Smile, You're on Candid Camera, Canada!

"Among the several commitments Canada has made to Qatar in the hopes of convincing the Gulf autocracy's ruling Al Thani family to double down on its energy investments in Canada is a June 25 memorandum of understanding between Canada's Public Safety ministry and Qatar's Internal Security Force. It's also under wraps, like the RCMP agreement with Beijing's Public Security ministry."

"The deal is supposed to extend Canada's co-operation on a variety of law enforcement portfolios, including money laundering, financial crime and terrorism."

"This will be unavoidably awkward, owing to the Al Thani family's conviction that the terrorist front Hamas, the Palestinian offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, is merely a national liberation movement."

"Qatar is already notorious in Canada's national security circles for the hundreds of millions of dollars it lavishes on the Muslim Brotherhood and its Canadian fronts and affiliates."

Terry Glavin, journalist, National Post  

Carney is greeted by Emir of Qatar Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani as he arrives to Amiri Diwan in Doha, Qatar. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)

 

Canada is at an impasse in attempting to deal with mercurial U.S. President Donald Trump, wedded to the big stick he wields with wild abandon, striking friend and foe alike with threatening tariffs geared to make them tremble in trepidation over the suddenly-wobbly state of their economy. The entire world economy is shaken to its foundations when America suddenly becomes unreliable, both in its trade and commerce cooperation with allies and competitors alike, ditching diplomacy for belligerence in expressions of bad faith and contempt toward other nations.

 

"I like this guy!" CBC

 

Trade dependency on a geographic neighbour may make common sense when one country is viewed as the junior, valued for its abundance of natural resources, prepared to continue its trade relationship with the other whose appetite for energy and mineral extraction is boundless. The exchange of raw resources with finished products has always been reflected in the trade relationship. Advanced to the junior partner in later decades through the sharing of production to the benefit of both. 

 

Canada's standard of living reliant on the good graces of its neighbour, received a shock when that neighbour suddenly began growling and grumbling about being taken for granted, insufficiently adored for its generosity, and become fed up with being milked in unfair trade practises. And the trade deficit!!!Then the junior reeled back in dismay at the very pronouncements of a trade-enforced geographic-sovereign-lost-merger, genially imposed by its powerful neighbour. 

 

Trade-diversion and -diversity imposed becoming the order of the day, the month, the year, stretching into infinity. Pierre Elliott Trudeau back in the distant past embarked on a similar adventure, but it somehow never progressed to the point of being. Canada's new foreign-policy trade agreements under current prime minister Mark Carney, a self-professed economic genius, now has his turn. Jean Chretien in his day made frequent exploratory-trade visits to China with a full regalia of government ministers and corporate elites in tow.

 

Prime Minister Mark Carney and Diana Fox Carney disembark a government plane in Ankara, Turkey, Tuesday, July 7, 2026. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld

 

In a year-and-a-half, Mr. Carney and his ministers have gone to 29 foreign capitals to drum up trade agreements with countries Canada has much in common with; Liberal democracies, and unsavoury others as well. He launched a "new world order" partnership with China, opening Canadian manufacturing and vehicle production in particular, to the trade-predatory Chinese Communist Party in Beijing. Taking no notice at the same time of China's human rights record on Tibet and Xinjiang.

 

China's predation is right out there in plain sight; countries that have imported cheaply-produced Chinese products valued by global consumers for their low prices have seen their own industries eviscerated,  unable to complete with the low wages and CCP subsidies to make Chinese goods preferable to their own. Europe's vast trade deficit with China was exemplified by the president of the EU Chamber of Commerce in China commenting on the situation comparing it to a "400-metre-long giant container ship loaded with 24,000 containers going to Europe, and coming back almost empty". 

 

Mark Carney — pictured with Chinese President Xi Jinping — reached a 'landmark' trade deal with China. (Sean Kilpatrick/Reuters)

 

Volkswagen's plans to rescue its Osnabruck plant along with 2,300 jobs y converting to production of components for Israel's Iron Dome defence system met a roadblock when Qatar objected, since the Qatari sovereign wealth fund purchased 10.4 percent of Volkswagen shares and 17 percent of its voting rights. Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Turkey is another potential trade partner for Canada under Mr. Carney's wide-ranging plans of rescue from the American trade orbit. 

 

Turkey's Erdogan is committed to the reestablishment of a Global Caliphate. Achieved perhaps, in a trifle more sophisticated way -- without the beheadings and crucifixions seen exercised by the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, but equally devoted to its inevitability, with the considerable assistance of the Muslim Brotherhood globally, and regionally the MB offshoot, Hamas in Gaza. Only two weeks earlier Mr. Carney announced Ottawa's negotiations with Ankara toward a free trade agreement.   

