Skip to main content
Axios

Axios

Newspaper | United States | Centre
www.axios.com/

Smart brevity news covering politics, business, technology, and more. Get essential news efficiently.

Engagement Insights

3.06 score
50
Discussions
6
Participants
8
Total Votes
387
Articles

Discussions from Axios

Geopolitics

What should the U.S. government's role be in responding to threats made by political leaders?

With a few exceptions, congressional Republicans were silent on Tuesday as the clock ticked down on President Trump's threat to wipe out Iranian civilization unless the Strait of Hormuz was reopened. Why it matters: Republicans in Congress have shown unwavering loyalty to Trump, and the president's threat against Iran appears to be no exception to the long-standing pattern of limited GOP resistance. Driving the news: Rep. Nathaniel Moran (R-Texas) said in a post on X that "I do not support the destruction of a "whole civilization." That is not who we are, and it is not consistent with the principles that have long guided America." Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) posted Trump's threat "cannot be excused away as an attempt to gain leverage in negotiations with Iran.""This type of rhetoric is an affront to the ideals our nation has sought to uphold and promote around the world for nearly 250 years. It undermines our long-standing role as a global beacon of freedom and directly endangers Americans both abroad and at home," Murkowski added."The United States does not destroy civilizations. Nor do we threaten to do so as some sort of negotiating tactic," Republican-turned Independent Rep. Kevin Kiley (Calif.) said. Kiley added that Congress has a responsibility to conduct oversight of the war. Zoom in: GOP leaders in the House and Senate have not publicly weighed in on Trump's remarks. Congressional Democrats have been sounding the alarm about the threat, with some lawmakers floating impeachment or even removal via the 25th Amendment. The bottom line: Congress has been out of session since March 27, and GOP lawmakers have been able to avoid uncomfortable questions in the Capitol hallways. Some Republicans have welcomed the comments: The official Senate Republicans' X account warned Iranians to take Trump "at his word."

Global
Join Discussion
Economy

How should the government respond to the effects of the Iran war on the economy?

Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell said the Fed is not yet at the moment when it needs to decide whether to "look through" the Iran war energy shock. What they're saying: "It's something we will eventually, maybe, face the question of what to do here. We're not really facing it yet because we don't know what the economic effects will be," Powell told introductory economics students at Harvard University on Monday morning. "We feel like our policy is in a good place for us to wait and see how that turns out." Powell said that the Fed has to consider the economic backdrop against which the shock is occurring. "The broader context is . we've been coming down close to 2% [inflation], post-pandemic, but we've never actually gotten and stayed at 2%," he said. But the Fed chair added that, at least for now, Americans' inflation expectations remain "well-anchored beyond the short term," putting less pressure on the central bank to act now.Powell also joked that maybe the students in the audience should tell him what to do, since they had just completed a problem set on how the Fed should approach such a supply shock. The intrigue: Powell was reluctant to give specific advice to his successor, Kevin Warsh, who is awaiting Senate confirmation. "I'll just say, in general . it's very, very important to stick to your knitting and stick to the things that were actually assigned," Powell said."There's always a time when an administration looks and says, 'It would be good to use [the Fed's tools] for something else,'" he said. "It happens all the time . but we have to be careful to stick to what we're doing." Answering a separate question from a student, Powell offered more insight into how he builds consensus at the Fed. "I think an underrated skill is in listening to people," he said. "If you listen to people, and you hear them . and they understand that you're actually listening to them, and not just communicating at them — for most of the people, most of the time, that's going

United States
Join Discussion
Geopolitics

What are the possible benefits and risks of lifting oil sanctions on Iran for the U.S. and the world?

The White House is considering lifting sanctions on Iranian oil that's at sea to keep oil prices down, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Thursday. Why it matters: The administration is pulling out all the stops — even easing up an economic threat to its enemy in war — to keep down oil prices. The latest: The price of Brent crude, the global benchmark, spiked 10% in just the past 24 hours, driving increasing worries among investors. Brent is now around $111 per barrel — nearly 60% higher than pre-war levels. Zoom in: "In the coming days, we may unsanction the Iranian oil that's on the water," Bessent told Fox Business Thursday morning. He said that would make up about 140 million barrels — about 10 days to two weeks of supply."In essence, we'd be using the Iranian barrels against the Iranians to keep the price down for the next 10 or 14 days, as we continue this campaign. So, we have lots of levers." The big picture: The White House has been able for the past few weeks to contain prices with various assurances and policies — promising tanker escorts through the critical Strait of Hormuz, waiving the Jones Act, and temporarily lifting sanctions on Russian oil. Zoom out Lifting sanctions on Iranian oil would be a remarkable next step — as it was something Iranians were asking for in negotiations last year. The White House referred Axios' questions about Iranian sanctions to the Treasury Department, which didn't immediately respond to a request for comment or more details. The bottom line: The administration appears to be conceding something in war that it was unwilling to give in peace, says Nicholas Mulder, a sanctions expert and professor at Cornell University. "The U.S. has to dial back sanctions to offset the second order effect of war," he says. "It speaks to the instability of the situation."

United States
Join Discussion
Politics

What could the recent election results in Florida mean for future political changes in the area?

Democrats on Tuesday flipped a Republican-leaning Florida state House seat that encompasses President Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate, per AP. The big picture: Democrat Emily Gregory beat the Trump-endorsed Republican Jon Maples in a special election in the Palm Beach County-based district that the president won by 11 points. Trump voted for Maples by mail, despite repeatedly railing against mail-in voting. Zoom out: Republicans have been getting creamed in dozens of state legislative elections since Trump took office last year. Democratic candidates running for state legislative seats this year have outperformed 2024 presidential candidate Kamala Harris' vote totals by nearly 11 points, according to The Downballot, a site that tracks congressional and state-level elections.The sluggish GOP voter turnout is deeply concerning Republican strategists ahead of the midterm elections. Reality check: Though Florida Republicans are disappointed by the outcome, they're still expressing confidence they'll keep the governorship and a U.S. Senate this in the fall midterms. Republicans have not lost a statewide race in Florida since 2018, and the party maintains control of the state legislature. What they're saying: "A slow-turnout state House special election is a snapshot of local quirks, candidate dynamics, and turnout math — not some grand verdict," said Republican National Committee Senior Adviser Danielle Alvarez Tuesday night. The other side: "Donald Trump's own neighbors just sent a crystal clear message: They are furious and ready for change," Democratic National Committee Chairman Ken Martin said in a Tuesday night statement. Marc Caputo contributed reporting

United States
Join Discussion
Geopolitics

What are the possible effects of Iran's actions in the Gulf on international trade and regional safety?

DUBAI, March 23 (Reuters) - An attack on Iran's southern coast and islands will lead to Gulf routes being cut with the laying of sea mines, the country's Defence Council said on Monday according to state media. The U.S. is considering plans to occupy or blockade Iran's Kharg Island, the country's main oil export hub, to pressure Tehran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz to all shipping, according to Axios

Iran
Join Discussion