The realist who saw the end of the Middle East coming

This week's headlines have been dominated by one question: are the U.S. and Iran close to a deal to end the war?

U.S. President Donald Trump has continued to say they are very close to a deal, while Iran has been clear that there have been no talks.

Crude markets have responded in kind, cooling whenever Trump gives assurances that the war will soon be over, and then immediately rising again when Iran denies the rumours. 

While the two sides might be engaged in talks, with Pakistan stating that it could host such an event, that does not mean either side is close to a deal.

The Iranian Speaker of Parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, has even accused Trump of using his statements to manipulate oil markets in an effort to keep oil costs low and minimise domestic frustration in the U.S.

This incident has highlighted the fact that the idea of “the truth” has increasingly broken down on the international stage. 

There was once a general expectation that when a government like that of the United States announced something, it was credible.

It had long been assumed that the architect of the “rules based order” followed those rules, but Trump’s America has refused to uphold those norms. 

This constant uncertainty has had a real material impact, causing fluctuations in global oil markets that affect the lives of millions of people.

This demonstrates the increasing importance of informational clarity in the modern age, and how traditional sources of information may no longer be as reliable as they once were.

At The Geopolitical Desk, we continue to cut through the noise and the information war that dominates headlines, and have expanded our Iran coverage to better prepare readers for the continued turbulence arising from this conflict.

In a recent special report, we break down the likely risk pathways regarding the trajectory of the war and how it will impact oil markets in the short to long term.

Link to the full report here:

Iran war: scenarios, conflict pathways and market implications

This report provides scenario mapping of the ongoing U.S.-Israel-Iran war, analysing potential regional escalation pathways, Strait of Hormuz disruption risk and the likelihood of further attacks on Gulf energy infrastructure.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

What will Trump do next?

While the battle over narratives surrounding negotiations continues, there are growing reports in U.S. media that a possible invasion of Iran's Kharg Island may be forthcoming.

Trump’s continued pursuit of the war has confused many international observers.

The president has a proven track record in relation to Iran, where he simultaneously pursues negotiation while preparing for escalation.

Despite his often stated opposition to regime change wars, Trump has historically been more hawkish on Iran.

Our recent article explains the domestic factors in the U.S. that helped lead to the war and examines Trump’s longstanding opposition to the Islamic Republic.

Our full analysis here:

The neocons’ long-awaited war with Iran is not what they expected

Decades of effort went into building the case for a U.S. war with Iran, and now it has finally arrived. But for Washington’s think tanks and policy circles, it is not what they had in mind.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Taking advantage of the moment

The wars in Ukraine and Iran have revealed that the world's energy supplies remain reliant on a limited number of actors and geographies. 

Demand for energy continues to grow rapidly, forcing investors to seek new areas to expand supply.

Algeria, even before the war in Ukraine, had begun taking steps to ease access for foreign investors into its energy market. 

New regulatory frameworks introduced by the Algerian government could not have come at a better time, as demonstrated by the success of the Algeria Bid Round 2024.

Now Algeria is preparing to launch Bid Round 2026, and international attention is increasingly turning towards the country as a source that can help maintain supply stability and diversify global production.

Find our full analysis here:

Algeria’s new bidding round comes at a critical time

Algiers is seeking to launch another bidding round for oil and gas exploration rights as the country aims to increase output in a world hungry for energy.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

The world in moving crosshairs

The Iran war has, somewhat justifiably, dominated headlines this week.

While it is a critical story that affects others around the world, there are additional developments that should also be monitored.

Ukraine targets Russian fuel infrastructure

What happened: Ukrainian drones heavily damaged the Primorsk export terminal, Russia’s largest, as well as an oil refinery in Ufa, halting 40% of Russia’s fuel export capacity.

Why it matters: Rising gas prices have been a boon for Russia, as oil is one of the state’s main sources of income and the government has long been affected by western sanctions. Ukraine’s goal is to weaken Russia’s ability to sell its oil.

Why you should monitor it: The attacks are strategically logical for Ukraine, as they disrupt Russian revenue streams and damage infrastructure that supports its military. However, with U.S. President Donald Trump seeking to keep prices low, continued Ukrainian action could draw his ire.

Trump appoints new head of DHS

What happened: Former Oklahoma Senator Markwayne Mullin was confirmed in a 54–45 Senate vote as the new head of the Department of Homeland Security.

