Thu, 15 Oct 2026
A new Sahel telecom regulator is clearing the way for Russian satellites, and possibly Russian control of the data. The post Digital Sovereignty or New Dependency? Russia’s Satellite Project for the AES appeared first on Geopolitical Monitor .
On Sunday, five British nationals from London were arrested for their involvement in an alleged plot against the Royal Air Force (RAF) Fairford Base located on the border between Gloucestershire and Wiltshire. The suspects were spotted in hoods and masks operating three white vans — at least one falsely branded with a British fuel company […] The post A Potential Terrorist Plot Against a British Airbase Shows the Continued Threat of Hybrid Warfare appeared first on The Soufan Center .
China rising, America in decline? The Trump-Xi summit Audio sseth.drupal@c… 25 September 2026 In this week’s episode of Independent Thinking, our experts discuss the Trump-Xi summit in Washington and the increasing competition between the two superpowers. President Donald Trump welcomes Xi Jinping to Washington with the US-China dynamic in a moment of historic flux. China is rising economically and militarily, while the US is mired in the Iran war, alienating allies and pursuing Trump’s unpredictable trade and tariff disputes. What do the two leaders want from this meeting, and will they get it? Can they reconcile their differing economic powers, the competition for critical minerals, and their radically contrasting visions for artificial intelligence. And in the longer term: who will dominate the 21st century? Does Xi really want to retake Taiwan for China before his time in power ends? Or is the US-Chinese dynamic more complex and perhaps less alarming? To unpick these threads Bronwen Maddox is joined by three experts from Chatham House’s Asia-Pacific Programme: programme director Ben Bland, senior research fellow Dr Yu Jie and associate fellow Dr Bill Hayton. About Independent Thinking Independent Thinking is a weekly international affairs podcast hosted by our director Bronwen Maddox, in conversation with leading policymakers, journalists and Chatham House experts providing insight on the latest international issues. More ways to listen: Apple Podcasts and Spotify . Explore our other Chatham House podcasts .
For twenty months, Russia’s 20th and 25th Combined Arms Armies ground toward Lyman, a small city in eastern Ukraine that sits on a critical road and railway juncture. By seizing […]
Trump–Xi summit: Why the US and China should not underestimate each other Expert comment LToremark 22 September 2026 The US and China both face serious domestic strains. As Trump and Xi meet this week to discuss trade, AI and Taiwan, neither side should mistake the other’s weaknesses for strategic decline. A superpower summit is a big deal. As US President Donald Trump and China’s President Xi Jinping meet in Washington this week, they have a lot to cover. They will try to extend a trade truce that expires in November, including China’s pause on rare earth export controls and America’s delay on chip restrictions. The leaders will also tackle Taiwan, where Beijing wants Washington to halt a $14 billion arms package, as well as China’s purchases of Iranian oil and a proposed dialogue on the national security risks of artificial intelligence (AI). In their negotiations, each side may be tempted to focus on the other’s weaknesses. But underestimating the other’s power would be unwise. China has many weaknesses – but should not be underestimated Many observers argue that China’s economic vulnerabilities will limit its international ambitions. Its growth model is faltering; its households still are not spending, so Beijing continues to push surplus production overseas. This has provoked a backlash of trade barriers from the US, EU and beyond. The property sector – once a quarter of the economy – is in its fifth year of slump, while a mountain of hidden local government debt threatens to drag down China’s growth for years to come. Meanwhile Xi’s government has become steadily more
Chatham House fellow gives evidence at UK parliament committee on global AI governance and risks News release thilton.drupal 21 September 2026 Senior Research Fellow Isabella Wilkinson spoke to the House of Lords International Relations and Defence Committee at a time when many are calling for greater regulation of AI in the light of emerging risks. Isabella Wilkinson, Senior Research Fellow with Chatham House’s Digital Society Programme, gave evidence on the global governance of AI to the UK House of Lords International Relations and Defence Committee on 16 September. Wilkinson outlined the main types of risk from AI: malicious risks, loss-of-control risks and systemic risks. Addressing the governance challenge posed by these risks, she said: ‘We’re facing a governance challenge because all of these risks are interlinked, so we have to be very strategic about how we design governance at multiple different levels. This is a multilateral challenge.’ Wilkinson said that interlinked governance challenges, including a dearth of trusted information about AI and ‘the lack of a crisis toolbox’ to deploy in the event of a crisis, had led to ‘quite a severe state of gridlock in multilateral AI governance.’ The committee was meeting in a week in which debates over the risks associated with AI featured prominently in public debate, following calls by tech leaders to slow the pace of the technology’s development. ‘We are in a moment of intense crisis and turbulence in multilateral AI governance. But as we’ve learned [from other areas of governance] … these conditions create a window of
It should address the shortcomings of previous crisis communication efforts and adapt to the demands of frontier AI.
