A Twisted World: Irony, Hypocrisy, and Power

 

From Washington to Seoul, and New Delhi to Tokyo, the global order is defined by stark contradictions. Laws are bent, histories are rewritten, and principles are abandoned when they clash with power or profit. A series of recent events reinforces my fear of this "twisted world."

The US: A President vs. The Rule of Law (and Then, The Market)

In a landmark 6–3 ruling, the US Supreme Court delivered a significant blow to former President Donald Trump, deciding that he lacked the legal authority to impose sweeping reciprocal tariffs. The Court affirmed that under the Constitution, the power to tax and tariff lies exclusively with Congress. The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the justices argued, is for narrow crises—not for rewriting global trade policy.

While the decision didn't touch tariffs levied under other statutes (like Section 232 on national security or Section 301 on unfair trade), it left over an estimated $100-$175 billion in collected duties in legal limbo, potentially subject to refund claims.

Predictably, Trump’s response was swift and characteristic. He announced a new 10% global tariff under a different law (Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974), a temporary measure meant to address balance-of-payments issues. But in a move that defines his modus operandi, he immediately raised the rate to 15% overnight, seemingly to "punish" the court and maximize the economic impact.

His verbal assault on the justices was even more scorching. He called them "a disgrace," "unpatriotic," "fools," and "lapdogs," even baselessly suggesting foreign influence had swayed them. In most common-law nations, this would be clear contempt of court. In the US, it is a protected, if corrosive, exercise of free speech.

Seoul vs. Washington: A Tale of Two Insurrections

On 19 February, a South Korean court sentenced former President Yoon Suk Yeol to life imprisonment for leading an insurrection. His crime: imposing martial law and using military force against the legislature, an act deemed a direct attack on constitutional order.

To a lay observer, the parallels with January 6, 2021, are glaring. On that day, a mob incited by Donald Trump stormed the US Capitol to halt the certification of an election. Trump was impeached for "incitement of insurrection" but acquitted by the Senate. While "treason" is a narrow legal charge in the US that doesn't apply here, the core similarity—a leader using extra-legal means to subvert democratic processes—is undeniable. The wildly different verdicts are a stark lesson in how political systems, and the power of personality, can bend the application of justice.

The "Board of Peace": A Gaza Conference Without Gaza

Trump’s inaugural "Board of Peace" meeting, held on 19 February, was ostensibly about coordinating Gaza's recovery. Twenty-six countries joined, with leaders from Vietnam, Pakistan, Indonesia, and Hungary in attendance. The US pledged $10 billion, with nine other nations adding $7 billion, and several countries offered troops for a stabilisation force.

But the meeting's true nature was revealed by two glaring absences. Neither Russia nor China sent representatives. More tellingly, no Palestinians were invited to discuss the future of their own homeland. The conference, chaired by Trump, felt less like a peace forum and more like a real estate development planning session. As one observer might cynically note, it is not hard to imagine Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, positioning himself to profit from the development of a "Riviera Trump de Gaza." The "Board of Peace" may well fizzle out, but the deals made in the shadows could have a lasting impact.

Japan’s Irony: The Pacifist Constitution and the Return of Militarism

Japan stands at a historic crossroads. Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi's recent electoral victory has given her party a two-thirds supermajority in the Lower House, the first step toward amending the country's pacifist constitution.

The irony is profound. Japan's post-war identity as a civilian power was enshrined in Article 9 of its constitution, a document largely imposed by the United States during the Allied occupation. Now, the US—seeking a stronger ally to counter China—is quietly encouraging Japan to rearm. Even more ironic is the response from Southeast Asia. Some leaders of nations that suffered brutal Japanese occupation during World War II are now welcoming a more militaristic Japan.

Whether Takaichi can overcome the hurdle of the upper house and a national referendum remains to be seen, but the momentum is unmistakable. The nation that was forced to renounce war is now being pushed to embrace the potential for it once more.

I do believe in physiognomy. Rightly or wrongly, my first and lasting instinct when I look at Takaichi is that her face conveys a slyness that makes me deeply uneasy — and it is an unease I cannot simply dismiss.

