The end came quickly for Bashar Al Assad. One would imagine that while he was fleeing on his private jet en route to Moscow he must have looked out and thought “Where did it all go wrong?” The answer to his question is probably when he used poison gas against his people, or when he used Russian bombs against his people, or when he allowed a radical terrorist cell to kill thousands of his people. Yeah, you get the point. Bashar Al Assad is not a good guy or an adequate leader. His two-decade rule saw Syria slip from a crown jewel of the Middle East to a war-torn and ruined nation. Syria has been under the grip of a brutal civil war since the Arab Spring in 2011. Assad’s remarkable cruelty has made him an international pariah. However, we do not have to think about Assad, or his policy, any longer, because he is no longer the ruler of Syria. In a surprise offensive, rebels took the city of Aleppo last week and then moved into the capital Damascus. The Assad regime crumbled like a house of cards and the people of Syria were left to pick up the pieces. In the absence of the Assad regime, a power vacuum remains in Syria, and the question of who is going to fill it will decide the future of one of the most war-torn nations on earth. 

The rebel group that ultimately will receive credit for toppling the Assad reign is Hayat Tahrir Al-Sham (HTS). HTS is the group currently holding Damascus and will likely attempt to set up a new government. That is both good and bad. It is good because they are not Assad. Other than that they are a major security concern. The United States already designates them as a terror group and their links to Al Qaeda are strong. Abu Mohammad al-Jolani, the leader of HTS, has a concerning pattern of spewing rhetoric about forming an Islamic caliphate in Syria. HTS are your typical Jihadist group with a standing force of ~12,000 soldiers. They will face serious trouble running the nation. 

But that’s trouble that the Syrian National Army has a better chance of facing. The Syrian National Army (SNA) is a collection of fighters assembled under the common goal of forcing out Assad. The SNA are Turkish-backed militia forces formed from all of the other militias in Syria. On November 30, the Syrian National Army (SNA) launched “Operation Dawn of Freedom” targeting the Manbij region with two main goals: disrupting supply lines controlled by the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) and creating a corridor between the cities of al-Bab and Tel Rifaat, which the SNA captured on December 1. The SNA are particularly anti-Kurd who are the largest ethnic minority in Syria. Kurdish militants want a separate uniquely Kurdish state. That does not happen if the SNA takes power. Instead, the SNA allows Turkey to make Syria into a proxy and further exert control in the region. 

Finally, the Islamic State is still a force in the region. While some think that ISIS is dead they very much are not. Expect them to make a return to regional prowess. Regardless of who takes change, Syria appears to be headed for a decade of turmoil and disaster. This is ultimately going to reflect a decade of pain for the Syrian people who already have endured so much hardship. 

Read more here:

In the case of a traffic light, red means stop, and green means go. It seems as if German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and his long-gone coalition are horrible citizens and don’t understand this. While trying to go and pass a new budget for next year, they stopped, and fell apart. This has plunged the nation into a state of instability. 

Mr. Scholz, of the Social Democrats (SDP), has said that he will call for a vote of confidence, which is planned to be on January 15th, 2025. But, there is pressure from the center-right Christian Democrats (CDU), a prominent opposition party, to speed up the process. The election will test whether the German parliament, or the 733-seat Bundestag, still has trust in him to lead the government. Considering that Euronews reports that his approval rating stands at a mere 18%, staying in office is highly unlikely. 

The German chancellor has the greatest influence on German politics. The country also has a president, who will give the green light to dissolve Parliament once Scholz loses the confidence vote, which is almost certain. Snap elections will then follow in the next 60 days. German voters will go to the polls to elect new members of the Bundestag, and those representatives will choose the new chancellor. 

In recent years, Germany has been suffering from political fragmentation. The latest development was the collapse of the “Traffic Light” coalition, composed of the SDP (red), the Free Democratic Party (FDP, yellow), and the Greens. Scholz’s firing of now ex-Finance Minister Christian Lindner, also the FDP’s head, triggered the fallout. Mr. Lindner disagreed with the SDP and the Greens over the “Black Zero”, a debt ceiling. His party wanted it enforced more powerfully to limit spending, while the other two progressive groups wanted to loosen rules in order to spend more. According to the Bundestag itself, the two party coalition now has 324 seats, after losing the FDP’s 90 and with it, their majority.  This spells danger, because a minority government at the helm is always risky. 

The several parties vying for power have now named their nominees for the nearly guaranteed elections. Conservative Friedrich Merz from the Christian Democrats (CDU) is the leading candidate. His opinions include taking a more proactive stance on Ukrainian support, tax cuts, and surprisingly, potentially loosening the constitutional spending cap. The strictness of this cap and the government’s struggles working with it is exactly what is giving him a large edge over Chancellor Scholz. The CDU currently holds the second most seats in the Bundestag, with 196. 

New groups have burst onto the German political stage, especially the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) and the far-left Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW). AfD’s nominee is Alice Weidel, who supports mass deportations. The Guardian reports that she polls at 17%, second only to the CDU, but she’s unlikely to do her job as chancellor even if she gets it, because no party wants to work with the AfD. 

BSW, led by Sahra Wagenknecht, has won double-digit support in recent state elections, showing its emergence to power. Despite polling at just 6.1%, it poses a bigger danger. The two parties advocate for the lifting of sanctions on Russia, as a result, the Kremlin is gaining an even bigger advantage in the Russo-Ukrainian war because the 2nd biggest donor to Ukraine is faltering politically. 

The Greens, led by Robert Habeck, and the FDP, led by Christian Lindner (the same guy who got fired), hold about 13% and 4.1% respectively. The latter is at the brink of collapse, because as of now, it can’t sustain the 5% figure that it needs to stay in Parliament. All three “traffic-light” parties have lost support thanks to recent political disasters. 

