Jumping into the stock market might seem intimidating with all its ups and downs, but it’s actually easier than you think. Today’s online brokerages make it simple to buy and trade stocks, ETFs, and options right from your phone or laptop. Many even connect you with experts who can guide you along the way, so you don’t have to figure it all out alone. Get started by opening an account from Money’s list of the Best Online Stock Brokers and start investing with confidence today.

Start investing

What you need to know

The new U.S. National Security Strategy

The publication of the new U.S. National Security Strategy (NSS) marks one of the administration’s most significant statements of intent. Issued periodically, the NSS sets out Washington’s view of the international landscape and explains how the U.S. intends to manage threats, competition and global disorder.

This edition arrives at a moment of severely heightened geopolitical strain, with conflict in Europe, turbulence across the Middle East and Africa, and sharpening rivalry with China. The document attempts to define how the U.S. will navigate a world shaped by great-power competition, rapid technological change and weakening global norms.

Its treatment of China is the most closely watched section, since it offers an insight into whether the U.S. seeks confrontation, accommodation or some form of managed rivalry.

The China framing with a twist: The document’s most consequential line on China is its claim that Washington still sees scope for a mutually beneficial economic relationship. This is striking because it departs from the growing belief in official circles in the U.S. capital that strategic rivalry now makes meaningful economic cooperation impossible.

The phrasing signals an attempt to pursue a dual course. China is cast as the pacing challenge for U.S. security and the principal competitor in the global economy, although the text keeps open the possibility of commercial ties, macroeconomic coordination and selective cooperation on issues such as climate policy, public health and financial stability.

This language appears crafted to reassure allies and markets that the U.S. does not seek wholesale economic separation, even as it tightens controls in strategic sectors such as semiconductors, AI, quantum technology and critical minerals.

What else is in the new NSS: Beyond China, the strategy ranges widely.

Defending the rules-based order
The NSS describes the deterioration of norms that shaped global politics after the Cold War. It highlights Russia’s war in Ukraine and Iran’s regional activity as major pressures. The document reaffirms that alliances remain central to global stability, with NATO, Japan, South Korea and Australia deemed indispensable. The language signals that the administration intends to preserve a leading international role despite isolationist impulses within U.S. politics.

Prioritizing the Indo-Pacific
The Indo-Pacific is identified as the primary arena of long-term geopolitical competition. The strategy leans on deeper alignment with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and India, and closer ties with ASEAN states concerned about Chinese assertiveness. AUKUS and the Quad are presented as core structures for deterrence and technological cooperation.

Investing in U.S. industrial and technological strength
Economic security is treated as national security. The strategy links domestic industrial policy to strategic rivalry, stressing resilient supply chains in critical technologies, pharmaceuticals, energy systems and rare-earth minerals. It places strong weight on AI, quantum research, biotechnology and space capabilities.

Guardrails for technology competition with China
Export controls, investment screening and outbound investment restrictions are framed as targeted tools to protect national security rather than mechanisms for broad decoupling. The implication is that economic tightening will remain narrow and technocratic rather than a comprehensive economic rupture.

A renewed focus on the Middle East
Despite earlier expectations of a regional drawdown, the NSS presents the Middle East as a continuing strategic priority. The U.S. pledges to deter Iran, stabilise the Red Sea and eastern Mediterranean, and support partners such as Israel, Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Jordan. Diplomatic efforts aimed at preventing regional conflict and revising security partnerships also feature.

Strengthening Western Hemisphere stability
Latin America receives notable attention. Venezuela, Haiti and migration flows are cast as urgent concerns. The hemisphere is described as contested terrain in which China and Russia seek broader influence.

Managing global disorder
Climate change, pandemics, food insecurity and economic shocks are portrayed as intertwined risks capable of destabilizing societies as deeply as conventional threats. The strategy calls for broad coalitions and stronger multilateral institutions to address these challenges.

Democratic resilience at home
Domestic polarization, disinformation and cyber interference are depicted as threats to national security. The document urges renewed investment in civic institutions, electoral integrity and digital safeguards.