The Currency of Power: Technocrats, Bombs, and Bluster

In this twisted world, only muscle talks—but "muscle" comes in different forms.
Among Western leaders, Canada's Mark Carney stands out, not for military might or populist rhetoric, but for "Middle Power" strengths. A former head of two central banks, he understands the mechanics of economic warfare better than anyone. He could fight Trumpism on its own terrain, which all other Middle Powers seem incapable of wielding. Yet for all his technocratic skill, Carney lacks the raw political killer instinct of a Kim Jong Un, who holds a different, more existential form of power—for instance, in denying the US the right to use its airspace.

Elsewhere, leaders like those in Iran or Venezuela's Nicolás Maduro project defiance, but their threats often ring hollow. Venezuela has been robbed of its oil, and Panama of the right to exercise sovereignty over its canal. Yet they appear as regimes waiting for the next shock, their bluster masking deep-seated vulnerability.

India’s AI Aspirations and a Robotic Dog

Finally, to New Delhi, where India recently hosted a massive AI Impact Summit, touted as the largest of its kind for the Global South. With 25,000 participants, 20 world leaders, and tech CEOs, it was meant to showcase India's technological rise.

Instead, it became a case study in the gap between aspiration and reality. The conference was overshadowed by a bizarre controversy when a professor from Galgotias University presented a robotic dog named "Orion" to the public broadcaster as an indigenous innovation from the university's "Centre of Excellence." It was quickly unmasked as a Unitree Go2—a commercially available model from a Chinese company retailing for just over $2,000. Apparently, other bogus AI feats were also exhibited. But the high praises continued, nonetheless.

The incident became an embarrassing metaphor for an event that, despite its high aims, seemed to lack the very organisational intelligence the conference was meant to celebrate. It was a small, farcical moment that perfectly encapsulated a "twisted world" where image is often mistaken for reality, and the substance of innovation is sometimes just a borrowed shell.

Of course, Google and Meta need look no further if they require a super CMO. This professor can guarantee instant publicity for any project they wish to promote.

End

Sharing Some Titbits from My Recent Travels…

 

1. Politics in Malaysia

I enjoy engaging cab drivers in conversation, especially during longer journeys — for example, to and from Seletar Airport to my hotel downtown, or between my apartment at Saujana Resort and KLIA. They often have a practical understanding of the world around them that many of us may overlook.

Just last Monday, I booked a Grab car to take me to KLIA for a trip to Jakarta on a Malaysia Airlines flight. My driver was a certain Abdullah Husain. I praised him for keeping his car neat and clean. He told me it was only a month old.

After some small talk about the weather, hometowns and families, I ventured to ask him about his views on Malaysian politics.

LYB: Given Anwar’s thin support among the Malay community, what are his chances of Pakatan Harapan winning the next general election?

AH: No way Anwar can win the election.

AH said the entire PH government revolved around only one man — Anwar Ibrahim himself.

“Do you see his ministers talk?” he asked. “Rafizi speaks a lot now, but that is because he is no longer in the Cabinet.” (He was referring to Rafizi Ramli, the former Economy Minister.)

LYB: Who will win the next election then?

AH: PAS!

LYB: But are Malays not concerned about PAS’s track record in the states they currently govern?

I told AH that I had visited Kelantan not too long ago, and that I genuinely felt sorry for the lacklustre state of the economy there. He countered that this was because Kelantan had not received the support it deserved from the federal government.

I also told him that the Chinese community feared PAS. He replied that the Chinese in Kelantan were happy under the present PAS state government. I did not feel it was appropriate to tell him that, in reality, only the older Chinese had chosen to remain, while many younger Chinese had moved to other states.

I shudder to think of the prospect of PAS forming the next federal government. AH believes UMNO would join PAS as a junior partner. In his view, UMNO no longer has the grassroots support to revive its former glory.

The Chinese community, to him, does not feature in the political equation at all.

To me, however, despite the setback suffered by DAP in the last Sabah state election, it will still be the Hobson’s choice for the Chinese community. MCA may have recovered slightly, but it remains far from being able to close the gap.

2. Jakarta’s Soekarno–Hatta International Airport

One cannot quite fault the designers of Terminal 3 at Jakarta’s Soekarno–Hatta International Airport for its overall structure. The terminal was extended from an existing building, and aircraft therefore have to be docked along only one side. That said, much still leaves to be desired in terms of internal layout.

Upon arriving at the gate assigned to Malaysia Airlines — located at one end of the building — one has to walk almost one kilometre, even with the help of moving walkways (or travelators).

