Patreon Feed Rational Security Titelbild

Patreon Feed Rational Security

Patreon Feed Rational Security

Von: The Lawfare Institute
Jetzt kostenlos hören, ohne Abo

A weekly discussion of national security and foreign policy matters hosted by Lawfare Senior Editor Scott R. Anderson.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Lawfare Institute
Politik & Regierungen Sozialwissenschaften
  • The “Hip to Be a Square State” Edition
    Jul 16 2026
    This week, Scott sat down with his colleagues Lawfare Foreign Policy Editor Daniel Byman, Lawfare Public Service Fellow Julia Curlee, and Lawfare Contributing Editor and Vice President of Research, Security and Defense at the Chicago Council on Global Affairs Ariane Tabatabai, to talk through the week’s big news in foreign policy, including:“Truce or Consequences.” The fragile ceasefire that had paused the U.S.-Iran war since the spring now appears to have collapsed. After Iran struck several commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz, the United States has launched several successive nights of strikes, hitting more than 300 targets across Iran. Iran has in turn retaliated against U.S. bases in Bahrain and Kuwait. Speaking from the NATO summit in Ankara, President Trump declared the June memorandum of understanding “over” even as he insisted that talks toward a lasting peace could still continue. By the weekend, Iran had declared the Strait of Hormuz closed, and U.S. officials were describing the ceasefire as fully “broken down.” Then, on Monday, Trump escalated further—declaring that the United States would “keep” and “run” the Strait as its self-styled “Guardian,” reinstate its blockade on Iranian ships, and charge a 20% fee on all cargo passing through, an arrangement Tehran has flatly rejected. Is the war back on? And is there any diplomatic path left to pull both sides back from the brink? “Rutte Awakening.” NATO’s leaders gathered in Ankara last week for a summit that Secretary General Mark Rutte billed as the launch of “NATO 3.0”—a stronger, more self-reliant Europe inside an alliance less dependent on the United States. Allies touted rapid progress toward last year’s pledge to spend 5% of GDP on defense, announcing more than $50 billion in new procurement and at least €70 billion in fresh military aid for Ukraine. But the gathering was overshadowed by friction with President Trump, who publicly berated allies for declining to help in the Iran war and briefly revived his campaign to acquire Greenland before ending on a somewhat more conciliatory note. What did the Ankara summit actually accomplish? And what does “NATO 3.0” mean for the alliance’s future?“Bad Bromance.” The once-close alliance between Washington and Jerusalem—and between President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Bibi Netanyahu—is showing unusual public strain. Trump has repeatedly clashed with Netanyahu over Israel’s continued operations in Lebanon—which have threatened the Iran ceasefire—and over the stalled second phase of his Gaza peace plan, which has all but wilted as Hamas refuses to disarm and Israel refuses to withdraw. Defense Secretary Hegseth abruptly canceled a planned trip to Israel, and a possible F-35 sale to Turkey has added to the unease. The tensions turned vivid this past week when Democratic Rep. Ro Khanna said he was detained for more than an hour by armed Israeli settlers—and then by IDF soldiers—during a West Bank visit, and armed settlers attacked a CNN crew and other journalists days later. At home, Israeli confidence in Trump has plummeted in advance of Israeli elections in October, even as U.S. primaries have produced a record number of candidates critical of Israel, particularly on the left. Just how strained is the U.S.-Israeli relationship? And how might Israel’s coming elections—and America’s midterms—reshape it? (Also see the Atlantic article by Thomas Wright that Julia references here.)In object lessons, Dan reviews the movie The Invite, and it’s complicated. Ari reviews Israeli jazz musician Avishai Cohen’s new album “Eternal Child” and is totally engaged. Scott remembers the influential life and career of Lindsey Graham, separating himself from any alleged involvement in a long-ago gym-mat scandal. And Julia is in love with post-SCIF life, especially one in which she can work from the serenity of her mother’s paradisiacal porch. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.
    Mehr anzeigen Weniger anzeigen
    1 Std. und 26 Min.
  • The "Scoot Over" Edition
    Jul 9 2026

    This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Editor in Chief and co-host emeritus Benjamin Wittes and Senior Editors Anna Bower and Michael Feinberg to talk through the latest in national security news, including:

