Latest Foreign Policy Posts

Saudi’s investments in sports, in particular, has been labeled “sportswashing” and a way for the Saudi Arabian government to increase its publicity and popularity in the world while also maintaining a regime that violates human rights. Their move into new sectors and industries has also been a part of their Saudi Vision 2030 program which aims to diversify their entire economy away from traditional fossil fuels (which has propped their economies for decades) and transition into a post-oil world. Is the move to purchase EA a new moment of economic diversification, or is it more in the way of “sportswashing”? The answer isn’t totally clear.

On August 15, after his meeting with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump said it had been “a great and very successful day in Alaska.” In phone calls with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, European leaders, and NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, Trump added that his talks with Putin had gone “very well.” He later wrote: “It was determined by all that the best way to end the horrific war between Russia and Ukraine is to go directly to a peace agreement, which would end the war, and not a mere ceasefire agreement, which oftentimes does not hold up.”

Relatives of people killed by Israeli fire while they were waiting to receive humanitarian aid mourn outside al-Shifa hospital in Gaza City. Photograph: Anadolu/Getty Images

Under the Trump administration, U.S. policy has shifted in tone, language, and substance: Washington has openly embraced Israeli priorities while sidelining Palestinian rights and claims. What had long been presented as a balancing act—security guarantees for Israel paired with a rhetorical commitment to Palestinian statehood—has become a policy that favors one side almost exclusively.

Trump’s egregious pre-election claim that he could “end the war in a day” between Russia and Ukraine has instead resulted in Russia’s huge surge of attacks on Ukraine and an increasing number of civilian deaths. While Trump often tries to deflect his responsibility for handling this war onto past U.S. presidents, he is now in fact the commander in chief and must take action to support an ally in Ukraine, help prevent further carnage, and demonstrate American democratic mettle vis-a-vis a ruthless dictator in Putin.   

In the summer of 2025, President Donald Trump became the centerpiece of a surreal global spectacle: a campaign to nominate him for the Nobel Peace Prize. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lauded Trump for supposedly brokering stability in conflict zones, and Cambodia’s deputy prime minister praised him for his role in a temporary ceasefire with Thailand. The White House eagerly embraced this narrative, touting Trump as a global peacemaker and repeatedly pointing to “six major conflicts” that he allegedly helped resolve.

South Sudan is the youngest country in the world in terms of its autonomous foundation. Once part of Sudan, it achieved semi-autonomy in 2005 after years of brutal civil war as part of its now northern neighbor. Eventually, under referendum, the people of South Sudan voted for absolute autonomy in 2011, legally breaking away from Sudan.

Palestinians in Gaza are now experiencing full blown famine as the total Israeli blockade, which for months made the extreme situation in the strip even worse as no food, water, medicine or fuel has been allowed to make its way into the strip. International humanitarian aid organizations, the UN and a majority of countries around the world acknowledge the forced starvation taking place in Gaza and expressed condemnation towards the Israeli government. Meanwhile various Israeli officials continue to deny the existence of mass starvation, claiming without evidence that Hamas steals and hoards aid and hinges blame on failures by the UN and its officials.

Those who have a casual understanding of history or geopolitics may react agreeably to the concept: the greater abundance of natural resources a country has the more well-off the people of that country will be. Unfortunately, for Nigerians, the opposite is their reality. The abundance of oil in Nigeria, along with their colonial history, has resulted in a “resource curse,” a theory posited by contemporary international relations scholars. Nigeria now finds its economy reliant on the export of oil and renting their oil fields to multinational corporations (MNCs), leading to a commodity industry based on corruption and wealth centralization.