"Last year, the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy [ISGAP] published an in-depth study of the reach of Qatar and the Muslim Brotherhood in Canada, recommending that Canada's intelligence agencies keep much closer tabs on Qatar's promotion of extremist ideology and support for extremist organizations in Canada:

"'It is imperative to assess their level of penetration, areas of influence, and long-term goals in order to effectively manage the risks posed to Canada' [ISGAP]."

Terry Glavin  

Another opportunity for Canada's Liberal Carney government arose with discussions on a free trade agreement with the 11-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) bloc of which Myanmar is a member, albeit a police state. Myanmar is listed among three other countries -- Iran and North Korea -- on the Paris-based Financial Action Task Force. Details, inconvenient details, so inconsequential, no need to bother with them. 

 

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan gifted Prime Minister Mark Carney and other NATO leaders a custom revolver with each recipient's name engraved on the barrel during the alliance's summit in Ankara, Turkey. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)

 

"So it's all well and good for Canada to be looking for deep-pocketed police state investors and maybe even some customers beyond the United States, at least for now."

"But the lasting damage to Canada's national security, diplomatic sovereignty, moral conscience, democratic alliances and international reputation might also be taken into account from time to time."

Terry Glavin, journalist extraordinaire, National Post 

 

Windsor/Detroit Gordie Howe International Bridge

"[Prime Minister Mark Carney has] negotiated a terrible deal for Canada."

"We took the risk and the cost. We deserve to recover our money."

"What precisely will be divided? Gross toll revenues, operating profit, net profit after expenses after Canada has fully recovered its investment?"

Conservative Canada-U.S trade critic Shuvaloy Majundar

 

"I'm happy the bridge is going to be open. We need it. We need it because we're expanding."

"The word 'net' does a lot of work in this. We are sharing after Canada is paid back. We get the revenues. Then the servicing of the costs of the bridge and paying the debt of the bridge, and then what's left over, there's a split of that for 15 years." 

"We are sharing after Canada is paid back. It's manning the toll booths, it's maintenance, it's snow removal, a series of other operational costs. So we get the revenues, then the servicing of the cost of the bridge and paying the debt of the bridge."

"And then what's left over, there's a split of that for 15 years."

"There's not going to be a lot of net to split. It's a good deal for Canada." 

Prime Minister Mark Carney 

 

"I will not allow this bridge to open until the United States is fully compensated for everything we have given them, and also, importantly, Canada treats the United States with the Fairness and Respect that we deserve." (February) 

"The new deal is great, and fair. Thank you and congratulations to the Canadian Government."

"May we both have many years of success with this wonderful new development."  (July)

"I was able to cut a MUCH BETTER DEAL for America, and by so doing, will be allowing the new and spectacular Gordie Howe International Bridge, spanning Detroit and Windsor, Ontario, to open on July 27th, as scheduled. The original deal made was unacceptable to me! The new deal is great and fair." 

U.S. President Donald J. Trump 

Gordie Howe International Bridge

 

Under the original agreement between Canada and Michigan which was signed as a contract in 2012, Canada, which paid for the construction of the $6.4 billion bridge, offered half ownership to Michigan. The contract stipulated that Canada would collect bridge tolls until such time as the capital costs expended by Canada were recouped. Following that, bridge toll revenues would be evenly split between Canada and Michigan. Because President Trump vetoed that understanding, a new, opaque agreement was reached to satisfy U.S. demands.

 

"Mark Carney's capitulation to Trump on the Gordie Howe Bridge is awful for Canada", commented opposition MP Andrew Lawton. While MP for Calgary Heritage Shuv Majumdar named it as "a terrible deal for Canada". He had written to Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc that the full agreement be released before the official bridge opening on July 27, so that the those who paid for the bridge -- Canadian taxpayers -- would be in possession of "a complete account of what was given away, what was received, and the true cost of this deal". 

 

An American official, reported Bloomberg News, contradicted Mr. Carney's statements; interest costs are not to be included in the calculation. In 2018 a bridge connecting Windsor and Detroit went under construction, although the owners of the long standing Ambassador Bridge made every attempt beforehand to stall and stop the initiative that would compete with the revenues they had long received as the sole bridge handling over a quarter of all trucked Canada-U.S. trade. 

