The hottest Great powers Substack posts right now

And their main takeaways
Category
Top World Politics Topics
Noahpinion • 29824 implied HN points • 10 Mar 26
  1. Coalitions are hardening: in the Western and Middle Eastern theaters the U.S., Europe, Ukraine, and Israel are aligning against Russia and Iran, while alliances in Asia remain murky with India mostly neutral and China cautious.
  2. Drones and AI are already reshaping warfare: strike drones and AI-driven targeting and decision‑support systems are being battle‑tested and will be central to how future wars are fought.
  3. World War 3 isn’t imminent but the risk is rising: hardened alliances, disruptive military tech, and uncertain balances of power create foothills that could let a regional war escalate into a much larger conflict.
John’s Substack • 7 implied HN points • 24 Mar 26
  1. A two-hour interview with a former Indonesian trade minister explored a wide range of current global conflicts and where they might lead.
  2. This was the third long conversation between them and featured a friendly, engaged back-and-forth.
  3. The overall assessment was bleak, offering a dark outlook on the direction of world affairs in the years ahead.
Doomberg • 6686 implied HN points • 23 Dec 25
  1. Russia and China have been oddly muted in response to US moves to pressure or depose Venezuela’s Maduro, and that silence stands out given their professed alliances.
  2. Both countries have deep stakes in Venezuela — Russia with energy joint ventures and arms sales, and China as the country’s largest oil customer — so stronger pushback would have been expected.
  3. Their silence is itself a clue: treating it like the 'dog that didn't bark' opens multiple possible explanations and suggests mainstream reporting may be missing important context.
John’s Substack • 9 implied HN points • 22 Mar 26
  1. The US is stuck in a bind over the Iran war with no good options, facing only bad choices between escalating or finding a risky exit.
  2. The war is forcing the US to move military and diplomatic resources from East Asia to the Middle East, which weakens America's ability to contain China.
  3. China and Russia benefit: China gains from a distracted US, and Russia is strengthened by eased oil sanctions and a reduced flow of weapons to Ukraine.
Anima Mundi • 267 implied HN points • 22 Feb 26
  1. The old postwar security architecture is fraying: the New START treaty lapsed and American guarantees to Europe are being redefined, pushing Europe to rearm and raising nuclear and military risks.
  2. Several crises are converging — a possible US strike on Iran, the ongoing war in Ukraine, and China’s strategic positioning — which together increase global instability and encourage arms races and opportunistic aggression.
  3. Trust in institutions and assumptions is weakening — courts, executive rules, trade policy, and techno-optimism around AI are being treated as malleable, ending a ‘deferred’ way of managing security and the future and forcing hard choices about who pays and what gets sacrificed.
Get a weekly roundup of the best Substack posts, by hacker news affinity:
Pekingnology • 135 implied HN points • 17 Feb 26
  1. Small states need to be masters of their own destiny, relying on resilience, social cohesion, and a clear commitment to self‑defence rather than size alone.
  2. Historical memories and great‑power narratives strongly shape regional reactions, so remarks about Japan or China can be amplified and interpreted through emotional, national lenses.
  3. Practiced diplomatic balance matters: staying principled and flexible lets a small country avoid dependency or unnecessary antagonism while navigating rising China–Japan tensions.
The Chris Hedges Report • 174 implied HN points • 05 Feb 26
  1. A U.S. leader who favors unilateral use of military and economic power and dismisses international institutions and allies can dismantle the post‑war rules‑based order and leave the country isolated.
  2. The world has shifted from unipolarity to multipolarity with China as a formidable great power, making East Asia the primary strategic flashpoint and increasing the risk of dangerous crises despite deep economic ties.
  3. Eroding the rule of law at home and gutting soft‑power tools while doubling down on fossil‑fuel economics will weaken U.S. influence, harm long‑term competitiveness, and raise the chances of domestic authoritarianism or reckless foreign adventures.
