Foreign Policy & Security

Episode 2 : Ukraine Talks, Japan's New Prime Minister, U.S.-Australia Ties

October 24, 2025— Hosts Dhruva Jaishankar and Rachel Rizzo delve into the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, highlighting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's recent visit to D.C. and Putin-Trump talks. They also cover the recent election of Japan's first female Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, and U.S.-Australia relations with focuses on rare earth agreements and the AUKUS pact.

Available on Spotify and Apple Podcasts

Transcript

Sneak Peek

Rachel Rizzo: I think this created a situation where Putin really blinked and got on the phone with Trump and there was some discussion about the two sides potentially meeting in Budapest, but that meeting has been scrapped for now.

Dhruva Jaishankar: So you've had now the past few years a series of short-lived prime ministers, each of whom who has been quite unpopular. But the opposition parties are even more so and don't have enough the numbers to actually form a credible opposition.

Rachel Rizzo: Keeping it in the Indo-Pacific, but moving it south a little bit, we had a major visit this week with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. So were you watching that? How did that go? What was the point of this visit? I didn't even know he was in town. I don't think a lot of people did.

Welcome to Around The World

Dhruva Jaishankar: Hi, I'm Dhruva Jaishankar.

Rachel Rizzo: And I'm Rachel Rizzo. Welcome to the Around the World podcast. Your essential guide to understanding the forces shaping our world today. Every week, we cut through the noise to bring you clear, insightful analysis of the most important developments in geopolitics.

Dhruva Jaishankar: Whether it's security challenges across Europe, shifting power dynamics in Asia, domestic updates from the United States, or regional updates from Latin America or the Middle East, we make sure you're up to speed on what's happening and more importantly, why it matters.

Rachel Rizzo: Thanks for tuning in.

Dhruva Jaishankar: It's been an interesting week as usual. We've had a burglary in the Louvre, which is something out of Ocean's Eleven. Iceland recorded its first mosquitoes, a sign of global warming. RIP D'Angelo,

Rachel Rizzo: Super newsy stuff. Lots of lots going on.

Zelensky Comes to Town

Dhruva Jaishankar: Yes, yes, yes, so a lot of important things, but let's bring it to something that's on a lot of people's minds is a war still going on in Ukraine. Ukrainian President Zelensky was in Washington, D.C. he met with President Trump. How did that go?

Rachel Rizzo: So there's a couple things here. First, the meeting was not as a much of a public disaster as the meeting between Zelensky and Trump in November. Remember that one took place in the Oval Office. It was super public. It devolved really quickly. This one was behind closed doors and reports indicate that it got just as contentious, especially because Zelensky is hoping to get more support from the United States on the ongoing war. And again, this meeting devolved into like map throwing and some arguments between both negotiating sides and Zelensky walked away with nothing yet again. So not great, but not as bad as the meeting went back in February. So at least that's a positive development. Pretty low bar, unfortunately, yeah.

Dhruva Jaishankar: That's a very low bar.

Rachel Rizzo: Pretty low bar unfortunately, yeah.

Dhruva Jaishankar: What do you think is animating Trump's... What are the major points of disagreement here?

Rachel Rizzo: OK, so there are a few things here. The first is that you talk to a lot of people who focus on Europe, who focus on Ukraine, and they'll say that Trump is always flip-flopping on his position with Ukraine. And I actually don't think that's true. The one consistent thing about Trump is that I don't think he really cares whether or not Ukraine specifically wins this war. What he cares about is that his team is able to get a win for his administration. Now this meeting with Zelensky came on the heels of a couple things. The first was, as we talked about last week, this ceasefire between Hamas and Israel, which is tenuous at best. But it also came on the heels of a two hour phone conversation with Putin. Now a couple weeks ago, there were discussions being floated about potentially having the United States send long range Tomahawk missiles to the Ukrainians and letting them use them. And I think this created a situation where Putin really blinked and got on the phone with Trump and there was some discussion about the two sides potentially meeting in Budapest, but that meeting has been scrapped for now. So there's just a lot of, this is a quick moving conflict. It's still going on. Russia continues to bombard Ukraine and it still shows an unseriousness or an unwillingness to really come to the table.