 

Gordie Howe International Bridge from Detroit, Detroit Free Press

 

And while Mr. Carney stated no split of toll revenue would occur  until the debt is fully repaid, U.S. President Trump in February announced the terms of the deal did not pass muster with him as final arbiter, eventually blocking a June opening ceremony following completion of construction. U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is credited with bringing the president around to that opinion. The Moroun family, owners of the Ambassador Bridge had the ear of the Trump administration. All the more so as significant $1-million contributors to Trump's MAGA campaign. 

"I'm proud to have fought for its opening and congratulate my partners who have worked on this issue alongside me for years."

"This bridge is a testament to the enduring partnership between Michigan and Canada and what we can et done when we think big and bet on our shared future together."

"Thank you to our allies in Canada and to the Michiganders who advocated for years to get this done."

Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer 

 Trump's tariffs have disrupted trade flows between the U.S. and Canada, but not entirely. There was an exchange of some $880 billion in goods and services in 2025, slightly diminished by about five percent less than the year before. While many Canadians have taken to boycotting recreational travel to the United States in protest of the tariffs as well as the U.S. president's anti-Canadian rhetoric, not to mention his constant musings and urges over the '51st State', these conditions may presage a lighter traffic flow than originally envisioned.

 

President Trump on Tuesday reposted an image with himself in the Oval Office surrounded by other world leaders, obviously produced by AI. A map of North America appears in the image, with the U.S. Stars and Stripes imposed over Canada and Greenland.  

 

 

 

"Perhaps Canada's willingness to pay a bribe was the correct thing to do in the short term, but signing long-term deals with the U.S. on anything has suffered an additional blow."

"[The opening was a] plus for commerce, but] it's bad for credibility, faith in contracts and a system of law and order, the viability of making long-term deals with the U.S., and democracy. It's blatantly unfair and commingles donor politics with commerce once again."

"Canadians have a right to know the full details, like was the Moroun family paid off somehow in the murky language of shared proceeds?"

Derek Holt, vice-president, head of capital markets economics, Scotiabank, Toronto 

In Defiance of Trump's Deal -- Israel's Survival

"[Iranian officials pushed to include a clause in the interim agreement finalized earlier this week requiring Israel to leave] the security zone in Lebanon."

"The prime minister said to the U.S. President: 'We understand the concerns, but this is a critical issue for our national security and we won't pull out'."

Zev Elkin, security cabinet member, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu ally 

June 18: Khamenei okays MOU in written statement, says talks with US do ‘not mean accepting its views’

 

The agreement reached between the United States and Iran had no input from Israel. This, despite that the aerial attacks launched on February 28 on the Islamic Republic was a joint enterprise shared by both Israel and the United States in a unified stance against the Iranian regime ever breaking the barrier toward achieving nuclear weaponry through its stealth uranium enrichment enterprise. That partnership broke down when Israel was excluded from negotiations carried on between Pakistan and Qatar as intermediaries between the U.S. and Iran, to achieve a ceasefire deal and end to the conflict.

 

And because Israel was not a member of the negotiations -- even though any such arrangement as was negotiated based on Iran's 'word of honour' that it had no intention of achieving nuclear arms, even while it threatened to destroy Israel, and its terrorist militias, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and the Yemeni Houthis were all delegated by Iran to take part in a pincer-movement of destroying Israel -- there was no expectation incumbent upon Israel to heed any of the conditions it felt to be inimical to its own survival.

 

President Trump made no secret of his disapproval of Israel's ongoing incursion into southern Lebanon, the stronghold of the Hezbollah-Lebanese terrorist group whose rockets continued to rain down on Israel at the behest of Iran whose proxies tend to respond to commands from the Shiite Islamist fundamentalist state that have been formed, trained and armed by the al Quds arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, the power behind the Ayatollahs' throne of command.

 

Trump insists Iran deal will open Strait of Hormuz 'toll-free' as he meets world leaders  BBC News

 

That being so, Israel did not appear to hesitate when rejecting the U.S. request to withdraw its troops from Lebanon, not as long as Hezbollah controlled Lebanon, despite the complications that ensued between the 'partnership' of Israel/U.S. defense coalition. The U.S./Iran agreed-upon interim deal stipulates hostilities must ease on all fronts, including -- at Iran's insistence -- in Lebanon, where Israel has been fighting a parallel war ever since Hezbollah attacked Israel in response to the joint attack on Iran. 

 

President Trump's dissatisfaction with Prime Minister Netanyahu's ongoing commitment in the face of Israeli security challenged by Iran's proxies and Iran itself, to continue its defensive offences has been publicly stated much to Israel's chagrin; re-stated more emphatically by Vice-President JD Vance in fairly offensive terms verging as close to rabid antisemitism as conceivable, helping to shake Israeli confidence in steadfast American support for Israel's survival.