The long rows of automated immigration gates look very impressive — very state-of-the-art — until you try to use them. They do not work with my Malaysian passport. Worse still, there was nobody around to help. All of us had to scramble to the manual counters. And guess what? Only two counters were open.

I was among the earlier arrivals, so the waiting time was still tolerable. But what about the bulk of passengers who arrived later?

For departures, immigration is again located at the far end of the hall. Between the check-in area and the immigration hall are the usual airport shops. Customs and security screening were fortunately efficient, but once again the rows of modern auto-gates were not friendly to foreigners like me. I had to use the manual counter yet again.

After clearing immigration and descending to the gate level, I had to walk another kilometre or so to reach my gate.

Two questions came to mind:

1. Why can’t immigration and customs be located in the middle of the terminal?
2. Why is Malaysia Airlines, which operates many flights a day to Jakarta, assigned gates at one extreme end of the terminal?

A Question of Attitude…

After my accident in 2016, my left heel pad became permanently impaired. I now walk with a slight limp. For longer walks, I carry a cane to help my left leg bear my body weight. On occasions, I use the assistance lane at airports. I thought I had a perfectly valid reason to use the one provided at Jakarta Immigration. However, When I approached the counter, the officer was clearly unhappy that his peace had been disturbed and gave me a distinct “why are you here?” look. I pointed to my leg. He reluctantly attended to me but could not hide his displeasure and subjected me to some unnecessary questioning. I remained polite, lest I be sent back to the long queue.

The contrast with what one sees at Singapore Immigration could not be sharper. Although some officers look like retired granddads and grandmas, they are unfailingly courteous, ushering passengers into available lanes and indulgently guiding one how to use their face recognition system efficiently.

The same applies in Malaysia, where QR-code counters are available for Malaysians. Older people like us can sometimes be confused by the procedure, but there is always someone on hand to help.

One wonders why Indonesia does not send its officers to Singapore or Kuala Lumpur to observe how neighbouring countries run their systems.

3. Social Etiquette

I was invited by a professional society to join its delegation to Jakarta. I could not help noticing that many of us are still not quite up to scratch when it comes to basic social norms — punctuality, personal hygiene, dressing appropriately for occasions and even table etiquette. The last two being important in Indonesia, for hosts in their society’s upper echelon tend to take them seriously. And they can feel extremely awkward when their guests are visibly uncomfortable or lost in such situations. (However, punctuality is usually a non-issue in Indonesia; it is just a matter of my personal discipline.)

Raising awareness would certainly help to address this problem.

Many years ago, I had the opportunity to serve as a board member of a social enterprise chaired by Royal Professor Ungku Aziz, then retired Vice-Chancellor of the University of Malaya. I once proposed to him that all university students should be required to attend a short finishing programme before graduation — a kind of mini-MBA in which the basic functions of business are introduced. For example, non-business students should understand P&L statements, balance sheets and cash flows, while non-STEM students should be exposed to basic technological literacy. Alongside these, social etiquette should also be taught, to better prepare graduates for workplace and societal expectations.

He was very supportive of the idea. Unfortunately, there was no practical mechanism for me to follow up and push it through.

End

A Chinese Diplomat Speaks Out… See the Difference!

 

On Australia’s plan to re-acquire the Port of Darwin…China’s ambassador to Australia, Xiao Qian, recently described Australia’s plan to re-acquire the Port of Darwin as unwise and problematic.

Xiao publicly criticised Canberra for seeking to take back the port now that it has become profitable, after leasing it out when it was unprofitable. He described this move as “ethically questionable” and “not the way to do business.”

He underscored that the Chinese company Landbridge had obtained its 99-year lease through proper market processes and had since invested substantially in the port’s infrastructure. In his view, such investment should be respected rather than reversed.

Xiao suggested that if Australia were to forcibly take back control of the port, China would feel obliged to take “measures to protect the Chinese company’s interests.” While he did not specify what those measures might be, he implied they could carry economic consequences or have broader implications for bilateral trade and investment relations.

He further argued that altering the agreement could affect “substantive investment, cooperation, and trade” by Chinese companies in the region—reflecting Beijing’s view that such a move could deter future foreign investment.

Xiao’s comments form part of the broader tensions between Canberra and Beijing over strategic infrastructure, foreign investment, and national security. While the Australian government maintains that regaining control of the Port of Darwin is in the national interest, China views any move to unwind the lease as destabilising commercial norms and bilateral relations.