Dhruva Jaishankar: Yeah, so they spoke, Putin and Trump spoke about a potential meeting in Budapest. It was announced Trump kind of announced it. There's some significance to Budapest being a European Union country, Hungary being a European Union country, a NATO member. But Viktor Orban, the leader of Hungary, has been more sympathetic than most European and EU and NATO countries and NATO leaders to Russia, right? So there was a self-significance of where they met. But why did that meeting get scrapped then?

Rachel Rizzo: So it seems as though the meeting got scrapped because there were not really going to be any deliverables in this meeting because there is still too much daylight between Ukraine and Russia in terms of what both sides are looking to get out of a potential ceasefire negotiation and where the two sides actually are. So I think Donald Trump and his team wanted to avoid an Alaska 2.0. Now, Alaska was, course, where Putin and Trump met a couple of months ago. And it was this, you know, he literally rolled out the red carpet for Putin thinking that they were going to walk away with some sort of negotiation or some sort of settlement and instead walked away with nothing. And I think you can blame that on a few things. The first is just, as I said before, Putin doesn't want to negotiate. This war gets to the heart of like Russian identity for him and his legacy and the legacy of like Russian imperialism. The second is that I think Steve Witkoff and his negotiating team kind of oversold to Trump what the Russians were willing to come to the table with in August. And so instead ahead of this potential meeting, Trump and his team sent Marco Rubio to talk to Lavrov, and I think out of that meeting it became very clear that there really is nowhere to go as of now. So what happens now? The US sanctioned two major Russian oil companies today, Luke Oil and Rosneft. So that's good. It still isn't sending Tomahawk missiles, although I don't think that's totally off the table. There's a big question about whether Europe will be able to use these frozen Russian assets that they're holding in a Belgian bank to provide loans to Ukraine for its recovery. So lots of big questions and stuff that we will cover in, I'm sure, the coming weeks and months because unfortunately I don't think this war is going anywhere anytime soon.

Dhruva Jaishankar: And those sanctions that were rolled out are going to have effects on the global oil markets. In fact, it's something being watched in India as well because there will be some potential spillover effects for global oil prices and for India as well.

Rachel Rizzo: Yeah, and I think there's been obviously frustration in India because as we remember, when this full-scale invasion happened in 2022, there was a push by the West to have India purchase Russian oil to keep global oil markets stable as other entities like the EU weaned themselves off of Russian oil. So it puts India in a difficult spot. But again, I'm sure that there will be plenty to talk about on this front for the time to come.

Japan Elects a New PM

Rachel Rizzo: And then I wanted to turn to you to look even further east than Ukraine and Russia, kind of focusing on the Indo-Pacific a little bit this week.

Dhruva Jaishankar: Yep.

Rachel Rizzo: And there's two major developments. The first is that there is a new Japanese prime minister. Tell us about her.

Dhruva Jaishankar: Mm-hmm. Yep. Yeah, so the Japan elected this week its first female prime minister, Sanae Takaichi. This is actually her third bid for a leadership position for leadership of her party, the LDP, and consequently the prime ministership. This made her the first female and a lot of the commentary is focused on a few things. One, her being the first female. Two, her being very conservative and three, some of the personal quirks in her personality. But just a little bit of background on this. So the Liberal Democratic Party, the LDP, has pretty much had a lock on politics in Japan for the past 70 years or so. And what ended up happening while it consistently formed the government, it was basically a series of factions within the LDP that kind of jostled for power. And they had a sort of informal system of rotating the leadership amongst these factions. And so if you had enough of the factions aligned on something, they would help appoint the new leader. This kind of got disrupted. There were a couple of sort of interregnums in between short periods when non-LDP coalitions formed but they were short lived. Then over the past two decades, two figures kind of came to dominate Japanese politics. First Junichiro Koizumi who was prime minister for quite a while, very popular, and then Shinzo Abe, who really sort of dominated Japanese politics. And the sort of faction system kind of broke down a little bit. Now, with Abe's assassination, he was assassinated shortly after he stepped down as prime minister. There were number of scandals that the LDP was involved in, including one involving the universal church and funding around this, which made the LDP really unpopular. And so you've had now the past few years a series of short-lived prime ministers, each of whom who has been quite unpopular. But the opposition parties are even more so, and don't have enough the numbers to actually form a credible opposition. I would just put Takaichi in as part of a series of likely short-lived prime ministers in this very unusual political terrain where the LDP is deeply unpopular and yet the opposition is too weak to actually provide a credible alternative.