Fisted by Foucault • 162 implied HN points • 15 Jan 26
  1. The Trump team has pushed a much more aggressive foreign policy with bold moves like seizing political figures, claiming territory, and threatening other states, signaling a return to forceful US action abroad.
  2. The idea of "Turbo America" says the US is not in decline but is reasserting itself by being more extractive of allies to keep global dominance, and recent events are presented as proof of that thesis.
  3. Europe lacks real sovereignty and functions largely as a set of US-aligned vassals, so the traditional concept of a unified "West" is effectively dead unless it’s seen as centered in the United States.
Brad DeLong's Grasping Reality • 169 implied HN points • 06 Jan 26
  1. Some realist arguments (like Mearsheimer's) treat great-power aggression as inevitable. That way of thinking can shift blame away from leaders and make theoretical predictions sound like excuses for war crimes.
  2. Russia’s behavior is better explained by long-standing internal factors—autocracy, militarism, and leadership choices—rather than primarily by NATO expansion. Putin’s domestic politics push adventurism that is often counterproductive.
  3. In the modern world military conquest rarely produces durable control and tends to create lasting enemies. Lasting influence comes more from soft power and economic ties than from tanks and occupation.
John’s Substack • 11 implied HN points • 08 Mar 26
  1. The University of Chicago's Graham School has a strong extension program.
  2. On March 3, 2026 John J. Mearsheimer did a long interview with Jennifer Lind.
  3. They discussed major issues spanning the last 250 years of U.S. foreign policy.
Phillips’s Newsletter • 231 implied HN points • 19 Dec 25
  1. China’s rising influence owes as much to bad leadership choices by the U.S. and Russia as to Chinese long-term planning, so its strength looks bigger than it may really be.
  2. U.S. unpredictability on trade and security — like punitive tariffs, exemptions for China, and a policy shift away from defending allies — has eroded trust among Indo-Pacific partners and handed advantages to China.
  3. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has made Moscow economically and militarily dependent on China, turning Russia into a strategic client and increasing Beijing’s leverage.
God's Spies by Thomas Neuburger • 75 implied HN points • 13 Jan 26
  1. The U.S. is losing global dominance as China builds industrial self‑sufficiency and leads in critical technologies, threatening dollar hegemony and key military supply chains.
  2. Long-term neoliberal policies and elite capture have hollowed out U.S. industry and power, and those elites are unlikely to willingly cede control as decline accelerates.
  3. The next decades will be driven by three linked crises—geopolitical rivalry, domestic social fracture, and an escalating climate emergency—with the climate shock set to reshape global stability and responses.
Dr. Pippa's Pen & Podcast • 46 implied HN points • 14 Jan 26
  1. Global geopolitics is being portrayed as a strategic Monopoly board where major powers and smaller territories alike are contested pieces in a broader chess match.
  2. The central conflict is framed as an internal struggle over control of cash flows and influence—the so-called "Blob"—rather than a classic ideological or superpower war.
  3. There are allegations of coordinated interference through intelligence networks, NGOs, voting-machine systems, and billionaire funding that have shaped elections and policy, fueling deep mistrust between the U.S. administration and its European and Canadian allies.
John’s Substack • 7 implied HN points • 20 Feb 26
  1. Two experts debated whether a peace agreement over the Ukraine war is possible, presenting sharply opposing views.
  2. One side argued a negotiated peace with Europe, Ukraine, and the US could be reached, while the other said no deal is possible and the war will be decided on the battlefield, ending in an armistice that creates a frozen conflict.
  3. The event measured audience opinion with a pre- and post-debate poll to see if views shifted, but the poll results were not disclosed.
America in Crisis • 99 implied HN points • 06 Apr 24
  1. Historically, shifts in world leadership have been linked to naval and economic power, with key nations projecting military and economic dominance as world leaders.
  2. The transition between world leaders often involves periods of Global War, where challenges are made to the existing world order, ultimately leading to a new world leader emerging.
  3. The Leadership Cycle theory suggests a pattern of phases including Global War, World Power, Delegitimation, and Deconcentration, following a cyclical pattern of rising and falling hegemons.