The strategic logic: Seen as a whole, the NSS depicts a world shaped by intensifying great-power competition, rapid technological change and growing systemic volatility. The administration aims to balance confrontation with China in sensitive domains with cooperation when interests converge; to meet Russia’s aggression without triggering uncontrolled escalation; and to marry global commitments with domestic renewal.

The underlying shift is significant. Washington stops short of defining its relationship with China as irretrievably hostile, even as it constructs a strategic framework designed to constrain Beijing’s more assertive behavior.

The ultimate complex system

Japan’s bond market shifts continue

Japan’s long-term borrowing costs have moved into genuinely unfamiliar territory. The 30-year yield has reached 3.43 percent for the first time on record, and the 10-year yield has climbed to 1.92 percent, its highest since July 2007.

Several implications follow. Japan’s bond market remains the anchor of global finance. When the world’s largest creditor nation sees its long bonds reprice upward, capital that once flowed outward in search of returns in Treasuries, European sovereigns and emerging-market debt may start to return home. Even a partial shift would lift global yields and reduce foreign appetite for U.S. and European bonds.

The breakout also indicates that investors view structural inflation as embedded in Japan. This challenges three decades of economic orthodoxy and raises the risk that refinancing costs for Japan’s large public debt will rise faster than markets or the Ministry of Finance assume.

Higher Japanese yields tighten global financial conditions indirectly. Increased hedging costs for Japanese institutions already curb demand for U.S. Treasuries, and further yield convergence would weaken foreign support for the U.S. curve at a time when Washington faces heavy issuance.

The shift also affects Asia’s economic balance. A Japan emerging from yield suppression could see a stronger yen, altering regional competitiveness. It may also signal to China and its tightly managed financial system that market-driven adjustments can occur abruptly once credibility shifts.

Taken together, Japan’s long-bond surge is not a local market curiosity; it is a global indicator that the post-2008 low-rate equilibrium is dissolving, with far-reaching consequences for capital flows, fiscal sustainability and global demand.

It’s America vs China & everyone else needs to choose a side

Russian hybrid warfare broadens the definition of risk

Reports that four hostile drones attempted to strike President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s aircraft before it arrived in Dublin earlier this week highlight the extent to which Russian hybrid-warfare activity has expanded the boundaries of what is regarded as normal. The episode reflects a strategic environment in which high-risk operations, including those that could endanger senior political figures, now appear alongside a steady stream of cyberattacks, long-range strikes, disinformation campaigns, and sabotage against critical infrastructure.

The strategic implications are clear. If Russia judges that such operations entail limited political or diplomatic cost, it may calculate that there is greater room to employ hybrid tactics that remain below the threshold of open escalation.

In this context, the incident matters less for its immediate effect than for what it reveals about the resilience of deterrence and the international system’s capacity to recognize early warnings during a prolonged, low-intensity conflict.

Pentagon review backs AUKUS partnership

The Pentagon has completed its long-running assessment of the AUKUS submarine partnership with Australia and the UK, and has advised Washington to remain fully committed to the pact.

A U.S. official said the review identified several areas where implementation must be tightened in order to place the trilateral initiative on the “strongest possible footing.”

The findings arrive at a delicate moment. Australia faces mounting pressure to expand domestic shipbuilding capacity and strengthen its supply chains, while the U.S. Navy is grappling with resource constraints that have prompted doubts about its ability to meet AUKUS delivery timelines without straining its own fleet.

Officials say the review is intended to reassure allies that the program remains politically and technically viable, despite scrutiny in all three capitals. The conclusions also signal that Washington continues to view AUKUS as a central pillar of its Indo-Pacific strategy, particularly as China accelerates naval modernization and advances its submarine-hunting capabilities.

China mounts its largest maritime deployment in East Asia

China has deployed what officials in Tokyo describe as an unusually large concentration of naval and coast guard vessels across key stretches of East Asian waters, a move that has sharply heightened already hight tensions with Japan.

