Brussels Sprouts

The Donroe Doctrine? Venezuela, Greenland, and America's New Agenda

On January 3, the United States apprehended the sitting president of Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, and brought him to the United States to face trial for drug trafficking. In the aftermath of the operation, President Trump and other senior officials in his administration have threatened similar aggression against Mexico and Cuba and revived rhetoric about the United States “needing” Greenland. The operation and Washington’s posture have sent shockwaves through the international system, as concerns rise about the resilience of international law and the risk that the world is moving toward a global order based on spheres of influence, where might makes right and authoritarian states like Russia and China sense a freer hand within their respective regions. The Trump administration’s comments about Greenland are putting additional stress on transatlantic relations, with the Danish prime minister making clear that any U.S. attack on Greenland would end the NATO alliance. To help make sense of the geopolitical implications of Maduro’s capture and more, Brussels Sprouts is pleased to welcome back to the podcast Lawrence Freedman and Shashank Joshi.Lawrence Freedman is an emeritus professor of war studies at King’s College London.Shashank Joshi is the defense editor at The Economist. 

Ukraine Negotiations: Prospects and Pitfalls of Peace

This week Brussels Sprouts breaks down the latest negotiations on Ukraine. American officials told reporters that they had resolved or closed gaps around 90 percent of their differences with Ukraine on a draft agreement to end the war. Territory and security guarantees remain the key sticking points. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has said it would be impossible for Ukraine to give up territory that Russia has not taken on the battlefield, while Russia has not dropped its demands to control the territories it illegally annexed. On the security guarantees front, the United States and Europe sound optimistic that progress is being made. The latest plan seems to envision an 800,000-strong peacetime Ukrainian military, U.S.-provided intelligence and monitoring to track any attempts to breach the peace agreement, and a European-led multinational force that would be stationed in Ukraine but away from the front lines to bolster confidence. However, it is highly unlikely that Russia will agree to this plan or any plan that leaves Ukraine with a strong and capable military. In the meantime, the European Union continues to wrangle over whether it will use the frozen assets to finance a €210 billion loan to keep Ukraine financially solvent.  To help us assess where negotiations stand and where they might go, Brussels Sprouts welcomes Jana Kobzova and Jennifer Kavanagh to the podcast. Jennifer Kavanagh is a senior fellow and director of military analysis at Defense Priorities.
Jana Kobzova is a senior fellow and codirector of the European Security Program at the European Council on Foreign Relations. 

Transatlantic Tensions in the New National Security Strategy

On December 4th, the Trump administration released its long-awaited national security strategy, sending another round of shock waves through the transatlantic community. The national security strategy acknowledges that Europe remains strategically vital to the United States and doubles down on the need for Europe to take more responsibility for its defense, but the strategy is unique in its condemnation of allies, focus on “civilizational erasure”, and promise to intervene to “help Europe correct its current trajectory.”
While the 2017 National Security Strategy explicitly laid out several threats Russia poses to American interests, this one makes little mention of Russia except for calls to restore strategic stability. Many of America's European allies are feeling unsettled and concerned about the national security strategy and what it means for transatlantic relations. So, to help us understand the new national security strategy, it differs from Trump's first strategy and where the through lines are, we're excited to welcome Nadia Shadlow and Rebecca Heinrich to Brussels Sprouts.
Nadia Schadlow is a senior fellow at Hudson Institute and a co-chair of the Hamilton Commission on Securing America’s National Security Innovation Base.
Rebeccah Heinrichs is also a senior fellow at Hudson Institute and the director of its Keystone Defense Initiative.

The Russia-Iran Partnership: A Geopolitical Balancing Act

It has been almost a year since Russia and Iran signed their comprehensive strategic partnership. That deal established a 20-year partnership between the two countries covering the full spectrum of their relationship from military to economic to cyber ties. Though the two countries have cooperated deeply, from mass production of military drones to smuggling millions of barrels of oil, Russia did not come to Iran's aid when Iran endured 12 days of punishing war at the hands of Israel and the United States. Despite this, cooperation between Russia and Iran has continued. In November, Financial Times reported that Iranian scientists and nuclear experts made a second covert visit to Russia last year in what the United States claims has been a push to obtain sensitive technologies with potential nuclear weapon applications. Cooperation between the two remains a significant challenge for the United States and its allies.  To take stock of where Russia-Iran relations are and where they may go, the Center for a New American Security is very pleased to welcome Hanna Notte and Nicole Grajewski to this week’s episode of Brussels Sprouts.
Hanna Notte is the director for Eurasia at the James Martin Center for Non-Proliferation Studies and a senior associate at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
Nicole Grajewski is a fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, an associate researcher at Harvard’s Belfer Center, and the author of Russia and Iran: Partners in Defiance from Syria to Ukraine. 

Credibility and Capability: The Future of Nuclear Stability

Over the last month, nuclear tensions have been heating up. In late October, Vladimir Putin claimed two achievements: the successful test of a nuclear-powered missile known as Burevestnik and the initial test of an unmanned nuclear-powered submarine known as Poseidon. Both systems theoretically have unlimited range, and both are capable of hosting nuclear warheads. Shortly thereafter, President Donald Trump announced that the United States would resume nuclear testing on an equal basis with Russia and China.This week on Brussels Sprouts, concerns around the world of a revived nuclear arms race are growing. Between Putin’s nuclear testing, inflamed rhetoric from President Trump, and the looming expiration of the New START Arms Control Treaty between Russia and the United States in February 2026, the mounting evidence paints a concerning picture.To discuss this and more, the Center for a New American Security is very pleased to welcome Corey Hinderstein and Jon Wolfsthal to Brussels Sprouts. Corey Hinderstein is vice president of studies at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and is responsible for the Technology, Sustainability, and Nuclear Policy Programs.Jon Wolfsthal is the director of Global Risk at the Federation of American Scientists and a CNAS adjunct senior fellow. 