On Chinese naval movements near Australian waters…
In an earlier interview with the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) in Hobart, Xiao described China’s naval deployments and drills near Australia as “normal” activities for a major power—routine training operations rather than a message or threat directed at Australia. He urged Australians not to over-interpret or misinterpret China’s military movements in the region.

He also emphasised that there was “no reason” for China to threaten Australia, even in the context of these naval activities. (You want to sink ships of your biggest trading partners? Come on!)

Coming of age…

I used to joke about the former ambassador, who could hardly string together a proper sentence in English. Xiao, on the other hand, represents a new generation of Chinese diplomats—confident, articulate in English, and carrying real gravitas. His demeanour exudes friendliness. Compared with the ambassadors dispatched by Trump around the world, the contrast is immediately obvious. (The one for Singapore literally asks for alms!)

End

Top of Form

 

Bottom of Form

 

 

Xi’s “Purge” of China’s Military - Zeekr and Zika

China's Zeekr

The removal of Zhang Youxia (张又侠), Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC), and Liu Zhenli (刘振立), also a CMC member and Chief of Staff, a few days ago has sent shockwaves around the world. They have been placed under investigation for “serious violations of discipline and law,” a euphemism for corruption or political disloyalty.

Is this a deep leadership restructuring taking place in China, or something else?

Since Xi became CMC Chairman in 2012, he has pushed a major anti-corruption drive into the military, restructuring its leadership to ensure loyalty and strengthen centralised control. In recent years, particularly from 2023 to the present, the pace and prominence of removals have accelerated, including the unprecedented fall of sitting CMC vice chairmen and other top commanders.

A couple of months ago — in October last year — He Weidong (何卫东) became the first sitting CMC Vice Chairman to be removed since the Cultural Revolution era. Removed together with him was Miao Hua (苗华), Director of the CMC Political Work Department, who was widely regarded as a Xi loyalist. Also removed at the same time were seven other full generals:

1. He Hongjun (何宏军), Executive Deputy Director, CMC Political Work Department
2. Wang Xiubin (王秀斌), Executive Deputy Director, CMC Joint Operations Command Center
3. Lin Xiangyang (林向阳), Commander, Eastern Theater Command
4. Qin Shutong (秦树桐), Political Commissar (Army)
5. Yuan Huazhi (袁华智), Political Commissar (Navy)
6. Wang Houbin (王厚斌), Commander, Rocket Force
7. Wang Chunning (王春宁), Commander, People’s Armed Police

Defence Minister and former Rocket Force commander Wei Fenghe (魏凤和) was removed in 2024, while in 2023 Li Shangfu (李尚福), Minister of National Defense, was purged.

Earlier casualties included Liu Zheng (刘铮), former Deputy Director of the PLA General Logistics Department; Li Zuocheng (李作成), the retired Chief of the CMC Joint Staff Department; and Li Yuchao (李玉超), former Commander of the Rocket Force.

All were three-star full generals.

Before Xi, the PLA had largely been a law unto itself, especially from the 1990s to the early 2010s. Although the PLA formally answered to the Party, in practice senior generals ran powerful fiefdoms. Civilian leaders such as Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao often lacked either the authority or the will to discipline top officers. Promotions were heavily influenced by patronage networks rather than professional merit. This gave rise to what many Chinese insiders later described as “军中山头林立” — mountains within the military, each with its own lord.

Corruption was systemic. “Buying ranks” was an open secret. Under generals Xu Caihou (徐才厚) and Guo Boxiong (郭伯雄) — both CMC vice chairmen — promotions to major general, lieutenant general, and full general were widely believed to be for sale. Key posts in logistics, armaments, and personnel became cash cows. Officers paid bribes to secure promotions, avoid audits, or obtain lucrative postings. Xu and Guo were the gatekeepers, and both fell between 2014 and 2015.

Xi later lamented that corruption had reached a level that “threatened the survival of the Party and the army.”

The PLA also ran businesses. Until the late 1990s and early 2000s, PLA units owned hotels, real estate, and trading companies. Officers blurred the lines between national defence and personal enrichment. Although Jiang formally ordered the PLA out of business in 1998, the networks and habits remained.

Xi did three things his predecessors did not dare to do fully:

    (a) Took down CMC vice chairmen

• Xu Caihou
• Guo Boxiong
• He Weidong, Zhang Youxia

    This shattered the belief that “CMC vice chairmen are untouchable.”

