Top Risks Report and 2026 Volatility
Bremmer explains his annual risk report and why several 2026 risks are already unfolding. He narrows the conversation to the few drivers he thinks matter most right now.
After predicting the world’s biggest risks for over 25 years, Geopolitical Expert Ian Bremmer reveals the top 10 risks for 2026, and why the AI job threat is far bigger than people think! Ian Bremmer is a political scientist and founder of Eurasia Group, a leading political risk research and consulting firm, and GZERO Media, a global affairs media company. He is also a Professor at Columbia University’s School of International and Public Affairs, and the author of several books, including, “The Power of Crisis: How Three Threats - and Our Response - Will Change the World”. He explains: ◼️Why the US has become the biggest driver of global instability ◼️How China is quietly winning the long-term power and resources game ◼️The AI threat that could hack banks, infrastructure, and entire economies ◼️Why millions of jobs could disappear and trigger political backlash ◼️How collapsing global leadership is creating a dangerous “G-Zero” world 00:00 Intro 01:43 The Report Warning of 2026’s Biggest Global Threats 06:43 Are We Watching International Cooperation Collapse in Real Time? 10:04 The Real Motive Behind Trump’s Most Controversial Moves 12:33 The Hidden Forces Driving the Iran War 18:51 The Critical Mistake That Escalated the Iran Conflict 20:17 Who Really Holds Power Inside Iran? 22:21 Why the U.S. Blocked the Strait of Hormuz—and What It Triggered 27:21 How the Lebanon–Iran War Spiral Began 29:15 What Could Have Prevented This Crisis From Unfolding? 31:39 The Unexpected Shifts in the Middle East 35:06 The Real Impact of Trump’s Impulse-Driven Decisions 40:40 The Path That Could Change Everything 45:00 Russia and China’s Calculated Response to the Iran War 47:58 What Europe Got Wrong - and Why It Matters Now 51:47 China’s Long-Term Strategy: Where Does It Leave America? 57:47 A Brief Break—But What Comes Next Matters More 00:59:53 I Predicted 2025—Here’s What’s Coming Next 01:04:10 Why AI Could Trigger a Global Economic Shock 01:06:07 The Unseen Workforce Powering AI’s Rise 01:09:52 Rising Public Anger: Why Elites and AI Leaders Are Under Fire 01:14:36 Is Universal Basic Income Becoming Inevitable? 01:16:01 The Growing Problems Big Tech Can’t Solve 01:22:21 Can the Tech Oligarchy Actually Be Stopped? 01:27:53 Is a True “Utopia” Possible—or Just a Myth? 01:34:34 Why Public Service Matters More Than Ever Today 01:37:46 At the End of Life: What Will Your Choices Really Mean? Enjoyed the episode? Share this link and earn points for every referral - redeem them for exclusive prizes: https://doac-perks.com Follow Ian: X - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/1jUp9VW Instagram - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/HII48p9 YouTube - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/4yJPMn2 Eurasia Group - https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/Jhf7nJ You can purchase Ian’s book ‘“The Power of Crisis: How Three Threats - and Our Response - Will Change the World”, here: https://link.thediaryofaceo.com/6YBkvoW The Diary Of A CEO: ◼️Join DOAC circle here - https://doaccircle.com/ ◼️Buy The Diary Of A CEO book here - https://smarturl.it/DOACbook ◼️The 1% Diary is back - limited time only: https://bit.ly/3YFbJbt ◼️The Diary Of A CEO Conversation Cards (Second Edition): https://g2ul0.app.link/f31dsUttKKb ◼️Get email updates - https://bit.ly/diary-of-a-ceo-yt ◼️Follow Steven - https://g2ul0.app.link/gnGqL4IsKKb
Bremmer explains his annual risk report and why several 2026 risks are already unfolding. He narrows the conversation to the few drivers he thinks matter most right now.
He argues the United States is now the biggest driver of geopolitical and economic instability. Policy swings on trade, alliances, and security create outsized ripple effects worldwide.
The discussion frames current US behavior as a retreat from the postwar order it built. Bremmer says the shock is that the disruption is self-generated rather than imposed by rivals.
He describes China’s strategy to dominate electric vehicles, batteries, and supply chains. The point is less China’s strength today and more how sustained investment shapes future leverage.
Bremmer explains why lithium, rare earths, and related inputs underpin consumer tech and advanced weapons. Control over extraction and processing becomes a form of national power.
He argues more countries diversify toward China as US commitments look less steady. Small hedges compound into larger shifts in global order and alignment.
Bremmer predicts Trump’s agenda collapses politically, especially around midterms. He argues the underlying economic and social grievances will still fuel a search for a new disruptive leader.