 

On the other hand, a senior U.S. official stated that Israel's withdrawal from Lebanon did not represent a condition of the deal; that Israel, in the opinion of the U.S. administration has the right to respond to any attacks by Hezbollah. Scathing condemnation from JD Vance, aside, which assurances is Israel to pin its decision-making upon? Grin and bear Mr. Trump's truculent insults, and turn aside from his vice's commentary, or put stock in what other Trump officials interpret...?

 

Israel has committed to destroying Hezbollah's capacity to continue lobbing rockets and drones into Israeli territory. So it continues to forge deeper into southern Lebanon, to oust Hezbollah from its perch there. In discussions with the Lebanese President Joseph Aoun, Israel has assured him that any territory it clears of Hezbollah's threatening presence, while degrading its weaponry stockpiles and eliminating its leaders, will be turned over to the Lebanese National Army, in 'pilot' zones.

 

Lebanon's President Aoun has accused Tehran of using Lebanon as a bargaining chip. The Hezbollah drone incursions led Israel to bomb Beirut on June 14, enraging President Trump. As insurance, Israel now focuses on new means whereby it can neutralize the threat the drones pose, hoping to be able to sidetrack responses that would once again raise tensions with Washington. According to PM Netanyahu, Hezbollah's pre-war arsenal of 150,000 rockets have been reduced to 12,000; still capable of more than ample damage.  

 

 

 Smoke rises from Israeli bombardment near the village of Kfar Tibnit in southern Lebanon on June 14, 2026. AFP via Getty Images

DeLiberation Day in the United States of America

"Their decision is incorrect. But it doesn't matter because we have very powerful alternatives."

"Today, I will sign an order to impose a 10 percent global tariff under Section 122, over and above our normal tariffs already being charged."

"And we're also initiating several section 301, and other investigations to protect our country from unfair trading practices of other countries and companies." 

"I am absolutely ashamed [of some judges who ruled against me]; disloyal to our Constitution. Lapdogs."

U.S. President Donald J. Trump

 

"The Government reads IEEPA [International Emergency Economic Powers Act] to give the President power to unilaterally impose unbounded tariffs. On this reading, moreover, the President is unconstrained by the significant procedural limitations in other tariff statutes and free to issue a dizzying array of modifications at will."

"All it takes to unlock that extraordinary power is a Presidential declaration of emergency which the Government asserts is unreviewable."

"IEEPA's grant of authority to 'regulate ... importation' falls short. IEEPA contains no reference to tariffs or duties. The Government points to no statute in which Congress used the word 'regulate' to authorize taxation .. we  hold that IEEPA does not authorize the President to impose tariffs."

United States Chief Justice John Roberts

 

"The Trump tariffs amount to an average tax increase per U.S. household of $1,000 in 2025 and $1,300 in 2025."

"The Trump tariffs are the largest U.S. tax increase as a percent of GDP [0.54 [percent for 2026] since 1993."

Tax Foundation

Supreme Court of the United States of America   Call it DeLiberation Day. On Friday, the US Supreme Court ruled in a 6-3 decision that the US president does not have the power to unilaterally impose tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA)  Atlantic Council

 

When Donald Trump took office in his first term at the 2017 White House he made it clear as a business real estate tycoon that the 'art of the deal' was his forte. His America First agenda and antagonism to world bodies, including those that regulate economics, international cooperation, Western alliances in defence sent a cautionary message abroad. However, it wasn't  until his second term at the helm of the most powerful nation on Earth that the quakes of his decision-making rumbled through the international community.

 

Declaring that the United States of America had too long propped up foreign nations, in a leadership role that had for too long been taken for granted by other nations who favoured riding on America's coattails, while failing to fairly contributing their share, the world was put on notice that the trust and reliance they had placed for the past 80 years on the leadership of the United States was at a troubling crossroad. Then came the hammerblow of Mr. Trump's rejection of global trade and investment that he felt favoured other countries over the well-being of the United States.

 

To correct that monumental assault on American economic sensibilities in trade imbalances, the surprising issue of sudden steep tariff announcements roiled the global financial world as friend and foe alike were placed on notice that the U.S. was no longer content to be the international community's rescuer in shoring up the economies of other countries that preyed on that of the United States. And to 'legalize' that impulsive decision to make enemies of friends and friends of enemies, Mr. Trump called upon the authority of a putative national emergency law.