Why it matters: Mullin’s confirmation follows Trump’s dismissal of former Secretary Kristi Noem after she implicated him in a political scandal involving the misuse of public funds. The DHS is one of Trump’s more favoured departments, and he has used it to advance his domestic agenda.

Why you should monitor it: The DHS is facing increasing scrutiny and declining public support in the United States due to its aggressive immigration enforcement tactics.

With ICE, an agency within DHS, continuing its immigration raids across the country, the department is likely to encounter sustained resistance from the Democratic Party as debates over its budget continue in Congress. Mullins will be forced to deal with increasing domestic unpopularity while also trying to meet Trump’s demands.

Nepal installs new PM

What happened: Former rapper Balendra Shah has been sworn in as Nepal’s Prime Minister after his party secured a major victory in elections earlier this month.

Why it matters: Shah is Nepal’s youngest prime minister in decades, and his success followed the country’s Gen Z protests last year. Frustration over unemployment and government corruption led to the collapse of the previous government and triggered early elections.

Why you should monitor it: Shah will face significant expectations to address the concerns of younger voters. Reorienting Nepal’s economy and tackling entrenched corruption will be challenging. His success may also serve as a broader indicator of the effectiveness of emerging Gen Z driven political movements.

Previous coverage on this topic here:

Gen Z’s struggle against the old order in Nepal

With the fall of the government, Nepal finds itself at an important crossroads, with a young generation hungry for change.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

As always, thank you for reading and for your continued support.

Feel free to reply with feedback or suggestions.

See you next week,

Will Mosko

Program Manager, The Geopolitical Desk

Over the past week, the war between Israel, the U.S. and Iran has entered a more unstable phase.

U.S. and Israeli operations have intensified, Iran has increased missile activity across multiple fronts, and the regional operating environment is deteriorating rapidly.

NATO has begun drawing down from Iraq, while the UK’s potential involvement is adding a domestic political dimension in Europe, where anti-war pressure is already building.

At the same time, policy coherence in Washington appears increasingly strained. President Trump has signalled mutually incompatible positions within hours from each other, from pledging to “obliterate” Iran and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, to downplaying its strategic importance, to suggesting the conflict may soon wind down. That inconsistency is a variable in its own right.

On the ground, the risk of horizontal escalation is growing. Iran is signalling it may expand its targeting to Gulf states facilitating U.S. operations, while regional actors are quietly exploring side arrangements to secure shipping routes and limit exposure.

Markets are reacting unevenly. Oil disruption is commanding attention, but stress in other asset classes, including bonds and safe havens, suggests a more complex repricing of risk may be underway.

As attention remains fixed on Iran, other fault lines continue to unfold.

• In Washington, internal divisions are shaping foreign policy execution in real time
• Israel is signalling it may expand its objectives, including potential moves in southern Lebanon
• Libya’s fiscal trajectory is further distorting its economy
• Saudi Arabia is extending influence into U.S. entertainment
• And European officials are increasingly focused on Taiwan as a parallel risk theatre

Let’s get into it.

Trump’s foreign policy is being fought internally

What happened: A growing power struggle is unfolding inside Trump’s foreign policy team, with Steve Witkoff positioning himself to take a more prominent role in North Africa.

Why it matters: U.S. foreign policy is not being shaped through clear institutional channels. It is being contested between personalities with different priorities, networks and approaches. That creates volatility not just in decision-making, but in how policy is implemented on the ground.

What this means: The margin between stability and disruption remains thin. North Africa sits at the intersection of energy flows, migration routes and European security. Even marginal diplomatic shifts can move markets, particularly in energy markets. Mismanaged U.S. engagement could destabilise local arrangements at a time of heightened geopolitical risk. Conversely, a more coherent U.S. approach could unlock investment opportunities across hydrocarbons, infrastructure and regional trade.

Read the full analysis:

Power struggle inside Trump’s foreign policy team as Witkoff eyes North Africa

U.S. officials are discussing transferring the North Africa portfolio from Massad Boulos to Trump confidant Steve Witkoff as Washington grows frustrated with stalled diplomacy across Libya, Sudan and the Morocco-Algeria dispute, according to multiple American and regional sources.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Exclusive: Israel may be preparing to annex parts of southern Lebanon

What happened: A European official has warned that Benjamin Netanyahu's government appears to be moving beyond military operations toward the potential annexation of territory in southern Lebanon.

