is Distinguished Professor of Democracy at the University of Toronto Distinguished Professor of Democracy in the Department of Political Science at the University of Toronto and a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. They are the authors of Competitive Authoritarianism: Hybrid Regimes After the Cold War.

In a special bonus episode, they speak with senior editor Eve Fairbanks about the global playbook for authoritarian regimes—and the stakes for American democracy.

You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

From record-low unemployment to strong GDP growth, the Biden administration presided over what appeared to be a strong economic recovery in the aftermath of the pandemic. But these measures masked a more complex reality, argues Jason Furman in a new essay in Foreign Affairs. That reality, in his view, should reshape debates about economic strategies going forward.

Furman, now Aetna Professor of the Practice of Economic Policy at Harvard University, chaired the White House Council of Economic Advisers under President Barack Obama. He traces a stark disconnect between Biden’s lofty goals and real economic performance, especially as it shaped voters’ lived experience. That disconnect opened the way for Donald Trump’s return to the White House. 

Editor Dan Kurtz-Phelan spoke with Furman about why the Biden administration’s economic policy fell short—and why both Democrats and Republicans should abandon what he calls their “post-neoliberal delusion.”

You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

After nearly three years of war, the mood among many of Ukraine’s allies has turned grim. Russian forces are making steady gains; Kyiv is running low on ammunition; and the return of Donald Trump to the White House has only added to anxieties about the conflict, casting doubt over not only the future of American military aid, but also the prospect of a negotiated settlement that is satisfactory to Ukraine.

In an essay for Foreign Affairs, titled “Putin’s Point of No Return,” Andrea Kendall-Taylor and Michael Kofman argue that the risks are even greater—that Putin’s Russia will pose a threat to Western interests even if the current fighting in Ukraine ends. Kendall-Taylor is a former intelligence official and scholar of authoritarian regimes and Russian politics; Kofman is one of the most astute analysts of the war in Ukraine.

They speak with editor Dan Kurtz-Phelan about the battlefield dynamics and political dimensions of the conflict—and about Vladimir Putin’s enduring ambition to reshape the global order.

You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

With Donald Trump about to return to the White House, leaders around the world are bracing for what could be a significant realignment in U.S. foreign policy—and trying to prepare their own country’s response.

In a special two-part episode, Foreign Affairs Editor Dan Kurtz-Phelan speaks with two policymakers who have grappled directly with the disruption that may come in Trump 2.0. Malcolm Turnbull, who was Australia’s prime minister during Trump’s first term, shares his lessons about how leaders can most effectively engage the new administration. And Bilahari Kausikan, one of Singapore’s most seasoned diplomats and analysts, considers what Trump’s return will mean for Asia.

Together, these conversations offer a window into how global leaders are approaching a period of potential turmoil—and an unvarnished guide to power politics in an era of American disruption.

You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.

The United States’ relationship with China has scarcely been so contentious. Over the last several years, the two powers have butted heads over issues including trade and technology, Russia’s war on Ukraine, and Beijing’s belligerence in the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait. Nicholas Burns has helped oversee Washington’s response to these rising tensions.

Burns has served as U.S. ambassador to China since 2022, the capstone of a four-decade career in the foreign service that has included posts as ambassador to NATO and Greece, State Department undersecretary for political affairs and spokesperson, and on the National Security Council staff on Soviet and Russian affairs. He has been in the room for some of the most consequential moments in recent U.S. foreign policy history: the fall of the Soviet Union, the 9/11 attacks, and now, the intensifying U.S.-Chinese competition.

Two years after his first conversation with editor Dan Kurtz-Phelan, Burns, in his final days as ambassador, looks back on the Biden administration’s approach to managing the relationship at this critical moment—and reflects on the need for diplomacy in the rivalry that may define the twenty-first century.

You can find sources, transcripts, and more episodes of The Foreign Affairs Interview at https://www.foreignaffairs.com/podcasts/foreign-affairs-interview.