 

Free trade suddenly became a dirty word in the United States along with free markets. The very drivers of enormous poverty reduction that rescued 2.3 billion people globally living below the poverty line in 1990, reducing that figure in 2025 to 831 million, even taking into account population increase."The proponents of quotas say 'Free trade is fine in theory but it must be reciprocal. We cannot open our markets to foreign products if foreigners close their markets to us"; a concept that the indomitable Milton Friedman responded to with: "The arguments sound reasonable. It is, in fact, utter nonsense. Exports are the cost of trade, imports the return from trade, not the other way around".  

 

Containers are stacked at the Port of Long Beach in California on Friday, the day the U.S. Supreme Court struck down President Donald Trump's tariffs. The refunds that do get issued as a result of the decision will take 12 to 18 months to roll out, experts estimate. (Damian Dovarganes/The Associated Press)

"The court's decision is welcome news for American importers, the United States economy, and the rule of law, but there's much more work to be done."

"Most immediately, the federal government must refund the tens of billions of dollars in customs duties that it illegally collected from American companies pursuant to an 'IEEPA tariff authority' it never actually had."

Scott Lincicome, Cato Institute 

Autocratic Regimes

"[Havana] aligns itself -- and provides support to numerous hostile countries, transnational terrorist groups and malign actors adverse to the United States [including Russia, China and Iran]."

"[The communist government provides] defense, intelligence and security assistance to adversaries in the Western Hemisphere [while violating the human rights of its citizens]."

"[Cuba] will be failing pretty soon. They got their oil from Venezuela. They're not getting that anymore."

"[I will impose tariffs on any country that] directly or indirectly provides oil to Cuba."  

U.S. President Donald J. Trump 

 

"We did not touch on the topic of Cuba [during their 40-minute telephone conversation], and in the evening then this [executive order] came out."

"The imposition of tariffs on countries that provide oil to Cuba could create a far-reaching humanitarian crisis [severely impacting the operations of hospitals, the electrical grid and the food supply]." 

"[Cuba is currently] going through a difficult moment [but Mexico cannot be put] at risk in terms of the tariffs."  

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum  

A drone view shows the Pajaritos terminal of Mexico's state-owned oil company Pemex, in Coatzacoalcos, Veracruz state. (Angel Hernandez/Reuters)

 

An executive order was signed on Thursday by U.S. President Donald Trump when he declared Cuba represented an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to U.S. national security for which tariffs would be imposed on all U.S. imports from any country supplying Cuba with oil. In the wake of the lightning military raid on Caracas in mid-January that took Venezuela's President Nicolas Maduro into U.S. custody for trucking with drug cartels, Mr. Trump turned his attention directly on Cuba.

 

Subsequent to the raid, the Trump administration now controls Venezuela's oil exports and took the occasion to block deliveries of oil to Cuba, long reliant on its regional ally in Venezuela to supply it with petroleum. Mexico, under critical trade duress found it necessary to cancel its latest scheduled delivery for the month to Cuba, taking into account the looming renegotiation of Mexico's free-trade pact with the United States and Canada.

 

Under these constraining issues, the sobering 'sovereign decision' was made to temporarily halt Mexican oil shipments to Cuba. Earlier in the day following the Trump order appearing on the White House website, the Cuban government attempted to rally Latin American and Caribbean neighbours to its rescue. "The peace, security and stability of Our America are in danger", Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez stated in a social media post, denouncing the U.S. for imposing "peace through force".

 

In an appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee the day before, Secretary of State Marco Rubio -- of Cuban descent -- was asked whether he would rule out forcing "regime change" in Cuba. "I think we would like to see that regime change", responded Mr. Rubio. "That doesn't mean that we're going to make a change, but we would love to see a change. There's no doubt about the fact that it would be of great benefit to the United States if Cuba was no longer governed by an autocratic regime". 

 

Long dependent on Venezuelan supplies of oil which it trades for security and medical personnel with Venezuela under Maduro and previously Hugh Chavez, Cuba produces little oil of its own. Imports averaged 37,000 barrels daily, the bulk of which arrived from Venezuela in 2025. Cuba is now left with a mere 15 to 20 days of oil, according to the Financial Times. Island-wide blackouts are common and frequent, impacting basic human services like drinking water.

