Fault Lines

Fault Lines Episode 551: Between Rhetoric and Reality: What’s Going on in IranToday, Morgan, Jamil, Matt, and Jess take a closer look at Iran, where widespread unrest continues largely out of view. Reports suggest protests have erupted in hundreds of cities, with tens of thousands killed or detained as the regime has tightened control, shut down the internet, and doubled down on its support for the Ayatollah. As Europe moves to designate the IRGC as a terrorist organization and U.S. naval forces operate nearby, President Trump has issued stark warnings, calling on Tehran to end its nuclear ambitions and stop killing protesters, while hinting at behind-the-scenes contact with Iranian interlocutors.What happens now? Is this another wave of protests destined to be crushed without meaningful international support, or is there a real window for outside pressure to make a difference? What does Trump mean when he says “help is coming,” and does credibility suffer if that help never materializes? Is the United States prepared to act, or content to wait and see yet again?@morganlroach@jamil_n_jaffer@NotTVJessJones@WMattHaydenLike what we're doing here? Be sure to rate, review, and subscribe. And don't forget to follow @faultlines_pod and @masonnatsec on Twitter!We are also on YouTube, and watch today's episode here: https://youtu.be/YgxnXBFULCc

Today, Jess, Les, Morgan, Andrew, and Amy break down the National Defense Strategy released last Friday, the Pentagon’s core blueprint for deterring adversaries and preventing conflict. Issued just weeks after the White House rolled out its National Security Strategy, the NDS reinforces familiar themes: deterring China through strength rather than conflict, pushing allies and partners to shoulder more regional security burdens, prioritizing the Western Hemisphere, and revitalizing the U.S. defense industrial base. Does the strategy signal a meaningful pivot toward de-escalation with China? Can U.S. allies and partners realistically fulfill the burden-sharing roles the strategy assigns them? And as sovereignty, trade, and security increasingly collide, does this strategy provide a clear framework for managing overlapping global threats—or allow for too much ambiguity at a critical moment?@NotTVJessJones@lestermunson@morganlroach@AndrewBorene@amykmitchellLike what we're doing here? Be sure to rate, review, and subscribe. And don't forget to follow @faultlines_pod and @masonnatsec on Twitter!We are also on YouTube, and watch today's episode here: https://youtu.be/Z1HdVjwfpvM

Today, Morgan, Les, Matthew, and Jess discuss the latest diplomatic push around Ukraine, following a flurry of high-level meetings at Davos and beyond. President Trump and President Zelensky met for more than an hour as the World Economic Forum wrapped up, while Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff traveled to Russia to meet with Vladimir Putin. For the first time since the war began, American, Ukrainian, and Russian officials are now slated to meet face-to-face in Abu Dhabi to discuss military and security issues, raising questions about whether momentum toward a negotiated settlement is finally building.But are we actually any closer to peace? What would it take for Putin to seriously engage, given his repeated rejection of past proposals and the political risks he faces at home? Is Trump’s increasingly tough rhetoric a signal of leverage, hinting at greater military support for Ukraine if diplomacy fails, or a strategy to give Putin a face-saving off-ramp? @morganlroach@lestermunson@WMattHayden@NotTVJessJonesLike what we're doing here? Be sure to rate, review, and subscribe. And don't forget to follow @faultlines_pod and @masonnatsec on Twitter!We are also on YouTube, and watch today's episode here: https://youtu.be/HA-taYy4ero

Today, Les, Jamil, Morgan, and Jess discuss Greenland as President Trump arrives at the World Economic Forum in Davos and once again places the Arctic island at the center of global attention. While Trump’s rhetoric has sparked backlash across Europe, the debate raises serious strategic questions: Greenland’s growing importance to U.S. national security, its role in Arctic defense, and why Washington has sought greater influence over the territory for more than a century.Should we be wringing our hands or rending our garments over the Kerfuffle with Europe? Does the United States have a legitimate national security interest in Greenland, and if so, what’s the right way to pursue it without fracturing NATO unity? How should Washington balance pressure with reassurance to allies already rattled by the war in Ukraine? And as Trump enters his second year in office, what does the Greenland debate tell us about how this administration plans to wield power going forward?@lestermunson@jamil_n_jaffer@morganlroach@NotTVJessJonesLike what we're doing here? Be sure to rate, review, and subscribe. And don't forget to follow @faultlines_pod and @masonnatsec on Twitter!We are also on YouTube, and watch today's episode here: https://youtu.be/RTw7qRU1Z6U