Why it matters: This would mark a significant escalation. Annexation shifts the conflict from a security operation to a territorial project, with long-term regional implications. Unlike under Biden, where Washington occasionally sought restraint, the Trump administration is viewed as offering near-total political cover, with global backlash largely redirected at the U.S.

What this means: The key question is whether this remains contingency planning or evolves into policy. If it does, it would fundamentally alter the strategic landscape along Israel’s northern border and raise the risk of sustained regional confrontation.

Read the full article:

Israel may be preparing to annex parts of southern Lebanon

A European official has warned that Benjamin Netanyahu’s government is looking to annex sections of Israel’s northern neighbor.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Belqasim Haftar’s spending spree is pushing Libya’s economy to the brink

What happened: Belqasim's Development and Reconstruction Fund is one of Libya’s largest state-backed development funds, but its expanding budget and opaque financial practices are damaging the economy and raising serious questions about its reliability as an international partner.

Why it matters: What began as a reconstruction effort in the aftermath of the Derna flooding disaster in 2023 is now evolving into one of the most powerful and least understood financial actors in the country. Its rise is not only reshaping how Libya spends, but how power itself is exercised through money.

What this means: Libya’s economic trajectory is increasingly tied to political incentives rather than reform. That makes structural correction unlikely without a shift in the underlying political settlement.

Read the full analysis:

Belqasim Haftar’s spending spree is pushing Libya’s economy to the brink

Belqasim’s Development and Reconstruction Fund is one of Libya’s largest state-backed development funds, but its expanding budget and opaque financial practices are damaging the economy and raising serious questions about its reliability as an international partner.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Saudi's growing role in U.S. entertainment

What happened: Saudi Arabia is deepening its role in U.S. entertainment and media, helping establish the Kingdom as a global player while strengthening its domestic capabilities.

Why it matters: One part of Saudi's investment strategy that has garnered significant international attention has been its acquisitions and growing stakes in technology and AI, particularly in terms of its role in the U.S. market. What has received comparably less attention has been the Kingdom’s investment strategy in cultural and entertainment industries, which has been as significant in quantity and in terms of the quality of its strategy.

What this means: Soft power is becoming a central pillar of Saudi strategy. The long-term impact may be less visible than traditional geopolitics, but no less significant. In the current context, where ongoing conflict is impacting the Gulf region and waning investor confidence in the immediate term, investing into creative and cultural industries may be a safer bet than other industries where operations are more directly impacted.

Read the full analysis:

Saudi’s growing role in U.S. entertainment

Riyadh’s growing investment in the sector is helping establish the kingdom as a global player, while strengthening its domestic capabilities.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Special Report: Iran escalation pathways

We also published a new Iran Desk report this week, based on source inquiries and scenario modelling. It examines how the U.S.–Israel–Iran conflict could evolve across multiple escalation pathways, and what that means for regional stability and energy markets.

This is the level of analysis we provide to Enterprise subscribers. If you would like to set up a free 30-day trial for your organisation, get in touch.

Explore the report:

Regional escalation pathways in the U.S.-Israel-Iran war

This report provides scenario mapping of the ongoing U.S.-Israel-Iran war, analysing potential regional escalation pathways, Strait of Hormuz disruption risk and the likelihood of further attacks on Gulf energy infrastructure.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

As always, thank you for reading and for your continued support.

Feel free to reply with feedback or suggestions.

See you next week,

Oliver Crowley
Co-Founder, The Geopolitical Desk

P.S. Please forward this to anyone who might find it useful. If you’re reading this second-hand, you can sign up for our free newsletter here.

Professionals across energy markets, diplomacy, risk advisory and investment use GPD Intelligence to track geopolitical developments before they move markets.

If you find this coverage valuable, you can unlock the full Intelligence briefings and scenario analysis.

The war between the United States, Israel and Iran is not proving to be a “quick” one. It has already surpassed the previous 12-day war and is now the organising event shaping global politics and markets.

This week’s analysis looks at three questions that increasingly matter.

First, whether the war is beginning to fracture the political coalition that brought Donald Trump back to power.