    (b) Broke service-based power blocs

• Rocket Force
• Equipment Development Department
• Political Work Department

     The recent purges show that Xi is still dismantling entrenched networks, even among his own appointees. 

    (c) Centralised loyalty to one authority

• Loyalty is no longer to “the Party” in an abstract sense
• It is explicitly to Xi as CMC Chairman

Outcome...
The system is certainly cleaner than before. However, corruption may simply have shifted from the open buying of ranks to more subtle forms. In the interim, fear has replaced impunity. Professionalisation has improved, but initially at the cost of initiative, candour, and internal trust.

Xi genuinely believes that corruption threatens China’s war-fighting ability. If he is true to his mission, these temporary hiccups will disappear in due course.

Poor Messaging…

Unfortunately, Beijing has been poor at explaining Xi’s transformation effort to the outside world.

          1. Silence looks like instability

China’s instinct is secrecy, but externally this backfires. Senior generals disappear, defence  ministers vanish without explanation, and CMC vice chairmen fall with boilerplate language.

 

To outsiders, this does not look like reform — it looks like elite chaos or factional warfare.

 

Western analysts fill the vacuum with the most damaging interpretations:

·         “The PLA is hollowed out”

·         “Xi doesn’t trust his own generals”

·         “China’s military is unready for war”

 

Beijing’s refusal to engage allows these narratives to harden.

2. Anti-corruption without benchmarks sounds arbitrary
“Serious violations of discipline and law” tells the world nothing. Without clear standards or named offences, it appears to be selective punishment rather than systemic clean-up. Internally, cadres may understand the signals; externally, it feels opaque and personalistic.

            3. The PLA is still treated as a sacred black box

           The CPC continues to communicate as if:

·         Military affairs are nobody else’s business

·         Foreign perceptions do not matter

That mindset worked when China was inward-looking. It does not work when China is a near-peer military power, operating globally and under constant strategic scrutiny.

What Could Have Been Done?
The framing should have shifted from PURGE to PROFESSIONALISATION.

Standards, operational competence, and key command rotations to prevent fiefdoms should have been emphasised. “We are building a modern, rules-based military, not a loyalty club” is the kind of language people understand. Due process must be observed, and outcomes should not be conveyed through leaks, rumours, or silence.

At present, every purge reinforces the idea that if Xi goes, the system collapses. Reforms should be institutionalised — promotion criteria codified, command regulations published, and collective CMC decision-making, even if symbolic, emphasised.

The irony is this: Xi may be carrying out the most radical PLA transformation since Mao, yet because of how it is communicated, the world interprets it as paranoia, instability, and personal insecurity.

However, I believe Xi is now confident enough to transform the PLA without the baggage of the old guards. Modern warfare requires quality young bloods, which China has plenty. 

Regardless, I have great faith in Xi. Let us help him explain his good intentions to the world.

End

 

Postscript…
Friends may be wondering why I have chosen a picture of Zeekr – a Chinese car – to introduce this article. Zeekr 极氪 (pronounced Jí kè), which means “Extreme Krypton,” is a premium electric vehicle brand owned by Geely Automobile Holdings, and it is known for its high performance. Yet the name Zeekr is faintly unsettling. Doesn’t it sound rather like Zika, the mosquito-borne virus infamous for causing severe birth defects when expectant mothers are infected?

A month or so ago, while I was in Shanghai, I visited a Pien Tze Huang (片仔癀) franchise outlet to buy a facial lotion that I thought would be suitable for my wife. When I returned, she unpacked the box and tried to make sense of the instructions. She asked whether I trusted it. I could hardly blame her. The English translation was so Mickey-mousy that few people – especially those who are unfamiliar with the depth and sophistication of traditional Chinese medical formulations – would dare to use the product. And yet Pien Tze Huang has a pedigree spanning nearly 500 years, dating back to the Ming Dynasty, and occupies a venerable place in traditional Chinese medicine.

Fortunately, Chinese companies now appear to be paying closer attention to global sensibilities in branding. Names like BYD, rendered in Chinese as 比亚迪 (pronounced Bǐyàdí), travel far more easily across languages and cultures. Is this, perhaps, a quiet form of reverse engineering in product naming?

In much the same way, Xi would do well to be more conscious of how China is viewed by the outside world.