Rachel Rizzo: Is it sort of like in the US where in 2016 we had Hillary Clinton running against Donald Trump and a lot of people voted for Donald Trump not because they liked him but because they really didn't like Hillary Clinton and there weren't any other options? Could you kind of compare it to that a little bit or is it just a different political system?

Dhruva Jaishankar: You know, I think it's a parliamentary system, so it's very difficult. I think the US politics won't offer an easy analogy where you have, again, a dominant incumbent party that is so unpopular and yet, again, no credible, serious opposition that's likely to form a true alternative for the long run. So I'm not sure there's a good US analogy to it, but I'm sure you can find something in British or some other politics. Actually, maybe British politics today offers something of a parallel.

Rachel Rizzo: Well, yeah. It could and so I also kind of road tested this comparison earlier with one of my friends who works on Asia and works on Japan and it seems like maybe you could sort of compare this new prime minister. She's sort of like maybe a Japanese Meloni where Meloni is like right wing and some might say far right. She is like very traditional in her values but is also kind of liberal internationalist in her approach. Like she's supported Ukraine, supports NATO and the EU. So, you know, there's this comparison that people draw between like what a prime minister does at home and how right-wing they might be and how that translates to what kind of policies they stand for on the world stage. So I wonder if that's maybe something to watch for.

Dhruva Jaishankar: So we'll see about that. I mean, at least Meloni is quite popular now at home in the sense that she's got enough of a mandate now that she's going to be a figure and she's not in a precarious position. We still have to see about Takaichi now. A couple of things on that front, though. One is she'll have an early opportunity to meet Trump. Trump is going to Japan as part of his Asian swing. He's going to Seoul. He'll likely meet Xi Jinping there, amongst others, for the APEC summit. So he is doing an early visit to Japan. And so an early test of the new prime minister will be this visit on the diplomatic side. There will be security and trade issues on the agenda when they meet. And so she will be tested quite early and her ultimately her management of the economy and this of tricky diplomacy will be this early test. Another thing to watch out for just on the domestic side, her biggest challenger is Shinjirō Koizumi who is the son of Junichiro Koizumi, who I mentioned earlier, who was very popular prime minister. And he is sort of like the first, might be the first millennial leader of Japan. He's kind of been groomed for this. He's made two or three bids now for the leadership position and fallen just short, but he's taking over the portfolio of defense minister.

Rachel Rizzo: Oh interesting.

Dhruva Jaishankar: And that's a sort of really interesting you know, particularly at this time where there's this emphasis on defense spending, moving him to a serious portfolio. And he was again, the most likely credible challenger to Takaichi. That's a space to watch.

Rachel Rizzo: And then of course, another issue to watch is Japan-Korea relations.

