Yesterday marked the fourth anniversary of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. Four years of war in which Russian forces have occupied roughly one and a half percent of Ukraine’s territory at the cost of approximately half a million lives. Our guest, Frederick W. Kagan, and his team at the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) and the Critical Threats Project (CTP) assess that Russia’s strategy is to win at the negotiating table what it cannot seize on the battlefield. Putin’s theory of victory rests on the assumption that Russian forces will continue grinding forward indefinitely, regardless of the cost, and that he will be able to persuade the West to abandon Ukraine, ultimately forcing Kyiv to concede more than it already has. Successful negotiation requires changing Putin’s calculus. Over the past four years, Ukrainians have made their position unmistakably clear: “We would rather die than be part of Russia.” So, what will drive this tipping point toward peace? Would a global inflection point against malign actors and axis partners change Putin's negotiating position? And what security guarantees from the West would be sufficient to sustain this hypothetical peace?

Frederick W. Kagan is a senior fellow and the director of the Critical Threats Project (CTP) at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI). He edits CTP’s and the Institute for the Study of War’s (ISW) daily updates on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. He was previously an associate professor of military history at West Point, and he earned the Distinguished Public Service Award for his volunteer service in Afghanistan. Dr. Kagan coauthored the report Defining Success in Afghanistan and is the author of the “Choosing Victory” report series, which recommended and monitored the US military surge in Iraq.

Read the transcript here.

Subscribe to our Substack here.

Over the weekend, President Trump launched Operation Epic Fury, the most ambitious US military operation in decades. In the wake of the 2025 12-Day War, Iran again worked to reconstitute its nuclear weapons program and its missile arsenal. These threats, in combination with the massacre of tens of thousands of Iranians in January, brought the US to the brink of war. The operation has targeted IRGC command, missile defense systems, and senior regime leadership, including the Supreme Leader and his successors. Secretary Hegseth has stated that nothing is off the table, including the possible deployment of ground forces, an option potentially necessary to secure Iran’s nuclear materials. Our guest, David Albright, warns that failing to secure those materials will ultimately undermine the operation’s success. In the weeks ahead, what indicators will signal whether the regime is truly at risk of collapse? Beyond military targets, what political considerations must be addressed to ensure lasting success once combat operations cease?

David Albright is the founder and President of the non-profit Institute for Science and International Security in Washington, D.C. He has written numerous assessments on secret nuclear weapons programs throughout the world, has authored or co-authored nine books and briefed policymakers on non-proliferation policy making.

Read the transcript here.

Subscribe to our Substack here.

Blame it on American individualism or a political aversion to regulation, but the United States has become a striking outlier in its failure to regulate the assisted reproductive technology industry. As a result, individuals from other countries have begun engaging in quasi–birth tourism through American surrogacy contracts, and not in small numbers. Chinese billionaire Xu Bo, for example, has reportedly fathered more than 100 American children through surrogacy and has been involved in legal battles over custody, describing them as part of his “business legacy". Beyond clear international abuses of U.S. surrogacy laws, there are also numerous domestic practices that warrant greater oversight and protection. The central question is why? What do they want these children for? Who, if anyone, is regulating these contracts? And why have lawmakers declined to address this rapidly growing industry?

Charles Hilu is a reporter for The Dispatch based in Washington, D.C. Before joining the company in 2024, he was the Collegiate Network Fellow at the Washington Free Beacon and interned at both National Review and the Washington Examiner. He attended the University of Michigan, earning a Bachelor’s in Political Science, where he was editor in chief of The Michigan Review and chairman of Young Americans for Freedom.

Read the transcript here.

Subscribe to our Substack here.