More than 100 ships have been confirmed, according to Japanese monitoring data, which makes this China’s largest maritime display of force in the region so far. The flotilla includes surface combatants, auxiliary vessels, and an expanded contingent of China Coast Guard cutters, many of which have been operating near the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands and along major shipping lanes in the East China Sea.

Japanese defense officials say the scale and dispersion of the deployment point to a coordinated operation rather than routine patrols.

Beijing has not offered a public explanation, although analysts in Tokyo and Washington consider the surge part of a broader campaign to test Japan’s response thresholds, reinforce China’s territorial claims, and complicate U.S. and Japanese operational planning.

The show of force may also be intended to signal irritation with expanding Japanese security ties with the U.S. and Australia, and Tokyo’s deepening collaboration with the Philippines.

The immediate concern is miscalculation. Close encounters between Chinese and Japanese vessels occur frequently, although the present density of ships raises the likelihood of an incident or escalation at a time when both governments face domestic pressure to be assertive.

Birthplace of civilization

STC advance reshapes the balance in eastern Yemen

Following their lightning-fast assault on 3 December, the UAE-backed Southern Transitional Council (STC) have capitalized on their momentum and seized al-Abr, a strategically important city in Hadhramaut Governorate and the last major stronghold of Saudi-aligned units in the region.

The capture of al-Abr effectively ends the Saudi military presence in inland Hadhramaut and marks a significant shift in the distribution of power across eastern Yemen.

The operation signals the growing confidence and organizational discipline of forces aligned with the STC, which appears intent on consolidating authority across the south and east.

With both al-Mahrah and Hadhramaut now largely under their control, planners linked to the STC are expected to turn their focus to Marib Governorate.

Marib is among Yemen’s most politically fraught and militarily complex arenas.

Any advance toward Marib would draw the Southern Transitional Council into an area where Saudi influence remains considerable, where tribal politics are intricate and where further movement risks igniting open confrontation with Houthi forces.

A push into Marib, if attempted, would amount to a major escalation and could alter the strategic map of the conflict.

Under threat worldwide

Russia tightens its grip on the internet

Russia has broadened its campaign to seal off the domestic internet, imposing new bans this week on FaceTime, Snapchat, WhatsApp, and the gaming platform Roblox.

The decision marks a sharp escalation in the Kremlin’s long-running effort to curtail foreign digital services that it cannot readily monitor or control. Officials present the restrictions as security measures intended to limit Western intelligence access and reduce the spread of “extremist content.”

The inclusion of Roblox is striking, given its popularity among younger Russians and its evolution into a quasi-social network.

Blocking major messaging applications appears designed to steer users toward state-approved platforms, where authorities can observe communications more easily.

Digital-rights groups caution that the cumulative effect of these measures is the rapid acceleration of Russia’s move toward a closed, Chinese-style internet model.

Granite Act sets stage for a clash over digital sovereignty

The Granite Act currently before the U.S. House of Representatives is Washington’s attempt to build a firmer legal shield around American technology firms operating abroad.

Its central premise, as currently drafted, is that U.S. companies should not be compelled by foreign regulators to comply with extraterritorial orders that conflict with American constitutional protections, particularly those concerning speech and due process.

Applied to Australia’s eSafety Commission, for instance, the implications may be far-reaching. The Commission already asserts broad extraterritorial powers, including the ability to order global content removals and impose fines on platforms headquartered overseas. Whether such fines would remain enforceable against major U.S. firms if the Granite Act becomes law is uncertain, although the text appears crafted to give American companies strong grounds to contest Australian enforcement in U.S. courts. Legislative intent, on present indications, points to practical enforcement of eSafety penalties in the U.S. becoming highly unlikely without a diplomatic settlement.

That wider backdrop explains the unusually sharp remarks from Sarah Rogers, the U.S. Under Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, who criticized Australia’s proposed Online Safety Act for “vastly overreaching” into other jurisdictions and described it as a diplomatic “red line.”

For a senior State Department official to characterize an Australian domestic bill in such terms is rare and reflects Washington’s growing concern that the legislation could establish a precedent for global regulatory claims over online speech. Rogers’ intervention indicates that if Canberra insists on universal takedown powers, the U.S. appears prepared to shift the matter from routine regulatory friction to a broader dispute over digital sovereignty and the limits of national jurisdiction.