Dhruva Jaishankar: Yeah, so that'll be another test of Takaichi. So interesting thing has happened. Korea recently elected a new president, Lee Jae-Myung. He's a really interesting character. He came from a very humble background, union leader. He's with the Democratic Party of Korea. And this has historically been a faction that has been more skeptical of the US alliance, but also more skeptical of relations with Japan. And these issues, these historical issues between Japan and Korea have often bubbled up to the surface under this dispensation. In theory, a sort of center-left leader in Korea, a right wing leader in Japan might be the kind of combination that would lead to a resurfacing of some of these issues that many had thought had been put to bed. again, there's something the Biden administration did a lot. They held a trilateral summit in Camp David- US, Japan, Korea. And that was really an attempt of putting to bed a lot of the historical distrust between Japan and Korea. So one of the things to look forward to now you have new governments in the United States, Japan, Korea. Different parties in all these places, not in Japan, but different parties in the other two.

Rachel Rizzo: Mm-hmm.

Dhruva Jaishankar: How much can this hold? The early signs are actually quite positive for the Japan-Korea relationship. One of the first places the new Korean President Lee visited was Japan. He then came to the United States, had a relatively good meeting with President Trump. One thing, however, while they may be able to manage those historical differences, other factors have now come into play. Tariffs, of course, being one, but also the arrest of these Korean workers at a factory in the United States, which is still dominating headlines in Korea.

Rachel Rizzo: Oh yeah.

Dhruva Jaishankar: Anyway, all of this means that we're in a very interesting place to watch as Trump goes to Japan first and then goes on to Korea.

A Bit More South of the Indo-Pacific

Rachel Rizzo: Yeah, and obviously with this administration, the Indo-Pacific and the states within it are both a geographical focus, but also a bilateral focus for them as well. you know, keeping it in the Indo-Pacific, but moving it south a little bit, we had a major visit this week with Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese. So were you watching that? How did that go? What was the point of this visit? I didn't even know he was in town. I don't think a lot of people did.

Dhruva Jaishankar: I did because I actually got stuck behind his motorcade at one point.

Rachel Rizzo: Okay, fair.

Dhruva Jaishankar: So I was late to something because I saw this Australian motorcade go by. So I did actually know he was in town. It also got overshadowed by another thing, which is Trump went after Australia's ambassador to the United States, former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd. And we had a slightly Zelensky-like moment in the White House where he said, I know you said bad things about me. And it led to a little bit of tension that's been all over the Australian press. But the two important reasons, one is there's a feeling in Australia that the United States under Trump in the second term is really not paying enough attention to them. There's a little bit of so they're hoping to get some of that back. But two things to look out for. One, there was an agreement on rare earths, which is one thing that really animates this White House. They care for some reasonable, you know, well, good reason in some ways because of the China concerns. They care about rare earths. So they’ve reached an agreement. Australia has more active rare earth exploration projects than any other country. So a lot of potential.

Rachel Rizzo: Mm-hmm.

Dhruva Jaishankar: So they've agreed to a smallish, significant but still small capital infusion to invest, but more importantly, a sort of price management mechanism to counter Chinese dumping because essentially what China has been doing is flooding the market at certain times to undercut and essentially make it financially not viable to invest in rare earths. So that's one of the things that there is now some coordination mechanism for managing prices for rare earths. And the other significant thing about this visit was Trump essentially seemed to greenlight AUKUS. And this is an agreement, a US-Australia-UK agreement that was signed under the Biden administration. It has survived changes in government in both Australia and the UK. And it's a somewhat controversial project, mostly for the expense, to do two things. One, help Australia acquire nuclear-powered submarines. This is called Pillar 1 of AUKUS.

Rachel Rizzo: Yep.

Dhruva Jaishankar: And this would give their submarines reach into the Northern Pacific in a way that they can't currently achieve that. And the second aspect is to collaborate in certain critical technologies and that's already starting to reap some dividends. So that's essentially the green light on AUKUS, which the Trump administration had been reviewing and this rare earth agreements were two of the highlights of this visit.

Rachel Rizzo: Ok, and I think probably at some point it would be worth it for us to do a deep dive on AUKUS because this was such a huge part of the Biden administration. I remember when this was announced a few years ago, how upset the French were.

Dhruva Jaishankar: Yes.