The conversation treats “revolution” as a continuing political market. Bremmer suggests the next figure could be ideologically different but powered by the same dissatisfaction.
He warns that if the US won’t lead and no one can replace it, global coordination breaks down. In that vacuum, stronger actors set rules and weaker actors adapt.
Bremmer offers three motives: confidence from a prior operation, a belief Iran won’t retaliate effectively, and an advisor environment that rewards loyalty over expertise. He argues these factors distort risk perception.
A successful intervention narrative is described as boosting Trump’s confidence for Iran. Bremmer ties it to the idea that quick wins can produce reckless extrapolation.
He contrasts Trump’s first term, with more independent officials, to a second term dominated by loyalty. Bremmer claims that reduces internal checks and increases policy incompetence.
After leadership strikes, Iran is described as shifting to decentralized decision-making to survive targeting. That creates more unpredictable attacks on infrastructure and Gulf states.
Bremmer argues Iran still shows centralized capacity despite the chaos. He points to coordinated actions and the presence of senior officials and technical briefs in talks.
The Strait of Hormuz becomes the central bargaining chip. Bremmer argues Iran can impose real economic pain while the US political system has low tolerance for sustained costs.
He interprets long negotiations as substantive even if no deal emerges. Trump’s blockade threats are framed as leverage signaling rather than immediate war escalation.
Bremmer argues Iran can wait out US electoral cycles and public discontent. He compares it to how China exploited leverage during tariff escalation episodes.
Israel’s push into southern Lebanon is presented as a security buffer response to Hezbollah strikes. Bremmer argues Hezbollah’s earlier deterrence has eroded dramatically under Israeli targeting.
He outlines an emerging alignment linking UAE, Israel, the US, and India on security and technology. He contrasts it with a Saudi-Pakistan-Turkey-Egypt axis seeking a different regional architecture.
Bremmer’s base case is extended ceasefire and continued talks leading to nuclear concessions. In return, Iran retains meaningful influence and revenue through Strait transit arrangements.
He discusses a more extreme US option to take Kharg Island, which handles most Iranian oil exports. That would raise troop needs, casualties risk, and potential escalation dynamics.
Rising oil, inflation, and affordability pressures are described as politically toxic. Bremmer argues Trump cannot easily shift blame because the conflict is seen as a war of choice.
The conversation argues Russia gains revenue from price spikes and faces less pressure to compromise. Reduced Western bandwidth and diverted weapons support worsen Ukraine’s defensive position.
Bremmer argues Europe has flatter growth, weaker tech investment, and underfunded defense. That reduces its leverage even as the US becomes more transactional with allies.
He claims Europe assumed lasting peace and convergence toward its model. That encouraged complacency on defense and competitiveness while China consolidated a different political-economic path.
Bremmer argues Europe leaned too narrowly into green transitions and treated nuclear as politically difficult rather than strategically useful. He points to France as a partial counterexample.
He says China lacks reserve-currency dominance and global military capacity. The bigger risk is China leading in key technologies and thereby setting rules, standards, and dependencies.
Bremmer revisits the idea that corporate capabilities can shape war outcomes and governance. Examples include cyber defense, satellite internet, and AI tools that outpace state decision cycles.
A new model is described as dangerous because it could rapidly identify exploitable software vulnerabilities. Bremmer treats this as a real security issue even if it also serves marketing goals.
The discussion highlights workers training systems that may replace them. Bremmer frames it as terrifying but potentially liberating if societies redistribute gains and create better life pathways.
He describes constituent anger over data centers due to low local job creation and higher resource costs. Bremmer suggests this becomes a surprising and potent political flashpoint.
The conversation links inequality and perceived elite capture to social instability. Bremmer argues the danger is political breakdown, not the technology itself.
Bremmer favors near-term measures like shorter workweeks with paid AI training. He argues reskilling and job redesign are more plausible than sudden universal income shifts.
He proposes US-China AI arms control, an AI stability board modeled on financial stability coordination, and large-scale funding to expand access. The goal is to reduce systemic risk while broadening benefits.
Bremmer warns that lack of electricity and infrastructure could become a deeper divide in the AI era. He frames it as a moral and stability problem that requires proactive funding.
He contrasts US private-sector dominance, China’s state control, and Europe’s regulation-heavy social contract. The argument is that each fails when taken to extremes without balance.
Bremmer expresses optimism about human progress and technology’s upside. His deeper fear is humans becoming more programmable and polarized through smartphones and algorithmic incentives.
He argues that independence in media is not just freedom but an obligation to host difficult conversations. Long-form dialogue is framed as a tool to resist algorithm-driven dehumanization.
Bremmer reflects on moving from childhood faith in elected office to impact through institutions, business, and public ideas. He frames influence and credibility as forms of responsibility in a fragmented world.