Today, Jess, Les, Andrew, and Joshua take a step back from the headlines for a Fun Friday roundtable on the best and worst American foreign policy decisions, inspired by a recent Council on Foreign Relations article drawing on conversations with the Society for Historians of American Foreign Relations. From the Marshall Plan and Bretton Woods to PEPFAR and the peaceful end of the Cold War in Europe, the team reflects on moments when U.S. leadership, economic power, and long-term thinking paid real dividends.What separates foreign policy successes from failures? Why do some hard-power decisions look effective at first but unravel over time? And as the U.S. looks ahead, what should decision-makers keep firmly in mind before reaching for any one instrument of power?Check out the article that helped shape our Fellows’ discussion: https://www.cfr.org/ten-best-ten-worst-us-foreign-policy-decisions/?utm_source=newsrelease&utm_campaign=best-worst-2026&utm_medium=email&utm_term=PressCFR%20-%20Including%20Members%20and%20Staff @NotTVJessJones@lestermunson@AndrewBorene@joshuachuminskiLike what we're doing here? Be sure to rate, review, and subscribe. And don't forget to follow @faultlines_pod and @masonnatsec on Twitter!We are also on YouTube, and watch today's episode here: https://youtu.be/FR_W1-fpr5o

Today, Les, Jamil, Morgan, and Andy revisit Iran as protests continue to escalate and the reported death toll climbs into the thousands. President Trump was briefed this week on response options and has publicly signaled support for demonstrators, saying that “help is on the way.” What does meaningful support for Iranian protesters actually look like? Should the United States openly back regime change—and if so, how, given limited military presence and a fractured opposition? Are covert action, cyber operations, and coordination with regional partners more realistic tools than overt force? And as Trump isolates Iran economically and diplomatically, is this the beginning of a pressure campaign that could genuinely tip the balance, or another moment of outrage without follow-through?@lestermunson@jamil_n_jaffer@morganlroach@andykeiserLike what we're doing here? Be sure to rate, review, and subscribe. And don't forget to follow @faultlines_pod and @masonnatsec on Twitter!We are also on YouTube, and watch today's episode here: https://youtu.be/bVOL-Ec7zB0

Today, Les, Jamil, Morgan, and Jess discuss escalating protests across Iran, where economic collapse and political repression are driving nationwide unrest. Demonstrations that began with small business owners have spread to major cities, prompting a violent crackdown by security forces and an internet shutdown. As the regime insists the situation is under control, President Trump has warned publicly that continued mass killings could trigger U.S. action, while Iranian officials have quietly floated the possibility of renewed nuclear talks.Is this protest movement meaningfully different from past uprisings that fizzled under pressure? Has the regime been weakened enough, internally and externally, for unrest to threaten its hold on power? And with Iran’s opposition fractured and no clear alternative government waiting in the wings, what leverage does the United States actually have if it wants to support change without creating a far more dangerous vacuum?@lestermunson@jamil_n_jaffer@morganlroach@NotTVJessJonesLike what we're doing here? Be sure to rate, review, and subscribe. And don't forget to follow @faultlines_pod and @masonnatsec on Twitter!We are also on YouTube, and watch today's episode here: https://youtu.be/wS56YpITIdI

Today, Jess, Les, Morgan, and Matthew discuss why Greenland has suddenly become a focal point of U.S. foreign policy. President Trump has reignited debate by publicly suggesting the United States should own Greenland, escalating rhetoric well beyond existing basing rights under the 1951 agreement with Denmark. While administration officials have walked back any suggestion of force, Greenlandic leaders have rejected the idea outright—even as the island’s strategic importance grows amid heightened Arctic competition involving Russia and China.What national security concerns is the administration trying to address with its approach to Greenland? Is the focus on Greenland driven by concerns over Russian and Chinese military activity, access to critical minerals, missile overflight risks, or all of the above? And while the U.S. case for Greenland’s strategic importance is clear, does the administration’s approach risk alienating Denmark and other NATO allies — and if so, at what cost to Arctic cooperation?@morganlroach@lestermunson@NotTVJessJonesLike what we're doing here? Be sure to rate, review, and subscribe. And don't forget to follow @faultlines_pod and @masonnatsec on Twitter!We are also on YouTube, and watch today's episode here: https://youtu.be/65o2FCiBrjw