Rachel Rizzo: They were so upset, actually, that the French ambassador to the US canceled a major party at his house, which is like everyone looks forward to this and everyone was so upset about it. And so, I think for our listeners and people who tune in who don't know the background on AUKUS, we'll do a deep dive in that sometime soon. obviously lots of stuff to keep watching here. We also have a major high level EU summit happening in Brussels next Tuesday. So we'll be watching that really closely and can give you some updates next Friday on what comes out of that meeting. Our listeners will keep you up to date on the latest happenings on this in geopolitics. Be sure to tune in every Friday, especially next Friday for the latest episodes.

Dhruva Jaishankar: As always, thank you for joining us on the Around the World podcast and we'll see you next week.

Episode 1 : Gaza Hostage Deal, U.S.-China Trade War, French PM

October 17, 2025 — Hosts Dhruva Jaishankar and Rachel Rizzo discuss the recent ceasefire agreement in the Middle East, the ongoing U.S.-China trade war, and political turmoil in France in the premiere episode of Around the World with Dhruva Jaishankar and Rachel Rizzo.

Available on Spotify and Apple Podcasts.

Transcript

Sneak Peek

Rachel Rizzo: I think that there's two sides here. There's this question of Hamas disarming, whether it's willing to do that or not, big questions about the political future of Gaza, rival factions within the Gaza Strip, and also how Israel decides to respond to this and how the United States decides to respond as well.

Welcome to Around the World

Dhruva Jaishankar: Hi, I'm Dhruva Jaishankar.

Rachel Rizzo: And I'm Rachel Rizzo. Welcome to the Around the World podcast. Your essential guide to understanding the forces shaping our world today. Every week, we cut through the noise to bring you clear, insightful analysis of the most important developments in geopolitics.

Dhruva Jaishankar: Whether it's security challenges across Europe, shifting power dynamics in Asia, domestic updates from the United States, or regional updates from Latin America or the Middle East, we make sure you're up to speed on what's happening and more importantly, why it matters.

Rachel Rizzo: Thanks for tuning in.

Recent Developments in the Middle East

Dhruva Jaishankar: The big news story over the past seven days or so has been President Trump's whirlwind trip to the Middle East and a landmark announcement which he made.

Rachel Rizzo: Yep.

Dhruva Jaishankar: This is the first step towards what seems to be something much more broad, a sort more durable solution to what has been a two-year conflict. Maybe to start us off by talking about what exactly we saw happen between Hamas and Israel, a really quite significant development over the past few days.

Rachel Rizzo: Yeah, I mean, it's hugely significant, but I think we have to give it some time to see actually how it develops. Now, of course, Trump is already taking a huge victory lap saying things like this is transformative and it's a new dawn for the Middle East. But, you know, he's not the first president to say this about the region. And so I think we have to just take that in stride. But you're totally right. It's been a big week. There was a ceasefire agreement brokered by Trump in Egypt. He's declared that the war is over. And on Monday, the final 20 living Israeli hostages that were held by Hamas since October 7th, 2023 were released and returned to Israeli medical staff. And in exchange for the hostages, Israel released about 1,700 Palestinian detainees held without charge and about 250 Palestinian prisoners. So big developments here, but I think there's still — It's still tenuous and we're not exactly sure where it's gonna go.

Dhruva Jaishankar: And that's actually interesting. On the one hand, it was really significant just seeing the footage and the videos of families being reunited on both sides. This has obviously been a really terrible few years for them. But yet, I think there are still a lot of questions that remain, including about still the continuing exchange of those hostages. There's still, I think, a few who haven't been identified and some bodies that are difficult to reclaim.

Rachel Rizzo: Yeah, and this is where we're already starting to see the potential fractures in this very delicate ceasefire. Hamas was supposed to return all living and deceased hostages within the first 72 hours, but they've handed over only about a third of the remaining 28 deceased hostages at this time. And basically Hamas is saying that it needs special equipment to access the remaining remains because they're buried under rubble. And you can already see the Israelis starting to say that this is Hamas trying to sidestep the ceasefire agreement. At the same time, what we've also seen is Israel restricting humanitarian aid entering Gaza. So there's only about 300 aid trucks entering instead of the agreed upon 600 and the Rafah border with Egypt remains closed due to the dispute over deceased hostages.