Second, whether the Islamic Republic (assumed by many to be brittle) is proving far more structurally resilient than expected.

Third, what this escalation means for global energy markets and investors who once believed geopolitical risk could be priced out of oil.

Together, these questions are beginning to define not just the trajectory of the conflict itself, but the broader economic and political landscape surrounding it.

Let’s get into it.

P.S. We published an in-depth report on the Iran war last week based on source inquiries across the region. If you would like a copy, feel free to reply to this email or get in touch.

Is Trump’s war breaking his coalition?

What happened: The decision to strike Iran has begun to fracture the coalition that returned Donald Trump to the White House. Segments of Trump’s base (particularly populist conservatives and anti-interventionists) are increasingly questioning the rationale and scope of the war.

Why it matters: Trump’s political coalition was always an uneasy alliance. It brought together traditional Republicans, nationalist populists, energy hawks and anti-war conservatives who viewed foreign entanglements as strategic mistakes. The Iran escalation exposes the fault lines between those factions. If the conflict expands, that tension could deepen — particularly if the economic costs begin to reach American voters through energy prices or market volatility.

What this means: The war’s political sustainability inside the United States may become as important as its military trajectory. The White House must now balance strategic escalation abroad with coalition management at home. That balancing act is becoming harder as time goes by.

Read the full analysis:

Trump’s ill-planned war is breaking his coalition

The President has walked himself into a new quagmire, but even if he finds a way to extract himself soon, the war will damage his party for the rest of his term.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Khamenei is dead. The system survives

What happened: The death of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has triggered a leadership transition inside the Islamic Republic. While many thought this moment would be destabilising, it showed how the system Khamenei helped build was designed precisely to survive moments like this.

Why it matters: The Islamic Republic is often portrayed externally as a personalised regime centred around a single leader. In reality, it functions more like a decentralised power structure. Authority is distributed across clerical institutions, security bodies and political factions that operate within a shared ideological framework. That structure has proven its resilience during the latest leadership shock.

What this means: The succession moment does not necessarily weaken the regime. In some ways it may reinforce it. Transitions allow the system to renew itself while preserving the institutional logic that has sustained it for decades. For outside actors betting on regime collapse, that may prove an uncomfortable reality.

Read the full analysis:

Khamenei is dead, long live Khamenei: Iran’s regime after wartime succession

The death of Ali Khamenei was expected to shake the Islamic Republic. Instead, Iran’s wartime succession and the rise of Mojtaba Khamenei reveal a regime that remains cohesive under pressure. National mobilisation, institutional loyalty and war dynamics may reinforce rather than weaken the system.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Energy dominance meets its limits

What happened: The escalation with Iran has sent Brent Crude over $100 per barrel. With Tehran threatening shipping routes and the Strait of Hormuz under pressure, energy traders are reassessing risks many believed were largely contained. The price of geopolitical risk is returning to oil.

Why it matters: Washington’s “energy dominance” narrative has long suggested the United States could buffer global markets from geopolitical instability, particulary in West Asia. But upstream investors are seeing supply shocks reverberate through global systems. Insurance costs, tanker routes, and investor confidence are all now in play.

What this means: The question is not really about oil prices, even though fluctuations will inevitably impact political apetite for and public reactions to this war. However, what is still unclear is whether the ongoing escalation forces long-term reassessment of geopolitical risk across the energy sector and global supply chains. Investors, governments and companies are beginning to model scenarios that only weeks ago seemed remote.

Read the full analysis:

The limits of U.S. energy independence and the upstream risks of escalation in Iran

U.S. military escalation against Iran is reshaping energy geopolitics and exposing new risks for oil and gas investors across the Middle East. From Iraq and Syria to the Eastern Mediterranean, upstream opportunities created by geopolitics may prove far less stable than they appear.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

🌏 The world beyond the war

Over the past few days, many readers have asked us variations of the same question: how do the Iranian people feel about the war, what are Iranians being told about the war, and what does the general public in Iran think about ongoing events.

Assessing public sentiment is always tricky in Iran, especially now that the internet is down and segments of society stand on opposite sides.

This is why Iran coverage is so polarised. State and semi-official news outlets focus on pro-government rallies or what are often scripted interviews.

On the other side, networks that were central in relaying January protest footage and have access to Starlink or top-of-the-line VPNs push out footage showing people quietly but passionately supporting the air campaign against their rulers, echoing calls by the IDF to amplify opposition voices in Iran.

