app_store_button

google_play_button

DK - Details page - Device banner - 894x1036

Nyd den ubegrænsede adgang til tusindvis af spændende e- og lydbøger - helt gratis

Lyt når som helst, hvor som helst 

Global Dispatches

The longest running independent international affairs podcast features in-depth interviews with policymakers, journalists and experts around the world who discuss global news, international relations, global development and key trends driving world affairs.

Named by The Guardian as "a podcast to make you smarter," Global Dispatches is a podcast for people who crave a deeper understanding of international news.

Global Dispatches -- World News That Matters

Danes are reeling from the aggressive nature of Donald Trump's designs on Greenland — but there is little they can do to stop the United States from acquiring the territory, whether by force or coercion. This is an odd position for Denmark, which has long been one of America's staunchest allies, as well as a core member of the European Union and NATO.
 
My interview guest, Søren Lippert, is the CEO of an independent security policy think tank in Denmark, Ny Verden ("New World" in English). We kick off by briefly discussing the historic, cultural, and political relationship between Greenland and Denmark before moving into a longer conversation about the vast implications of America's aggressive posture toward Greenland. As he explains, Denmark, Europe, NATO, and the very foundations of the transatlantic alliance are all imperiled by Trump's quixotic desire to make Greenland part of the United States. 
 
Support the show.
 
https://www.globaldispatches.org/

The View from Denmark as Trump Threatens Greenland | Søren Lippert

Protests sweeping Iran are unlike anything the regime has faced since coming to power in 1979. What began as demonstrations by shopkeepers in Tehran over the sharply devalued Iranian rial quickly morphed into sustained, nationwide anti-government protests. The government responded with extreme brutality, killing thousands of people—and in doing so, once again put itself in the crosshairs of the United States. Donald Trump has publicly encouraged the protesters and is threatening military action against the Iranian government.
 
Could the United States strike Iran yet again? Why are Israel and America's Gulf allies—normally among the loudest advocates of confronting Tehran—suddenly urging restraint? And if the U.S. does launch a strike, how might Iran respond?
 
My guest today, Dalia Dassa Kaye, literally wrote the book on the long and fraught relationship between the United States and Iran. A senior fellow at the UCLA Burkle Center for International Relations and the author of Enduring Hostility: The Making of America's Iran Policy, she has spent years studying how escalatory cycles between Washington and Tehran unfold. We begin by discussing why this protest movement is fundamentally different from those that came before—and then examine why the military options now being debated in Washington are unlikely to produce their intended results.
 
As a crackdown intensifies in Iran and Trump weighs conducting strikes, this conversation gives you useful context for understanding events as they unfold.

Why a U.S. Strike Against Iran May Backfire

On Christmas Day, the United States launched a series of missile strikes in Nigeria, ostensibly against jihadist groups. In the weeks prior, Donald Trump had been claiming that Christians in Nigeria were being subjected to systematic attacks by such groups, and he framed these strikes as a "Christmas present" that killed jihadist leaders and destroyed terrorist camps. But that does not seem to have been the case.
 
The strikes largely targeted an area in northwest Nigeria that is not home to any major jihadist group, and credible independent analysts have not found evidence of any deaths. Last week, a New York Times report found unexploded Tomahawk missiles lying in a field.
 
So what is actually going on here? My guest today, Amaka Anku, is the head of Eurasia Group's Africa Practice. She was in Nigeria at the time of the strikes, which she said caused considerable bewilderment among Nigerians. We kick off by discussing what we know about the missile strikes and why the region targeted was politically convenient for both the American and Nigerian governments. We then have a longer conversation about what these American missile strikes say—and don't say—about Nigeria's multiple security challenges.
 
Support the show! https://www.globaldispatches.org/

The Curious Case of America's Christmas Day Missile Strikes in Nigeria

I'm joined by one of my favorite fellow podcasters and Substackers, Kaiser Kuo, host of the long-running Sinica Podcast, for a wide-ranging conversation on China, Venezuela, and America's shifting role in the world. We start by unpacking how trade ties between Venezuela and China have produced a deeply imbalanced relationship between Caracas and Beijing, before turning to Beijing's reaction to Trump's audacious move in Venezuela and the broader foreign-policy message it sends.
 