In the coming months, the fate of the third largest economy in the world will be sealed. It could go anywhere from left, right, or even the same state that it is right now, going nowhere. It’s up to German voters to switch gears and give the green light to a new leader who can drive them back into prosperity, not into another red. 

Read more: 

• Christopher Schuetze, New York Times 

• Seán Clarke, The Guardian

• Sertac Aktan, Euronews 

• Thomas Escritt, Reuters 

• Jon Fleck et al., Atlantic Council 

• James Angelos et al., Politico

• Jens Thurau, Deutsche Welle 

• Kirsten Grieshaber, The Associated Press

On June 14, 1985, European leaders convening in the small Luxembourg village of Schengen dramatically reshaped the European continent for the decades to come. There, ministers from France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg signed an agreement establishing the Schengen Area, a free travel zone in which no border controls existed. By March of 2024, the Area had grown to include twenty-five out of the European Union’s twenty-seven members as well as eight additional non-EU members, widely being viewed as the most successful and extensive free travel zone ever established. 

Lately, however, the Schengen Area’s openness has become the target of many European governments. Due to concerns over irregular migration, several countries have used the agreement’s provisions to temporarily reinstate border controls. Moreover, some EU countries have even stalled efforts to expand the Area to new countries. As more countries join a growing list of Schengen Area skeptics, its prospects are bleaker than ever.

Migration concerns are at the heart of new Schengen Area restrictions. Over 385,000 migrants entered the continent in 2023 by irregular means (such as land crossings or, more commonly, by sea.) This has sparked public and political concerns that public services and housing would be significantly strained by new arrivals (although the validity of these concerns is debatable). As a result, parties espousing stricter immigration policies have found success all over the continent in recent years, many winning on pledges to keep out new migrant arrivals.

To act on these promises, Schengen Area members have begun to close their borders to varying degrees. In September, the German government officially reinstated border checks for individuals entering from the Netherlands and France, citing a surge in irregular migrant arrivals from those countries. Less than a month later, the Netherlands joined them, announcing their intention to conduct spot checks at the border. Both nations used a provision in the original Schengen agreement that allows for countries to temporarily reintroduce border controls for six months (and extend them for up to two years) in cases of threats to “internal security.”

Furthermore, an effort to restrict the Schengen Area’s expansion also spread among EU members. Bulgaria and Romania, two countries that have been members of the European Union since 2007, did not apply for Schengen Area membership until 2011. However, several countries led by Austria essentially vetoed their bid until late 2024, citing their status as migration hotspots.

While reintroducing internal border controls may offer some temporary relief, it will almost certainly fail to address the root causes of the migration crisis. Smuggling networks are adept at establishing new routes into countries like Germany, meaning that enforcing border checks will likely become a game of cat and mouse. Additionally, it could cause a sizable buildup of migrants in countries bordering those with closed borders if migrants choose not to risk the journey. This would undoubtedly increase tensions between EU member states, further dashing hopes that a strategy to equitably distribute migrants between EU members can be reached.

Schengen, Luxembourg prides itself as “the birthplace of a borderless Europe.” Unfortunately, Berlin and Amsterdam may be where it takes its last breath.

Read more here:

• Bernd Riegert, Deutsche Welle

• Kali Robinson, Diana Roy, and Sabine Baumgartner, Council on Foreign Relations

• Tara Varma and Sophie Roehse, Brookings Institution

• Riham Alkousaa, Reuters

• Euronews

• Laura Dubois and Marton Dunai, Financial Times

The office of the Mexican President seems to be a job that nobody truly desires, yet a revolving door of characters has taken it on. Amidst brutal systemic violence and horrific poverty, the role of president can indeed feel very isolating. That’s why Claudia Sheinbaum, Mexico’s first female president, now faces one of the most challenging jobs in world politics. Adding to the complexity is the re-election of Donald Trump as President of the United States, creating heightened tension across Mexico’s northern border. Trump’s proposed economic plans have disastrous implications for Mexico, and how Sheinbaum navigates this situation will set the tone for both her presidency and the nation's future.

In 2016, Trump won his first term while Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO) held office in Mexico City. During his presidency, Trump dismantled NAFTA, ending decades of U.S.-Mexico trade partnerships. Now, having been re-elected this November, Trump seeks to undo his own NAFTA replacement, the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). He has pledged to impose sweeping tariffs on goods imported from Mexico and Canada, with a specific focus on auto parts, threatening a 25% tariff. While the practicality of such threats is debatable, their implications are already being felt in Mexico City’s presidential palace.

Trump argues that these tariffs are necessary to revive 19th-century-style protectionism. However, he also demands that Mexico take stricter actions to combat cartel violence. Extreme violence has plagued every Mexican president since 2006, when then-President Felipe Calderón deployed soldiers to the streets to fight cartels. Sheinbaum, however, has made tangible progress. During her tenure as Mayor of Mexico City, the homicide rate dropped by 50%.

In addition to his demands on cartel enforcement, Trump has increased pressure on Sheinbaum to tighten immigration controls. With the looming threat of economic turmoil—given that the U.S. is Mexico’s largest trade partner—Sheinbaum is left with little room to maneuver. After Trump’s recent declarations, a flurry of diplomatic calls reached his Mar-a-Lago estate. Sheinbaum has threatened retaliation if the tariffs are implemented.

The specter of a North American trade war now looms, with potentially long-lasting and disastrous implications. For the already war-torn nation of Mexico, Claudia Sheinbaum’s strategies in the face of this crisis will shape not only her presidency but the future of a nation that has already endured the devastating effects of conflict.

• Katie Lobosco, CNN

• Douglas Rediker, Brookings

• Kate Linthikum, LA Times