In the middle of this political show, the overall sentiment is more mixed.

So, how do Iranians feel about the war?

People oscillate between shock and anger toward what they see as an illegal attack, concern over their immediate security and long-term future in Iran, or anxious trepidation toward the possibility of a better tomorrow without the Islamic Republic.

The future is murky. For those desiring change, the mood depends largely on which geopolitical outlook they hold.

Some adopt a uniquely Iranian perspective that carries excessive reverence toward the United States and high hopes for Israel’s motives in seeking an Iranian ally.

Others take a more grounded geopolitical outlook, looking at the U.S. regional imprint since 2001.

Now that the war enters its second week and more civilian infrastructure is struck inside Iran, the population is feeling growing fright, anger, and patriotic awakening.

The debate beyond Iran

Outside Iran, there is no serious platform defending the Islamic Republic, which has burnt through much of its soft power since its faulty stance during the Arab Spring, its consecutive repression of domestic protests, and its attachment to an Islamism that is reviled in the West and losing ground in the region.

Although laughed at in right-wing circles and misused by parts of the Left, anti-imperialism remains a central movement shaping Middle Eastern conflicts and motivating hearts and minds.

However, Tehran’s foreign policy missteps have severely weakened its ability to rally such support.

Even when rallies occur, such as in Pakistan, they cannot translate into any geopolitically salient force.

As a result, the Iran debate abroad is split between those who see a golden opportunity to reshape the Middle East, return from exile, or remove an ideological adversary, and those who rightly point to the illegality and heedlessness of the war but struggle to identify a credible short-term path away from the Islamic Republic.

The problem with speaking for “the Iranian People”

Now that another foreign intervention has taken shape, political entrepreneurs increasingly style themselves as the voice of the “Iranian people”.

They draw attention and support despite peddling disinformation, hidden agendas, and a lack of planning.

Revolutionary periods inevitably compress individual voices into sweeping narratives about “the people”.

But Iran, like any society, is deeply diverse.

Reducing it to a binary struggle risks falling into the same Manichean logic that has shaped so much Western interpretation of the region. Ironically, that worldview may be Ancient Iran’s most enduring export.

Here are some recent Intelligence-only articles:

Iran’s escalation scenarios: how the war could disrupt oil, shipping and global aviation

The war on Iran is entering a dangerous phase. From disruption in the Strait of Hormuz to potential attacks on Gulf energy infrastructure and aviation hubs, several scenarios could shake global oil markets, shipping routes and regional security across West Asia.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Why escalation may be Iran’s only working strategy

While the U.S. and Israel have a dizzying array of strategic goals, ranging from Iran’s military weakening, change within the regime and regime change, Iran simultaneously follows two broad approaches which aim at forcing the U.S. to throw in the towel and allowing the Islamic Republic to survive.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Who rules Iran after Khamenei? Succession scenarios explained

From IRGC hardliners to clerical conservatives and pragmatic insiders, this analysis maps the key figures, power blocs and scenarios shaping Iran’s future and regional stability.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Thin diplomacy, heavy firepower: U.S-Iran at a breakingpoint

Little progress, large egos, and military buildups are hurtling the U.S.-Iran crisis toward potential confrontation.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

The multiple murky paths of U.S.-Iran tensions

An American flotilla is nearing Iran as the country recovers from a violent state crackdown on mass protests. The U.S. task force’s goals remain unclear, driving tensions in southwest Asia.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

This week’s coverage focuses on the widening war around Iran and the second-order shocks beginning to ripple across the region.

What began as targeted strikes has quickly evolved into a conflict with implications for global energy markets, shipping routes, regional militant networks and the internal stability of the Islamic Republic itself.

Let's get into it.

How the Iran war could disrupt oil, shipping and global aviation

What happened: Military escalation between Iran, Israel and the U.S. has pushed the region toward scenarios that could directly affect global aviation routes, maritime traffic and energy infrastructure across the Gulf.

Why it matters: Iran’s strongest leverage does not lie in conventional military victory but in its ability to disrupt global markets. Even limited interference with shipping or aviation corridors could send shockwaves through energy prices and insurance markets.