John’s Substack • 8 implied HN points • 06 Feb 26
  1. President Trump’s foreign policy shows a clear disdain for international law and institutions, which undermines the building blocks of the global order.
  2. Examining historical events reveals important similarities and differences that help explain current international dynamics.
  3. The overall picture is worrying and unstable, but frank conversations can help people make sense of a changing and potentially dangerous world.
John’s Substack • 6 implied HN points • 30 Jan 26
  1. A recent Cross Talk podcast episode explored how great power politics is returning after the unipolar era.
  2. The conversation focused especially on the motivations behind President Trump's foreign policy choices.
  3. The episode continued a long-running dialogue about US–Russia relations and realist perspectives, linking current debates to discussions from about a decade ago.
World Game • 8 implied HN points • 26 Dec 25
  1. The Western or American-led global order seems to be declining, but it’s unclear what will replace it.
  2. A Chinese world order isn’t a foregone conclusion, since even Chinese authorities don’t seem to believe in imposing one single model.
  3. We’re moving into an era of radical skepticism and pluralism where there won’t be a single unified order — instead, ordering will be an ongoing process.
John’s Substack • 7 implied HN points • 11 Jan 26
  1. The world is shifting from a unipolar order to a multipolar one, which brings back intense rivalry among major powers.
  2. With at least three great powers, security competition will become more dangerous and unpredictable.
  3. This transition has serious consequences for international stability and makes managing conflicts harder.
The Octavian Report • 0 implied HN points • 23 Dec 25
  1. U.S. withdrawals and weak policy in the Middle East have created a security vacuum that lets terrorist groups expand. That vacuum also raises the chance states like Iran will pursue nuclear weapons and makes regional allies doubt America's reliability.
  2. The United States must remain militarily strong and willing to use force when necessary to deter rivals. If it does not, powers such as Russia and China and unstable regional actors will take advantage of perceived weakness.
  3. Nontraditional risks like nuclear proliferation, EMP attacks, and solar storms threaten the power grid and civilian infrastructure, so those systems need to be hardened. At the same time, the shale energy boom strengthens economic and strategic resilience.
The Octavian Report • 0 implied HN points • 23 Dec 25
  1. Unpredictable, contradictory policy decisions have eroded U.S. credibility, making allies doubt commitments and giving adversaries room to exploit American inconsistency.
  2. A small, sustained U.S. presence in northeast Syria and Iraq helps prevent the return of ISIS and protects local partners, but withdrawing forces without a clear, resourced strategy risks instability and undoing hard-won gains.
  3. Long-term competition with China and managing threats like Iran require stronger alliances and more investment in diplomacy; cutting diplomatic resources and acting unilaterally weakens U.S. power.
The Octavian Report • 0 implied HN points • 23 Dec 25
  1. The United States' retreat from global leadership has left dangerous gaps that won't be fixed by simply reversing past policies. Rebuilding influence and military power will take years and a clear political signal.
  2. The spread of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the ongoing threat of international terrorism are immediate dangers, especially if terrorists obtain a nuclear device. Cyber attacks add another level of risk and require clearer rules for distinguishing espionage, crime, and acts of war.
  3. China and Russia pose different long-term threats: China is building military, naval, and cyber capabilities to dominate its neighbors, while Russia remains a nuclear-armed but economically weak aggressor. The U.S. needs tailored strategies, stronger human intelligence, and firmer alliance pressure to meet both challenges.
The Octavian Report • 0 implied HN points • 23 Dec 25
  1. Iran is likely to acquire nuclear weapons, which would threaten Israel and trigger a Middle East arms race; diplomacy looks unlikely to stop it, so military options may be needed.
  2. U.S. withdrawals and a perception of weakness have eroded trust among allies and created vacuums that terrorists and rivals like Russia and China can exploit. Regaining influence requires a strong, credible military posture.
  3. The civilian electrical grid is dangerously vulnerable to an electromagnetic pulse or a major solar storm, and practical measures and funding are needed now to harden infrastructure before a catastrophe.