What does China make of this "Donroe Doctrine"? What does it mean for Beijing's claims in Asia, including Taiwan? And as the United States retreats from the liberal international order it once championed, is China prepared—or even willing—to step into the void?
 
https://www.globaldispatches.org/40percentoff

How China is Responding to the "Donroe Doctrine"

The Security Council convened an emergency meeting on Monday in response to American military operations in Venezuela that captured Nicolás Maduro and his wife— forcing dozens of countries to publicly respond to one of the most audacious U.S. actions in recent memory.
 
Anjali and Mark break down what unfolded in the chamber: which countries issued the strongest condemnations, which were more restrained, and which attempted to thread the needle between defending a core principle of the UN Charter and avoiding the wrath of Donald Trump. They also ask a larger question: can an American foreign policy openly premised on hemispheric domination, resource extraction, and territorial expansion coexist with a United Nations designed to prevent exactly that? Is this an existential moment for the UN? Can the rules-based international order survive? And why has Somalia's UN ambassador suddenly landed in MAGA crosshairs? We discuss all this—and more!
 
https://www.globaldispatches.org/40percentoff

Is This an Existential Moment for the United Nations? | To Save Us From Hell

In a stunning U.S. military operation carried out in the early hours of Saturday, January 3rd, American forces captured Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife. As of Saturday afternoon Eastern Time, the two were en route to New York, where they are expected to face criminal charges tied to a U.S. indictment issued roughly five years ago.
 
The operation follows months of escalating confrontation between Washington and Caracas. The Trump administration had already carried out military strikes on vessels accused of drug smuggling and seized oil tankers off Venezuela's coast. Hours after Maduro's capture, President Trump declared that the United States would now "run Venezuela," offering few details—but repeatedly emphasizing that the U.S. would soon control the country's vast oil reserves.
 
To help us understand what just happened and what may come next, I'm joined from Bogotá, Colombia by Elizabeth Dickinson, deputy director for Latin America at the International Crisis Group. We discuss what is known so far about the operation, the risks facing Venezuela in the days ahead, and why this moment bears uncomfortable similarities to the U.S. overthrow of Saddam Hussein and the occupation of Iraq more than two decades ago.
 
Support Global Dispatches with your paid subscription! https://www.globaldispatches.org/

The U.S. Just Toppled Nicolás Maduro. Here Are the Major Risks

In 2022, countries agreed to negotiate an international treaty to end plastics pollution. They gave themselves a two-year deadline to finalize the treaty text — and needless to say, that deadline has not been met.
 
The conventional wisdom is that these treaty negotiations are hopelessly gridlocked, with some countries pushing for a wide-ranging agreement while others insist on something far more narrow. But according to my guest today, Maria Ivanova, there is a potential path forward.
 
Maria Ivanova is one of the world's leading experts on international environmental treaties. She is the Director of the School of Public Policy and Urban Affairs at Northeastern University and Co-Director of the Plastics Center at Northeastern. We kick off discussing the fundamentally global nature of plastics pollution — and why this treaty process was launched when it was in 2022. We then turn to a longer conversation about the key geopolitical divisions that have stymied progress, before Maria Ivanova explains how countries might move beyond seemingly intractable positions and finally kickstart progress toward a binding international treaty on plastics pollution.

How to Revive a Global Plastics Pollution Treaty | When Treaties Work

Today's episode is produced in partnership with the Global Challenges Foundation. The Foundation is dedicated to raising awareness of global catastrophic risks and strengthening global governance to address them. Global Challenges Foundation's 2026 Global Catastrophic Risks report outlines five of the biggest risks facing humanity today, including ecological collapse, the topic of this episode. You can find this report at globalchallenges.org/gcr-2026. 
 
Two of the authors of the chapter on ecological collapse are my guests today. David Obura is the director of CORDIO East Africa, a nonprofit research organization based in Kenya, and chair of the Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. Eva Mineur is head of climate and sustainability at Global Challenges Foundation.
 