Why the U.S. Should Unlock Allied Cooperation

America’s allies are cooperating in a growing variety of domains. In their recent Foreign Affairs piece, former NATO Ambassador Julie Smith and former National Security Council Senior Director Lindsey Ford argue that the United States should support and facilitate cooperation among America’s European and Indo-Pacific allies. In a world where U.S. adversaries are deepening their cooperation, it is no longer sufficient to ask allies to just focus on their own respective geographic corners of the world. Smith and Ford argue that cooperation between American allies stands to benefit American grand strategy.  This week on Brussels Sprouts, if the United States fails to capitalize on the already present trend of growing cooperation, Washington risks self-isolation and an inability to effectively manage challenges in a world where the lines between Asia and Europe are blurring and crises on one continent have spillover effects on the other. To discuss this and more, the Center for a New American Security is very pleased to welcome Julie Smith and Lindsey Ford to Brussels Sprouts.  
Julie Smith is president and cofounder of Clarion Strategies and former U.S. permanent representative to NATO from 2021 to 2024.  
Lindsey Ford is a senior fellow at the Observer Research Foundation and a former senior director for South Asia at the National Security Council from 2024 to 2025. She served as U.S. deputy assistant secretary of defense for South and Southeast Asia from 2021 to 2024. 

Trump's Trade Talks and Europe with Liz Economy and Mikko Huotari

President Donald Trump’s meeting with Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping on October 30, 2025, ended with a temporary truce between the two leaders. While this may be good news for the U.S.-China relationship in the short term, no formal comprehensive trade agreement followed, and any number of issues could derail the delicate truce. Europe has long sought to balance its ideological opposition to China with the desire for pragmatic trade and diplomatic relations. 
This week on Brussels Sprouts, while European nations have largely aligned with the United States in restricting trade with China, could the recent U.S.-China trade thaw lead Brussels to pursue a similar rapprochement? 
To discuss this and more, the Center for a New American Security is very pleased to welcome Liz Economy and Mikko Huotari to Brussels Sprouts.
Liz Economy is a principal with WestExec Advisors and a senior fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution
Mikko Huotari is the executive director of the Mercator Institute for China Studies

Mike McFaul on Autocrats vs Democrats

Are we in a new Cold War? That is the question Mike McFaul takes on in his new book, Autocrats versus Democrats: Russia, China, America, and the New Global Disorder. McFaul argues that modern analogies to a second Cold War hold some merit but are insufficient given the rise of authoritarian tendencies within the United States and European democracies. Combining analysis of the Russian and Chinese threats with a critique of the Trump administration's isolationist and authoritarian tendencies, McFaul articulates a set of policy prescriptions that sketch a new grand strategy for American engagement with the world.
Dr. Michael McFaul is the Director of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies and a Professor of International Studies at Stanford University

Did Europe Change Trump's Mind on Ukraine?

The Trump administration made a major move this week in its announcement of sanctions on major Russian oil companies Rosneft and Luke Oil, along with 31 subsidiaries. This follows President Donald Trump’s cancellation of a discussed meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Budapest and a U.S. agreement to allow Ukraine to use Storm Shadow missiles to strike targets deeper inside Russia. Some have suggested that European leaders are feeling some satisfaction that their repeated interventions with Trump on behalf of Ukraine have finally produced American pressure on Moscow.
This week on Brussels Sprouts, how can Europe navigate escalating Russian attacks on Ukraine and hybrid threats from Moscow while keeping the United States on side?
To discuss this and more, the Center for a New American Security is very pleased to welcome Daniela Schwarzer and Natalie Tocci to Brussels Sprouts.
Daniela Schwarzer is a board member of the Bertelsmann Stiftung and one of Germany's leading experts on European and international politics and economics and the development of democracy and the rule of law.
Nathalie Tocci is the Director of the Italian Institute of International Affairs and a Professor of Practice at the John Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies.

A Tale of Two Russias: Views from Former Intelligence Officers

Four years into its war in Ukraine, Russia continues to escalate attacks on the Ukrainian population while also dialing up its hybrid campaign against Europe. In the last six weeks alone, Russia has sent military drones into Polish and Romanian airspace and fighter aircraft into Estonian airspace and has continued its influence operations in places like Moldova and Czechia. The Russian military threat appears to be growing: German intelligence has stated that Russia “will not shy away from a direct military confrontation with NATO,” and the European Commission proposed a roadmap to prepare Europe for war by 2030.
Yet that is only one side of the story. Russia has not come close to an operational breakthrough in Ukraine, and its economy is increasingly strained. Ukraine has struck 21 of Russia’s 38 large oil refineries since the start of this year, disrupting as much as 40 percent of the country’s oil refining capacity. Gasoline prices in Russia have spiked nearly 10 percent. In many ways, this is a tale of two Russias: one that appears to be gathering itself to strike NATO and another slowly crumbling under the weight of the war and Western sanctions that show no sign of letting up.
To help us evaluate these two paradigms and assess the Russian threat, Brussels Sprouts is pleased to welcome three former deputy national intelligence officers for Russia and Eurasia:
Eric Ciaramella and Nate Reynolds, senior fellows with the Russia and Eurasia Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Pete Schroeder, adjunct senior fellow at the Center for a New American Security’s Transatlantic Security Program.