The Lawfare Podcast

On Dec. 5, the European Commission announced that they are fining X (formerlly Twitter) 120 million euros for impersonation scams with “verification,” broken advertising transpaency system, and blocking researchers from its platform. On a Lawfare Live, Lawfare Senior Editor Kate Klonick and Lawfare Contributing Editor Renee DiResta analyzed the decision, what happens next, and how this fits into the geopolitical struggle over free speech.

New START, the last bilateral nuclear arms control treaty between the United States and Russia, will expire in February 2026 if Washington and Moscow do not reach an understanding on its extension—as they have signaled they are interested to do. What would the end of New START mean for U.S.-Russia relations and the arms control architecture that had for decades contributed to stability among great powers?

Lawfare Public Service Fellow Ariane Tabatabai sits down with John Drennan, Robert A. Belfer International Affairs Fellow in European Security, at the Council on Foreign Relations, and Matthew Sharp, Fellow at MIT’s Center for Nuclear Security Policy, to discuss what New START is, the implications of its expiration, and where the arms control regime might go from here.

For further reading, see:

This week, Scott sat down with his Lawfare colleagues Benjamin Wittes, Natalie Orpett and Eric Ciaramella to talk through the week’s big national security news stories, including:

• “The Art of the Ordeal.” The Trump administration has been at the center of yet another bout of shuttle diplomacy the last several weeks, after an initial “28-point plan” for peace in Ukraine it appeared to hash out with Russia was met with widespread skepticism, both at home and in Kiev — leading it to shift focus to a “19-point plan” officials hashed out in closer consultation with Ukrainian officials and European officials, which was subsequently rejected by Russian President Vladimir Putin. What does this chaotic process tell us about the Trump administration’s strategy and priorities? And what is it likely to mean for America’s Ukrainian allies? 

• “The War Crime on Drugs.” Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is at the center of another controversy, this time over his reported order to “kill everybody” in the first strike on an alleged narcotics-smuggling boat this past September—an order that, intentionally or not, led to a second strike that killed several people who were by that point clinging to wreckage in the open sea, in seemingly clear violation of Defense Department practice and the laws of armed conflict. Hegseth and the White House have sought to shift responsibility for the second strike to senior military personnel, but it’s not clear whether Congress—where Democrats and Republicans on the armed services committees are threatening oversight—are persuaded.

• “Unlawful Good.” Several legislators who are also current or former servicemembers have been labeled the “Seditious Six” by the Trump administration and its allies for public statements they made reiterating that servicemembers’ are only obligated to follow lawful orders, specifically in relation to ongoing counter-narcotics military operations in the Caribbean. And at least one—Sen. Mark Kelly, a retired naval officer—has been publicly threatened with a court martial by the Defense Department. How seriously should we take these legal actions? And what could the broader ramifications be for the military?