Dhruva Jaishankar: So, still, I mean, already a few challenges. And it seems like in Gaza, there's been some violence not involving Israel that has erupted between different factions. The Israeli military preparations also seem to be continuing. Is that correct?

Rachel Rizzo: Yeah, it is. And I think this is something to watch really closely. I mean, part of this 20-point plan that Donald Trump and his team, Jared Kushner, Steve Witkoff came up with, one of the points of that was that Hamas has to de-arm itself. And now I think the big question is, is it willing to do that? Who else would be the governing body in Gaza if not Hamas?

If they did de-arm, who would they de-arm to? I mean, where are all these weapons going to go? And what is really the driving force behind Hamas making that decision? And so I think there's a lot of questions that are left on the table. President Trump has also said that Israeli forces could resume fighting in Gaza, “soon as he says the word”, if Hamas doesn't uphold the ceasefire.

So I think that there's two sides here. There's this question of Hamas disarming, whether it's willing to do that or not, big questions about the political future of Gaza, rival factions within the Gaza Strip, and also how Israel decides to respond to this and how the United States decides to respond as well. So I think that we can have delicate celebrations at the moment, but understand that this is just the start of a very long road ahead.

Dhruva Jaishankar: And what are we to make of the meeting, I think it was in Sharm el-Sheikh in Egypt, where Netanyahu wasn't there. Trump presided over a number of leaders, European leaders - Macron, Keir Starmer came for that. A number of Arab leaders came for that. And what are we to make of that ceremony as well?

Rachel Rizzo: Well, I think, you know, we're on the heels of a major meeting in September, which was the UN General Assembly. And we have seen multiple European countries recognize Palestinian statehood. This has been a huge, not just geopolitical issue, but it has stepped into domestic politics around Europe as well. So we see a lot of support from leaders like Macron, like Keir Starmer, like Friedrich Merz in Germany, who really want to be a part of this potential ceasefire and potential future peace for this region. Now, again, I think that Donald Trump really sees himself as the center of these discussions. And in many ways, I think he is. I think that he and his team deserve credit here. But again, as I've said before, this is only the framework. This is only the start. And it's going to take agreements and it's going to take effort on many sides, not just Israel and Gaza, but the U.S. and European leaders as well to really bring this forward so lots to watch and we'll keep an eye on it over certainly the next few weeks and the next few months.

U.S.-China Trade War: Economic Implications

But another, you know, shifting the topic a little bit - that's sort of what's going on in the Middle East and it's taking up a lot of the new space. But we're here based in Washington and a big conversation for us has also been on the economic front. All these geopolitical developments in the Middle East are happening at the same time as this U.S.-China trade war seems to be resuming. So maybe we can shift gears a little bit and extrapolate sort of what those geopolitical tensions have meant for this U.S.-China trade war and what you're watching on that front economically.

Dhruva Jaishankar: Yeah, the two conflicts obviously that have continued to preoccupy a lot of people's time and attention, which is the Middle East war between Israel Gaza. But that has now spread across the region in various ways, affecting Israeli strikes on Iran and Yemen, and has had wider implications. And then, of course, the Ukraine war that continues. But I think the big geostrategic trend to be watching, which doesn't get the front pages, obviously, is really what's taking place between the United States and China.

The two largest economies, largest militaries, or most potent militaries in some ways around the world, that are jostling for power internationally. And yet, what's somewhat ironic is that the bilateral trade volume between the United States and China is huge. It's a trillion dollars, massive bilateral trade. It is also very unbalanced trade. And this is important because this is something that Trump has really made an issue, which is the United States has a large trade deficit, goods trade deficit with China.