We kick off by discussing what we mean by ecological collapse and examining examples of this phenomenon already underway around the world, before turning to a longer conversation about how to strengthen international cooperation and global governance to prevent ecological collapse—and the catastrophe it would entail.

How to Prevent Ecological Collapse | Global Catastrophic Risks

Your very own To Save Us From Hell co-host Anjali Dayal briefed the United Nations Security Council on Monday! She was paired with former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon for a special meeting of the Council dedicated to examining the role of the Secretary-General and the process for selecting Antonio Guterres's successor. Anjali gives co-host Mark Leon Goldberg a behind-the-scenes account of what it's like to sit in the briefers' chair at the famous horseshoe table and shares highlights from the meeting.
 
After the paywall, Mark and Anjali discuss a glowing New Yorker profile of International Atomic Energy Agency chief—and UN Secretary-General candidate—Rafael Grossi. It's certainly a PR coup for the Argentine, but does PR really matter when it comes to running for UN Secretary-General? We discuss!
 
And one more thing: this is the 50th episode of To Save Us From Hell. Fifty episodes of deep dives into power, politics, and the UN's place in the world. Huge thanks to everyone who listens—and especially to our paid subscribers, who make this show possible. If you've been on the fence, now's the moment: grab a paid subscription using the discount link below, get access to our full episodes and support the show with a cult following around the UN!
 
https://www.globaldispatches.org/40percentoff

To Save Us From Hell | Anjali Addresses the Security Council! Plus: Rafael Grossi Gets "The New Yorker" Profile Treatment

In 1998, 120 countries came together to adopt the Rome Statute, creating what would become the International Criminal Court. Four years later, that treaty entered into force, and the ICC officially opened its doors as a permanent court tasked with prosecuting individuals accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity.
 
Now, looking around the world today, it's clear the ICC has not put an end to war crimes or crimes against humanity. But even so, the court—and the treaty that created it—have profoundly shaped international politics in ways that are often overlooked.
 
My guest today is Mark Kersten. He's a Senior Consultant with the Wayamo Foundation and an Assistant Professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of the Fraser Valley in British Columbia. We start with a brief history of the ICC, and then dig into how the court has influenced not just legal definitions of war crimes and crimes against humanity, but how states themselves behave.
 
When we spoke, Mark had just returned from the ICC's annual Assembly of States Parties—the court's main governing body. He explains why that meeting offers a window into some of the biggest challenges the ICC now faces, including the very real possibility of U.S. sanctions—not just against individual court officials, but against the institution itself.
 
This episode is produced in partnership with Lex International Fund, a philanthropic initiative dedicated to strengthening international law to solve global challenges. It's part of our ongoing series highlighting the real-world impact of treaties on state behavior, called "When Treaties Work."

When Treaties Work | The Rome Statute for the International Criminal Court

Last week, the Polish Senate passed a law that would make it a criminal offense to claim that Poland was complicit in Nazi crimes. The Israeli government strongly opposed this measure, as do most people who care about honest academic discourse. Nevertheless, the measure was passed and now awaits the signature of the president to become law. 
 
 When I caught up with my guest today, Monika Mazur-Rafał, Poland's lower house had recently passed the law and as Monika explains the public debate and discourse about it was heavily colored by invocations of ethnic nationalism and hate speech. Monika is the director of Humanity in Action-Poland, which is an organization that seeks to promote pluralism and cosmopolitan values. As she explains the use of hate speech around this particular public debate is just one manifestation of a trend that has increased sharply in recent years. 
 In fact a public survey, which Monika describes in detail, finds that Polish people's exposure to hate speech has increased dramatically with the coming to power of the far right wing Law and Justice party. She explains that dynamic, and the relationship between anti-semitism, homophobia, islamophobia and racism and the electoral success of the ruling Law and Justice Party. Needless to say, there are some interesting and disturbing parallels to what is happening in Poland and what happened during the 2016 election in the United States. Finally, Monika explains what organizations like Humanity in Action are doing to counter this disturbing trend.

Hate Speech is on the Rise in Poland

Lyt når som helst, hvor som helst

Other podcasts you might like ...