    • “Humphrey’s Executioner.” On June 29, the Supreme Court closed out its term with a trio of decisions on the president’s power to fire officials at supposedly independent agencies. In Trump v. Slaughter, a 6–3 majority upheld Trump’s firing of FTC Commissioner Rebecca Slaughter and overruled the 90-year-old precedent Humphrey’s Executor, handing the president at-will removal power over roughly two dozen multimember agencies. The same day, in Trump v. Cook, the Court refused 5–4 to let Trump remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, carving out a special exemption for the central bank. And a day later, in Blanche v. Perlmutter, the justices declined to let Trump oust Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter, whose office sits within the legislative branch. Taken together, what do these cases tell us about the unitary executive and the future of agency independence?
    • “For Your Lies Only.” The Office of the Director of National Intelligence is in freefall. Since Bill Pulte—a housing-finance official with no intelligence background—took over as acting DNI on June 19, he has demanded a roster of every employee, fired the head of the office that oversees the President’s Daily Brief, and all but liquidated the National Intelligence Council. The fight over his appointment has already cost the government its Section 702 surveillance authority, which lawmakers let lapse rather than leave in his hands, and Trump abruptly canceled the confirmation hearing for his own permanent nominee, Jay Clayton, to keep the “less shackled” Pulte in place. How did the nation’s top intelligence coordinator get here—and how much damage can a politicized ODNI actually do?
    • “Fixer Upper.” In one of the stranger turns of the Trump era, Michael Cohen—the former “fixer” whose testimony helped convict Trump of 34 felonies—says he and the president have reconciled. Cohen, who once vowed to flee the country if Trump won, said that the ice between them “didn’t just melt, it broke,” and he is now taking a weekend slot on a conservative station with what he says was Trump’s “glowing recommendation.” The thaw arrives as Trump’s appeal of his New York conviction and related civil fraud judgment grind forward—and after Cohen publicly claimed he felt “pressured and coerced” to testify. What might Cohen’s turn mean for that pending appeal?

    In object lessons, everyone is in a unifying mood. Ben demonstrates how RAGtime, his co-creation with AI overlord Claude to develop and analyze datasets, can find common cause between this week’s co-hosts. Mike is enthusiastic about the new Criterion Collection bringing together all of Stanley Kubrick’s works. Scott is reaching for perhaps humanity’s greatest unifier—a certain beverage that can be enjoyed across political persuasions and coasts alike. And Anna is bringing us all to the world of personal essays with Jo Ann Beard’s “The Fourth State of Matter.”

    Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

    Mehr anzeigen Weniger anzeigen
    1 Std. und 28 Min.
  • The “Happy FrAIday” Edition
    Jun 26 2026

    This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Kevin Frazier, Roger Parloff, and Molly Roberts to talk through some of the week’s big news in AI, including:

    • “Citizen Cain’t.” When the NAACP sued Elon Musk’s xAI under the Clean Air Act—alleging that the company built dozens of gas-fired turbines to power a data center in Mississippi without relevant air permits and exposing nearby, predominantly Black communities to harmful pollution—the Justice Department opted to do something it has never done before: it intervened in a citizen suit against a private company in order to kill it. DOJ’s motion offers two theories: first, that shutting down the turbines would threaten national security because the military relies on xAI’s Grok Gov model (including in relation to the Iran war) to secure the nation, and second, that the Constitution’s vesting of executive power in the president means private citizens cannot enforce federal law over the executive’s objection. How strong are these arguments? And what would it mean for environmental and other citizen-enforcement suits if DOJ were to prevail?
    • “Grok the Vote.” We may be living through the first true “AI elections.” In Manhattan’s NY-12 Democratic primary, more than $40 million in AI-industry and AI-safety money turned a little-known assemblyman, Alex Bores, into something of a national referendum on whether voters care about AI regulation and AI safety—though Bores ultimately lost to Micah Lasher this week. Meanwhile, overseas in Malaysia, parties are using chatbots and other AI-driven technologies to reach out to voters in new and novel ways. And just this week in Washington, a new study has concluded that frontier AI is perhaps more persuasive than ever, but also may not be as politically neutral as some suspect or one might hope. What does this all mean for democratic politics when both money and the messaging involved in our politics are increasingly shaped by AI?
    • “Kill, Kill Switch, Kill, Kill!” The government's frontier-AI "kill switch" is now ready to have its first day in court. If you recall, a few weeks ago, the Commerce Department's Bureau of Industry and Security sent Anthropic an "Is Informed" letter ordering it to suspend all access to its Fable 5 and Mythos 5 models for any foreign nationals, including its own employees. This ultimately led Anthropic to pull access to those models for everyone within hours. But this past Monday, June 22, a technology startup called Legion LegalTech filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government alleging that it has acted in a way that is unlawful and raises a number of statutory and constitutional concerns. How strong is the legal challenge, and what does it tell us about whether courts—rather than the executive—will end up defining the government's power to switch a frontier model on and off?

    In object lessons, Molly sticks to the script for this week’s episode with her call-out of Erik Nitsche’s “Atoms for Peace” poster series for General Dynamics. Also inspired by this week’s theme, Kevin dives into some “light summer reading” about technology, globalization, and the law with “Rules for a Flat World,” by Gillian Hadfield. Roger, similarly, is “unwinding” with “The Winter Warriors,” by Olivier Norek, a novel about the lesser-known David vs. Goliath story of Finland taking on the Soviet Union in 1939. And Scott says enough already! He’s headed on vacation next week, and so is Rational Security. We’ll be back with a new episode and a rejuvenated Scott on July 9.

    Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

    Mehr anzeigen Weniger anzeigen
    1 Std. und 20 Min.
adbl_web_anon_alc_button_suppression_t1
Noch keine Rezensionen vorhanden