What it means: The escalation ladder still has multiple rungs. Disruption of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, targeting of Gulf infrastructure, or wider proxy involvement remain plausible pathways if Tehran seeks to regain deterrence.

Subscriber insight: This briefing maps the specific escalation triggers that could push oil above $100 and disrupt Gulf aviation corridors.

Iran’s escalation scenarios: how the war could disrupt oil, shipping and global aviation

The war on Iran is entering a dangerous phase. From disruption in the Strait of Hormuz to potential attacks on Gulf energy infrastructure and aviation hubs, several scenarios could shake global oil markets, shipping routes and regional security across West Asia.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Why escalation may be Iran’s only working strategy

What happened: As the conflict deepens, Tehran faces a strategic dilemma: accepting a ceasefire risks exposing weakness, while escalation offers a way to impose costs on its adversaries.

Why it matters: Iran cannot match Israel and the United States militarily. Its most effective strategy may instead be to make the conflict economically and politically unsustainable for its opponents.

What it means: Expect Tehran to rely increasingly on asymmetric tools. Market disruption, proxy pressure and calibrated regional escalation could become the core pillars of its strategy.

Why escalation may be Iran’s only working strategy

While the U.S. and Israel have a dizzying array of strategic goals, ranging from Iran’s military weakening, change within the regime and regime change, Iran simultaneously follows two broad approaches which aim at forcing the U.S. to throw in the towel and allowing the Islamic Republic to survive.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Modern warfare in Tehran: is the air campaign working?

What happened: Israel’s air campaign over Iran has expanded significantly, targeting infrastructure and strategic sites across Tehran and other key areas.

Why it matters: Airpower can degrade military capabilities but rarely determines political outcomes on its own. The effectiveness of the campaign depends on whether it can disrupt Iran’s command structures and war-making capacity.

What it means: If the campaign fails to generate decisive effects, pressure may grow for broader escalation, potentially involving expanded regional operations or deeper U.S. involvement.

Modern warfare in Tehran: is the air campaign working?

U.S. and Israeli strikes are degrading Iran’s missile launchers and military infrastructure, but intelligence gaps, rising civilian casualties and uncertain missile stockpiles raise questions about how durable the campaign’s gains will be.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Who rules Iran after Khamenei? Succession scenarios explained

What happened: The war has revived a long-standing question within Iran’s political system: who will succeed Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.

Why it matters: The identity and alignment of Khamenei’s successor will shape Iran’s ideological direction, institutional balance and willingness to confront external pressure.

What it means: Elite factional competition could intensify if the conflict weakens the current leadership structure, creating uncertainty about the future trajectory of the Islamic Republic.

Who rules Iran after Khamenei? Succession scenarios explained

From IRGC hardliners to clerical conservatives and pragmatic insiders, this analysis maps the key figures, power blocs and scenarios shaping Iran’s future and regional stability.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Will new regional instability give rise to ISIS?

What happened: Rising instability across West Asia is prompting renewed concern about whether extremist armed groups could exploit the current crisis to regroup.

Why it matters: Periods of regional upheaval have historically created opportunities for militant organisations to rebuild networks and expand recruitment.

What it means: If security vacuums deepen in key theatres such as Iraq and Syria, the conditions that previously enabled ISIS’s resurgence could begin to re-emerge.

Will new regional instability give rise to ISIS?

Drone activity, jihadist fractures and regional escalation are all creating a hostile environment that could see the rebirth of ISIS.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Is the Libyan National Army drifting westwards?

What happened: Recent political signals suggest Khalifa Haftar’s Libyan National Army may be adjusting its posture.

Why it matters: A shift in Haftar’s strategy could alter the fragile balance between eastern and western power centres and reshape ongoing negotiations over Libya’s political future.

What it means: If confirmed, this recalibration could reopen political space for new alliances, negotiations and potential institutional restructuring.

Is the Libyan National Army drifting westwards?

Just two years ago, the Libyan National Army (LNA) was widely treated as an international pariah. Western capitals explored ways to weaken it and diplomatic engagement was limited. Today, that picture looks increasingly outdated.

The Geopolitical DeskThe Geopolitical Desk

Trump envoy pushes to strip elections from UN Libya communiqué

What happened: Diplomatic negotiations around Libya’s political roadmap have intensified, with a U.S. envoy reportedly pushing to remove elections from a UN communiqué.