 

Preparing dinner during a blackout in Havana on Wednesday, as Cubans from all walks of life hunker into survival mode, navigating seemingly interminable blackouts and soaring prices for food, fuel and transport as the U.S. increases pressure on the communist‑run nation. (Reuters)

 

Signing a new defence co-operation pact with Havana last fall, Moscow pledged $1 billion in investment over the next five years in efforts to retain a hemispheric foothold. Diplomatic support has emanated to Cuba by both China and Russia. The determination of the U.S. to direct oil supplies away from Cuba along with a fleet of navy and coast guard ships in the Caribbean for operations against Venezuela tasked to stop drug smuggling, the oil blockade of Cuba was next on the agenda.

 

Seven sanctioned oil tankers carrying Venezuelan crude have been seized by the U.S. to date -- blockading legitimate shipments to Cuba risks global criticism of violating international law, according to maritime experts. In response to questions in the immediate aftermath of the Caracas raid, the U.S. president responded that he felt no additional actions were required against Cuba, since lacking oil from Venezuela, "Cuba looks like it's ready to fall". 

 

 

The Gaza Board of Peace

"[The Board of Peace would] work with many others, including the United Nations."

"Once this board is completely formed, we can do pretty much whatever in conjunction with the United Nations. You know, I've always said the United Nations has got tremendous potential."

"Every one of them [those signing on the 'Board of Peace'] is a friend of mine. A couple, let's see, a couple I like, a couple I don't like."

"No, I like, actually, this group. I like every single one of them, can you believe it? Usually I have about two or three that I can't stand." 

"[I wish that] we didn't need a Board of Peace [but the UN had failed to help solve the world's conflicts]."

U.S. President Donald J. Trump

U.S. President Donald Trump, centre, sits with leaders of other countries during a signing ceremony for his 'Board of Peace' initiative aimed at resolving global conflicts, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, on Thursday. (Jonathan Ernst/Reuters)

"I think what you're seeing is a board that has been cobbled together for Gaza with much bigger aspirations. But with a set of skills and a set of people that is really very Middle East centric, and I think has quite little relevance to crises outside of that region."

"Yes, the UN has very serious problems. But I think that doesn't mean that Europeans [and] many others — in South America, for example — want to see a world in which the White House, in which Trump, in which Americans acquire disproportionate power over these sorts of decisions."

"This is not just a contest that the U.S. can shape by itself and say, 'I'm done with the UN, it's over.' The Chinese will keep playing this game. Very powerful rising countries like Brazil and India will have a stake in the UN, and they will seek to influence its agencies and bodies more and more as the U.S. draws back." 

Shashank Joshi, defence editor, The Economist  

President Donald Trump in Davos officially launched his Board of Peace initiative, claiming his very personal project so dear to his heart which may yet gain him 2026's nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize, joined on stage by his board's founding members comprised of political allies such as President Javier Milei of Argentina, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and representatives from Bahrain, Morocco, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates and Uzbekistan.

 

All of whom were pleased to join Mr. Trump at the document signing table where the board's charter was declared to be 'in full force', as an "official international organization". Phase two of the Peace Plan is set to proceed, despite the fact that Phase one has not been fully implemented. And considering the critical nature of fully implementing the first portion of the plan focusing on dismantling and disarming the Hamas terrorist group governing Gaza, to follow on seems a trifle premature. It represents, in fact, a failure.

 

Not according to Mr. Trump who considers the initial peace plan phase successful, emphasizing his intention and that of the United States to have Gaza 'properly rebuilt'. There are some heads of state who, given the uncertainties that lie ahead and their concerns regarding the makeup of the board's membership who prefer to hang back before finalizing their decisions to join, and others who are certain there is no good reason for them to be part of the notional planned success. 

 

US President Donald Trump (C) speaks during the Sharm El-Sheikh Peace Summit in the Egyptian Red Sea resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh on October 13, 2025. (Photo by SAUL LOEB / AFP)

 

American allies, part of the Group of Seven, remain uneasily on the sidelines. Originally the board was proposed to help oversee the reconstruction of Gaza. A broader purpose has been newly revealed: to "secure enduring peace on areas affected or threatened by conflict", a vision that places many U.S. allies on alert, concerned there is a hidden agenda to rival and perhaps replace the traditional 'relevance' of the United Nations.

 

That a new draft plan suggests countries joining the board contribute $1 billion each should they wish to  place themselves past the initial three-year registration to permanent status, may have taken many aback. The view being that Mr. Trump will remain its chairman in perpetuity, making all the decisions as its "inaugural chairman". The invitation extended to Russian President Vladimir Putin and Belarus's Alexander Lukashenko certainly persuaded Volodymyr Zelenskyy to politely turn down his own invitation, while raising eyebrows throughout Europe.