 

You Win Some, Thanks to a Delusional TACO

 

Infantility of the Lowest Kind
Can you imagine the President of the United States of America writing the following to the prime minister of another country?

“Dear Jonas:

Considering your country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America…

President DJT”

This was written on January 18. “Jonas” is Jonas Gahr Støre, Prime Minister of Norway. And of course, DJT needs no introduction—also known, rather fittingly, as TACO.

Trump blames Norway for “not giving” him the Nobel Peace Prize, claims he “stopped 8 wars PLUS,” and announces that he no longer feels obliged to “think purely of Peace.” This idiot does not even know— or chooses not to know—that the Nobel Peace Prize is awarded by an independent committee, not by the Norwegian government.

His message to Støre goes on:

“Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China, and why do they have a ‘right of ownership’ anyway? There are no written documents—it’s only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago. But we had boats landing there also.

I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding, and now NATO should do something for the United States.

 

The world is not secure unless we have complete and total control of Greenland.

Thank you!”

Støre replied calmly, stressing that Greenland is part of the Kingdom of Denmark and that Norway fully supports Danish sovereignty over the island. Norway does not claim Greenland, nor has it ever done so.

(Apparently, Støre and Finland’s President Alexander Stubb had already reached out to Trump to lower tensions and even proposed a three-way call—before Trump linked the Nobel Prize to Greenland policy.)

In our Oriental culture, such behaviour would be described plainly: infantile.

A Podcast That Nailed Trump Perfectly

I happened upon a podcast clip on TikTok. I don’t know who the podcaster was, but it remains one of the best commentaries on Trump I have ever heard:

 

“Every single sentence uttered from his little slimy mouth was either something he came up with on the spot or a lie that was still stuck in the part of his brain that hasn’t atrophied yet.

 

Every time you assume this man has finally reached the absolute bottom of human intelligence, he arrives with a shovel and a smile saying, ‘No, I can go lower.’

As his dementia progresses and the pressure from the Epstein case builds, Trump keeps unlocking new tiers of verbal incoherence. You almost—almost—have to admire him.

 

We’re watching a geriatric patient wandering through a geopolitical hallucination on stage, in front of the whole world, making assertions so profoundly detached from reality that it would take a child mere seconds to fact-check and debunk.

 

And yet tens of millions of Americans look at this synaptic meltdown—this confused, sweating elderly man shouting at the clouds—and think: ‘This is the best thing that could have happened to our country.’

 

This man is the peak of evolution—if we believed in evolution.

 

Give him the nuclear codes.

 

To the Americans who haven’t yet lost their sanity, I am so sorry. I hope with every fibre of my being that your democracy survives this madman. If it doesn’t, we are all f**ked.”

Brutal. Accurate.

Trump at Davos: Fantasy Economics Meets Delusion

Below are some of the more spectacular claims Trump made in his recent World Economic Forum Special Address:

 

“…our economy is booming. Growth is exploding, productivity is surging, investment is soaring, incomes are rising, inflation has been defeated, and the United States is experiencing the fastest and most dramatic economic turnaround in history.”

He continued:

 

“Over the past three months, core inflation has been just 1.6%, and fourth-quarter growth is projected at 5.4%. Since the election, the stock market has hit 52 all-time highs, adding trillions to retirement accounts.”

He claimed $18 trillion—soon $20 trillion—of investment commitments, declared the U.S. the “economic engine of the planet,” and sneered that Europe is ‘not heading in the right direction’ due to failed ideas on migration, spending, and trade.

He boasted of tariffs, slashed deficits, soaring energy output, surging steel production, Venezuelan oil deals, falling gasoline prices, and a nuclear renaissance with “safe and competitive” reactors.

On Greenland (and Finland… somehow)

“It’s hard to call it land—it’s a big piece of ice—but it plays a strategic role in world protection… After World War II, we returned Greenland to Denmark; now we are asking for it back. I will not use force, but I want it for world defense.”

This alone should qualify as a case study in historical ignorance.

He then claimed NATO members now pay 5% of GDP (they do not), while repeating his favourite line:

“We defend you; you didn’t pay.”

Trade, Tariffs, and Sinophobia
Trump claimed tariffs cut the U.S. trade deficit by 77%, promised drug prices would fall by up to 90%, and accused Europe of freeloading.

Without naming him, Trump also took clear aim at Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, criticising U.S. security partners who allow Chinese EVs and industrial goods into their markets.