Because of the competition between them, growing competition between them, both are trying to, in their own ways, decouple from each other and de-risk in critical areas where they realize that they have vulnerabilities on each other. China has certain vulnerabilities. They need certain items from the United States. They need market access in certain areas. And then similarly, the United States has some critical vulnerabilities. And just to give a sense of how complex these interdependencies are, the integrated supply chains: You buy an electronic item in the United States or anywhere in the world today, or advanced machinery of any kind, and it's quite likely, just to give examples, that this has been precision manufactured in or assembled in a place like Taiwan or Korea, which in turn is based on equipment made in Germany or the Netherlands or Japan, which in turn relies on raw materials that are processed in China or Ukraine or the United States, but which is then mined in Chile or Congo or Japan or China. And all of this relies on software that's sometimes designed by U.S. headquartered firms or encoded by coders in India. So this is a very complex integrated global supply chain that results in certain items that are critically needed, whether it's an average consumer or whether it's a sort of advanced military or otherwise sensitive equipment. So this is, I think, the backdrop to the decoupling we're starting to see.

Rachel Rizzo: Well, just to follow up on that, I think it was Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent this week who was doing an interview. Obviously, it's the IMF-World Bank annual meetings here in D.C. this week, and he was doing an interview. And he said this economic competition is not China versus the United States or the United States versus China. This is China against the world. Is that accurate or like how are you viewing comments like that that are coming out of the Trump administration?

Dhruva Jaishankar: Well, you know, Bessent’s comment represent a slight change in tenor over what we've seen over the past few months, which is in some ways the United States was trying to take on the world. But I'm just going try and contextualize this a little bit. In some ways, what he says is right, which is China today has the manufacturing power, which is disproportionate to its share of the global economy. It is in many ways the factory of the world. So many supply chains run at least partially through China today that it's very hard for anyone, not just the United States, to disentangle themselves. With the exception of some component manufacturers in East Asia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and raw material exporters, almost every other major economy has a massive trade deficit with China. So in that sense, he's not off. Let me just take this back. When the Trump administration came in earlier this year, they decided to use a pretty blunt instrument, tariffs, to try and renegotiate economic terms of engagement with much of the world.

At one point in time, tariffs on China exceeded 100%. Now, China did something quite clever in some ways, which is they decided to cut off supplies for rare earths, or threatened to cut off supplies. That led to a reconsideration within Trump's economic team, where they realized that certain critical items that they were really operating, they had a few weeks of supply, and in certain really crucial areas. They realized there was this really key vulnerability that China was exploiting and using as leverage. There were then talks in the spring and summer between U.S and Chinese delegations at the cabinet level in Geneva, in London, in Stockholm, extending into the summer. And the tariffs came down as part of these negotiations, the tariffs came down, U.S tariffs on China, to 30 % average. The United States also resumed advanced semiconductor exports to China, which was something that was quite controversial, even amongst many Republicans in the United States.

In September, there were a round of talks in Madrid, and what appears to have happened is the two sides agreed to a kind of ceasefire until Trump and Xi met in person, and they were expected to meet in Seoul on the sidelines of the APEC summit that's coming up soon. And the two sides appeared to believe that they had an understanding on a few critical areas of contention, on rare earth exports from China, on advanced chips from the United States, on the sale of TikTok in the United States, and on tariffs. China was hoping for this pause until Xi and Trump met. And then a couple of things happened quickly, which was one, the U.S. Commerce Department expanded its entity list, which is a list of countries that require license for export companies. Then the other thing is they separately, they were looking at increasing and applying this fee on Chinese ships docking at U.S. ports. China believes that this was kind of a violation of this understanding that they had brokered and has now tried to exert leverage on rare earths and pretty sweeping potential restrictions. So Beijing believes it has the upper hand here and this is, I think why tensions have kind of escalated in the past week or so.