 

Altogether some 60 leaders were given invitations to join. France, the United Kingdom, Sweden, the Netherlands, Norway and Germany have declined their invitations. Canada accepted, but given its trade overtures to Beijing that followed, has been  summarily disinvited.  The UN Security Council had originally endorsed the Gaza plan, but may since have had second thoughts.

 

 

 

Seizing Greenland

"We don't have any involvement whatsoever in plans to seize Greenland, and I have no doubt that Washington is fully aware that neither Russia nor the People's Republic of China has any such plans."

"This is not our issue. Our primary concern is our interest in establishing open and free Arctic co-operation."

"[Russia is monitoring developments in this] serious geopolitical situation."

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov

 

"We are going to do something on Greenland whether they like it or not."

"We've not going to have Russia or China occupy Greenland and that's what they going to do if we don't."

"Considering your Country [Norway] 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."

"The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland."

"NATO has been telling Denmark for 20 years that 'you have to get the Russian threat away from Greenland'. Unfortunately, Denmark has been unable to do anything about it."

"Now it is time, and it will be done!!!" 

U.S. President Donald Trump

 

"If a trade war is launched against us, which I cannot recommend, then we must of course respond. We would be forced to do so."

"I hope we do not get to that point. I hope that we succeed in convincing the Americans that this is not the path we should take."

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen 

Greenland is not a distant outpost but is of great importance to the whole of Europe. It is an Overseas Country and Territory of the European Union with special rights. Bruegel

 

Thousands of Greenlanders marched over the weekend to protest any threat from the U.S. President, warning that their island would be taken over by the United States. "We will not be pressured", responded Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielson, and the tariff threats issued by Trump would make no difference in Greenland's determination of complete sovereignty. 

 

A 10 percent tariff was announced by Mr. Trump to  take effect on February 1, rising to 25 percent in June, for eight European countries -- EU members Denmark, Sweden, France, Germany, the Netherlands and Finland as well as Britain and Norway -- as punishment following their decision that they would take part in NATO military exercises in Greenland. This latest threat has given cause to European Union leaders to plan an emergency summit for discussion of possible retaliatory measures, counter-tariffs included. 

 

The uncertainty has led Greenland's prime minister and the people of the Arctic island's population alert to the need to begin preparing for a possible military invasion, a scenario that seems unlikely, but given the U.S. President's mercurial decision-making, not entirely implausible. "It's not likely there will be  military conflict, but it can't be ruled out", cautioned Prime Minister Nielsen at a Nuuk news conference on Tuesday. 

 

The government plans to work on distributing new guidelines to its 57,000 population, including a recommendation to ensure each family has sufficient food for a five-day period, in a drive to help people prepare for any possible disruptions to daily life. Earlier on Tuesday, President Trump posted an AI-generated image of himself planting a U.S. flag on the island. Alarming symbolism for Greenlanders. 

 

As part of the Kingdom of Denmark, but with its own government overseeing life on the island, but for defence, Denmark has deployed a greater number of troops there to boost its Arctic defence. As well, Denmark and seven other NATO countries deployed a number of officers on the island, part of the Operation Arctic Endurance. The plan now is for Denmark's Joint Arctic Command to expand the military exercises to operate possibly year-round, according to a Greenlandic newspaper.  

 

The Greenlandic flag flies over a building as the HDMS Vaedderen of the Danish Navy patrols behind on Jan. 18, 2026 in Nuuk, Greenland. | Sean Gallup/Getty Images

"I think it's a complete canard that the president would be doing this because of the Nobel [not having know/n anything about the president's letter to Norway]."

"[Trump] is looking at Greenland as a strategic asset for the United States."

"We are not going to outsource our hemispheric security to anyone else."

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent 

Trump cancels tariff threat over Greenland, says NATO agreed to 'framework' of future Arctic deal. PBS News

"We want a piece of ice for world protection, and they won't give it. You can say yes, and we will be very appreciative. Or you can say no, and we will remember."

"[There should be] immediate negotiations [for the U.S. to acquire Greenland. There's a bigger price, [than merely monetary] and that's the price of safety and security and national security and international security."

U.S. President Donald Trump 

Trump 'Monitoring the Situation in Iran'

"The truth is only President Trump knows what he's going to do and a very, very small team of advisers are read into his thinking on that."

"He continues to closely monitor the situation on the ground in Iran."

"All options remain on the table." 

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt 

 

"President Trump is a man of action, not endless talk like we see at the United Nations."

"He has made it clear all options are on the table to stop the slaughter."