Carney’s recent China visit resulted in a deal reducing Canada’s 100% tariff on Chinese EVs to around 6.1%, allowing up to 49,000 Chinese EVs annually, in exchange for China lowering tariffs on Canadian exports like canola and food products.

Carney called it an opportunity for Canada’s auto sector and a step toward diversified trade.

But Sinophobia runs deep in Caucasian blood.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford attacked the deal as reckless, claiming it endangered Canadian jobs—and even implied Chinese EVs might pose cybersecurity risks. Evidence? None.

The U.S. Walks Away from the World

Despite years of ingratiation by WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, the U.S. has quit the WHO while owing approximately USD 280 million in dues.

The U.S. is withdrawing from 66 international organisations, including 31 UN-affiliated bodies—among them UNFCCC, UN Women, and UNFPA—as well as 35 non-UN organisations such as IPCC, IRENA, and the International Solar Alliance.

The U.S. has also re-withdrawn from the Paris Climate Agreement and is exiting UNESCO again.

Trump believes America can stand alone. His sycophants cheer wildly.

Absolutely delusional.

Europe Looks East

Finland’s Prime Minister Petteri Orpo is visiting China. Germany’s Chancellor Friedrich Merz will soon follow. Even Argentina’s President Javier Milei, once rabidly anti-China, now wants in. All in the name of trade.

Keir Starmer has also effectively “bought his ticket to Beijing.”

He has cleared China’s proposal to build a new embassy in London – originally submitted in 2018. Although cleared by UK authorities and intelligence agencies, the project has sparked protests. Human-rights activists, diaspora groups, and British politicians alike oppose it. From politicians, it is pure hypocrisy. They are not ignorant. They are simply against China.

Trump’s Trump Riviera Project Turned Board of Peace…

For the development of Trump Riviera-post-Gaza, he is initiating a club called “Board of Peace for Gaza” to oversee post-war reconstruction and governance in the Gaza Strip following the ceasefire and peace plan Trump “helped” broker. He has named himself the Chair and amongst executive board members are Marco Rubio, Tony Blair, Jared Kushner, Ajay Banga and Steve Witkoff.

He has invited most country leaders – even Russian and Chinese – to join. Countries can become permanent members by committing USD1 billion contribution or join for a fixed term without that contribution. Ironically, there is no Palestinian representation.

Several of the key NATO countries are spurning him. They are NOT joining.

Initially touted as the Board of Peace for Gaza, it is being morphed into a platform for world peace, soon he will call it the New United Nations, with him as the life-long President.

Many of the political midgets and jesters have signed up, but I bet you, he will run out of steam and allow it to drift, after collecting some good billions for his son-in-law to throw.

The CIA’s Visible—and Invisible—Hand
Jimmy Lai was central to Hong Kong’s 2019–20 unrest, funding political campaigns and sanctions advocacy abroad. I know his CIA and MI5/MI6 connection. (His aide Mark Simon had deep U.S. political connections.)

We are told there is “no credible evidence” of CIA involvement.

Do you buy that?

Hong Kong paid dearly—billions in damage, destroyed infrastructure, ruined livelihoods, and lost lives. Yet Europe sanctions Hong Kong over Lai.

History repeats.

Remember in Indonesia, 1965–66, hundreds of thousands—perhaps over a million—were slaughtered after a failed coup. The U.S. Embassy and CIA provided lists of alleged communists and support to Suharto’s forces.

As Vincent Bevins documents in The Jakarta Method, this became a blueprint for U.S.-backed purges worldwide.

Conclusion

I personally do not believe Trump is capable of foresight. I doubt he even knew of Greenland’s existence—let alone its supposed mineral wealth—until one morning he realised it sat conveniently next to Canada; the country he openly fantasised about turning into America’s 51st state. To him, Greenland now looks like an easy slice of cake, and so the lust follows.

Much—though not all—of Europe has awakened to the reality that Trump has deserted them. They can no longer rely on someone who demands protection money like a gangster.

Talk is already emerging of a neo-NATO without the U.S., possibly including Japan, Korea, and Australia. The U.S. military-industrial complex may lose billions of easy profit, and the dollar’s dominance may erode.

Internally, Trump is turning the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement into a Gestapo-like outfit. The country is imploding!

The sooner the world sees through Trump, the sooner we may celebrate the birth of a real Peace Board.

 

End