Rachel Rizzo: So just to bring us back to basics for a little bit for those who might be listening that don't follow the economic relationship between China and the United States as closely as you've been following it. These debates around tariffs, around the Chinese export of rare earths, decreasing those exports. I mean, does this all just come down to who has the ability to make the most powerful semiconductors, which then go into making the most powerful technologies, which in turn feed into this global so-called competition between the United States and China. Like, is that really what we're talking about here? Is it that easy or is it a little bit more complicated than that?

Dhruva Jaishankar: So I think semiconductors are the most visible and immediate area of contention. It's something that is really so integral to your smartphone, laptop, television. It's integral to military applications. Any advanced military equipment has chips in them. It's integral to AI and growth and competition in the AI sector. I think that that's one that just speaks to a lot of people it is so. But it is actually representative of a deeper, more underlying issue, which is to what extent and what ways can the United States continue to depend on Chinese manufacturing and supply chain - it's completely down the supply chain in certain areas, there are these vulnerabilities. And similarly, China is asking the same question, where are we vulnerable to the United States? And so the challenge is that de-risking and, de-risking is, there's a slight nuance here, de-risking would involve identifying certain key areas and focusing on them, whereas decoupling is a sort of more ambitious widespread not trading with each other in various ways. And I think now there's a realization that de-risking is more probable. Both sides are going to be much more focused rather than trying to completely decouple from each other. But doing it isn't sometimes much harder because it requires very high capital costs that somebody has to front. The United States is sitting on a lot of rare earths, but processing it requires environmental clearances. It requires buyers to commit to buying beforehand. It requires very high capital costs and is therefore very risky for an investor, a private investor. So it's much easier said than done and that's what I think everyone's finding.

Rachel Rizzo: Before we move on to the next topic, I mean, it's interesting to have watched this debate develop over the last 10 or so years in Washington, you know? The big pivot to Asia was a huge part of the Obama administration and every administration since then. Trump 1, Biden, Trump 2, has really focused on China and the Indo-Pacific and has culminated in this real geo-economic competition between the two sides. And Europe is also at the center of it because they rely so much on Chinese exports. They rely on exporting to China as part of their markets. Germany's car industry, for example, is a huge part of this. So I think it's something that we'll obviously be watching closely, talking about more in depth in the coming months. It's an issue that is at the center stage of U.S politics and European politics as well.

French Political Turmoil

Dhruva Jaishankar: And actually, just to wrap up - a quick question for you on European politics. We've seen some turmoil in France, particularly, where you had a prime minister resign and then get reappointed, it appears, and then barely survive and no confidence vote. What's going on there?

Rachel Rizzo: Okay, so French politics are messy, so we can just like lay that down as the baseline. The French government has fallen a couple times in the last year or so, and this all stems from this decision back in summer of 2024, where Macron decided to dissolve parliament. And this was after a really poor showing of his party in the European parliamentary election. So he thought he wanted to dissolve Parliament and give voters a chance to make their voices heard, potentially put the far right into Parliament and see if they could govern. This has really backfired because it's just created an era of instability for Macron and for the government. So Sébastien Lecornu, who was the prime minister, his government fell. He was reappointed as prime minister by President Macron just days after resigning. He unveiled yet another cabinet on October 12th. This is France's fifth prime minister in under two years. I mean, it's pretty crazy. But I think what we need to watch closely going forward is does this government hold, does the cabinet hold? They're supposed to be presenting a 2026 draft budget next week.

Let's see if that goes forward. And let's see how the fractured parliament split between three ideological blocks holds over the coming weeks and months. It’s probably worth like a full episode. It's probably worth a full deep dive sometime in the next couple of weeks. But something worth watching and we'll be taking a close look at it in the next few days to see what happens with this new government and whether it holds or not.

Dhruva Jaishankar: Thanks again, Rachel. It was great talking to you and thanks for joining us on Around the World this week.

Rachel Rizzo: Absolutely. Thanks, Dhruva, and thanks to all of our listeners. See you next week.