Artificial Intelligence, Real Fears: Is it time to slow down? Audio sseth.drupal@c… 18 September 2026 On this week’s episode of Independent Thinking, our experts discuss the growing fears around the development of AI. A call by leaders of the tech giants on the frontier of Artificial Intelligence to ‘slow the pace’ of its development has sparked debate over the risks associated with AI. Does AI represent an existential threat, and if so, how urgent are the warnings? Or can humanity harness this powerful technology to our benefit? Our experts discuss the implications for international security, from cyber to the increasing use of AI in today’s conflict zones, and the dynamics of the race toward the cutting edge – not only among industry competitors, but also in the realm of geopolitics. Bronwen Maddox is joined by Dr Marion Messmer, director of our International Security Programme, and Alex Krasodomski, director of our Digital Society Programme. About Independent Thinking Independent Thinking is a weekly international affairs podcast hosted by our director Bronwen Maddox, in conversation with leading policymakers, journalists and Chatham House experts providing insight on the latest international issues. More ways to listen: Apple Podcasts and Spotify . Explore our other Chatham House podcasts .
At a federal technology summit earlier this year, a senior Pentagon official described a moment his office was proud of. Facing a congressional reporting deadline, and with a workforce hollowed […]
Military leaders warn the risks of falling behind adversaries in artificial intelligence research outweigh the potential risks of the technology.
Is AI really getting out of control? Expert comment jon.wallace 14 September 2026 Anthropic’s warning should be taken seriously – but not as cover for entrenching US labs or escalating rivalry with Beijing. This weekend current and former employees of US AI laboratories and their leaders issued dire warnings of a near-term apocalypse at the hands of AI. Out-of-control AI development could mean ‘ we could all die in the immediate future ’ said one former lab employee. This was followed by a proposal from Dario Amodei, the CEO of AI company Anthropic, to slow down AI development to ensure the technology is safe. The proposal met with approval from the leaders of other labs, including Sam Altman and Elon Musk. No observer of AI would argue against a greater focus on safety in AI development and deployment. But the renewed attention on AI’s long-term risks must not become too hyperopic, at the cost of tackling the present-day impacts of the technology. It must not be a blunt instrument used to crush competition to current US AI leaders. And it will not be possible to address without some kind of US–China agreement. Why the new warnings? The path to catastrophe described by Amodei and others runs through a technique referred to as recursive self-improvement (RSI) – an approach to training AI models that is beginning to roll out, if still in its early stages. The risk is that RSI, which involves AI training AI, could lead to AI development of such speed that at some point a tipping point will be reached, where the AIs are capable enough to improve themselves without and beyond hu
The modern battlefield is becoming more lethal and fast-moving, while the proliferation of sensors makes concealment increasingly difficult. Persistent sensing, precision-strike weapons, autonomous systems, and increasingly capable enemy artificial intelligence […]
While France and Australia are seeking to establish the legal obligations of messaging apps like Telegram, Russia wants total subordination.
As AI advances, the risk of engineered viral bioweapons is growing. The window to prepare is now—by building a layered, resilient system of defense.
In this episode, Colonel Chaveso “Chevy” Cook sits down with MWI’s Charlie Faint to recount a career that took him from a South Carolina JROTC classroom to West Point and […]
AI-powered command systems are becoming the backbone of modern warfare. NATO needs shared standards, but if those rest on American software, interoperability will come at the price of dependence.
The new defence investment plan is weighed down by the habits of Britain’s defence establishment. By contrast, the British public appear readier to accept change.
Chinese foreign manipulation and interference are rising in Europe. Five techniques feature in Beijing’s playbook, communicating messages about China’s place in the world and support for Russian positions.
Europe’s defensive measures to shield its democracies from hybrid attacks are no longer enough. If Europeans want to protect their peace and prosperity, the time has come for them to fight back