If both pieces of legislation advance, with Australia pursuing global compliance and the U.S. constructing a statutory firewall, the result would be a collision between two legal orders.

In practice, American platforms could face conflicting obligations: comply with Canberra and risk breaching U.S. law, or comply with U.S. law and reject Canberra, triggering fines Australia may struggle to collect.

The most plausible outcome, judging by earlier disputes involving the EU’s GDPR regulations, is a negotiated memorandum of understanding that narrows the reach of eSafety rules in exchange for voluntary cooperation on the most harmful categories of content.

America First

U.S.–Congo strategic partnership

The U.S.–Congo Strategic Partnership marks one of Washington’s most consequential efforts to reshape the global contest for critical minerals. The agreement was signed yesterday, 4 December, by President Donald Trump, Congo’s President Felix Tshisekedi, and Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame, a grouping that reflects the regional political and military stakes as well as the economic ones.

Under the deal, American firms will receive priority access to a basket of strategic assets in Congo, including cobalt, copper, gold, and a set of unexplored concessions long viewed by geologists as promising although political risk kept them dormant.

At its center, the agreement creates a joint Strategic Mineral Reserve designed to secure long-term supplies for the U.S. industrial base. Cobalt remains especially valuable since it is a critical input for electric-vehicle batteries, specialized alloys, and certain defense technologies. Washington has been searching for ways to diversify supply chains that have become heavily dependent on Chinese refining and on Congolese extraction controlled by Chinese operators. By working directly with Kinshasa and, importantly, drawing Rwanda into the governance structure, the U.S. aims to build a reliable corridor for minerals that support both economic competitiveness and national security.

The pact also signals a broader recalibration of American engagement in Africa. Congo gains a geopolitical counterweight to China and access to capital with fewer conditions than those attached to Beijing’s state-backed firms. For the U.S., the partnership offers resource security as well as a foothold in Central Africa’s mineral belt at a moment when global demand for battery metals is rising.

If the initiative develops as planned, it could become a template for similar arrangements across the continent, pairing Western industrial needs with local development in a more politically balanced fashion.

Move fast and break things

Supreme Court signals restraint on partisan electoral maps

The Supreme Court’s decision on Tuesday to uphold Texas’s congressional map carries broader implications than the case at hand.

By signaling that most justices are reluctant to revisit or overturn how states draw their districts, the ruling points to a wider judicial posture.

The Court may be disinclined to strike down California’s new map or similarly partisan maps adopted elsewhere. This is not an explicit commitment, although the reasoning in the Texas opinion suggests a narrower role for federal courts in redistricting disputes, particularly when states contend that political rather than racial considerations shaped their boundaries.

If that logic holds, the landscape of electoral map-making may become more entrenched and more polarized. States run by Democrats and Republicans may feel emboldened to stretch partisan advantage, aware that the Court appears increasingly hesitant to intervene.

The likely result is a patchwork of boundaries shaped by each state’s political incentives rather than a consistent set of judicially enforced constraints. For Congress, this could lock in structural asymmetries between states for long periods over several electoral cycles, reducing the chances that litigation will materially shift the balance of power.

Appeals court grants Trump a temporary win

A U.S. appeals court on Thursday delivered a procedural victory to President Donald Trump, granting a temporary pause to a lower-court order that would have required the withdrawal of National Guard units from Washington within days.

The ruling does not settle the wider legal dispute, although it suggests that the panel sees some force in the administration’s claim that the deployment remains warranted by current security conditions.

The stay gives the White House time to maintain the status quo while the judges consider whether the president has the authority to keep Guard forces in the capital without fresh approval from Congress or local officials.

The case has evolved into a contest over the limits of executive power and the management of domestic security.

The appeals court, for the moment, has chosen caution. Its intervention highlights how sharply disputed the boundaries of presidential authority have become, particularly when security concerns and political symbolism converge in the capital.

Center of Gravity sign up link: https://www.namea-group.com/the-daily-brief