Mike Waltz, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations

At least 52 prisoners were executed in Iran based on prior non-political convictions during a period of nationwide protests and an ongoing internet shutdown.  Iran International

 

Last June Leavitt had read a message to reporters saying it had come "directly from the president". Trump himself would decide, he maintained, whether to strike Iran "within the next two weeks"; this at a time when Israel was carrying out strikes on Iran, and the president was weighing whether he would order the U.S. military to become involved. Before two days elapsed B-2 bombers were ordered to carry out strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. 

 

"It might be that they're delaying things and using the time for getting that posture correct", ventured Jeremy Shapiro, research director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, on the theory that the American president might have been concerned over the current U.S. force posture in the Middle East spurring him to hesitate. No U.S. aircraft carriers, an asset during a military operation in the region were available having been deployed to an operation focused on Venezuela.

 

The perceived shifting tone of U.S. President Donald Trump leaning away from his threats to attack Iran following his continued warning issuing warnings against Tehran for its brutal crackdown on Iranians mounting a countrywide protest against the oppressive Islamist Republic's theocratic regime saw a drop in oil prices as markets reacted to the uncertainty of this mercurial president's changeable sentiments.

 

The intervention of top officials from Egypt, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Qatar warning that an American military intervention would have the effect of destabilizing the global economy as well as shaking an already volatile region moving it close to a total regional war appears to have had an effect on the president's decision-making. This is a Muslim Brotherhood reaction to the potential removal of the Islamist theocracy ruling Iran.  

 

Anti-government protesters demonstrate on January 8, in Tehran.   Getty Images

 

While Oman and Qatar are in full support of Iran, as Muslim Brotherhood-linked states, the Muslim Brotherhood has been officially proscribed in Egypt, where it was formed almost a century ago, as a fundamentalist Islamist group dedicated to strict Sharia and jihad by any means, and in Saudi Arabia as well it is outlawed, though it seems that the severe orthodoxy of totalitarian Islamism dictates the decision making in favour of the Muslim Brotherhood whose agenda the Islamic Republic of Iran represents a living example.

 

Qatar in particular, with its massive oil wealth, has bought respectability and recognition as a 'moderate' Muslim state in the United States. Its persuasive power lies in its massive financial investments there, in its universities where it has been able to influence academia to respect its agenda of portrayals of Islam as benign, not the Western values-destructive totalitarian threat it carries. President Trump admires the trappings of wealth and power and is not immune to appreciating those whose generosity benefits him personally.

 

Iranians took to the streets despite the danger they face from their despotic, oppressive government that has, over almost a half-century persecuted them through force of threats and state punishment from imprisonment, torture and a relentless death penalty. Despite Iran's authorities warning the population that taking part in mass protests against the government would be construed as grounds for capital punishment, Iranians kept turning out in their hundreds of thousands in cities across the nation, facing police violence.

 

Iran International

 

Estimates of the rising death count have reached well over 30,000 people. The wounded have overwhelmed hospitals and now reports emerge that the Basij are entering hospitals to take away and execute those wounded in the protests. As for families frantic to recover the bodies of their loved ones for burial, without the thousands of dollars demanded by the regime to release them, those families that cannot afford the price to redeem the corpses are left disconsolate in their grief. 

 

After having issued vehement threats to the Iranian regime for the rising death count, and promising Iranians that the U.S. military is prepared to rescue them,  Trump's assurances that "help is on its way", while urging Iranians to take over their country's institutions, abruptly declared information had been given him from "very important sources on the other side" that Iran  had put a halt to killing protesters and executions were no longer proceeding. No need, therefore, to intervene.

 

At the same time that Qatar, Oman, Egypt and Saudi Arabia persuaded Trump to stand down from his word to the Iranian people, they urged Iranian officials to end the visible repression of protesters, warning that continued Iranian responses or an action against the U.S. would significantly impact Iran. Through social media Trump repeated the speaking lines of those persuading him not to strike Iran: "This is good news, hopefully, it will continue!", he posted over the commutation of a death sentence for a young Iranian shopkeeper-protester.

 

Iran's response was to once more completely shut down the Internet connections across the nation.  And nor can cellphones be operational. No news in or out of the theocracy, other than what the regime may permit. No guarantees that the hunting down and slaughter of Iranians, disconsolate over their abandonment by the world at large and fearing now to emerge from their homes, is ongoing. This is what is meant by a pact with the devil some might compare to the 'art of the deal'. 

"[Thousands have been killed], some in an inhuman, savage manner."

"Those linked to Israel and the US caused massive damage and killed several thousand."

"We consider the US president criminal for the casualties, damages and slander he inflicted on the Iranian nation."

"[Iran considered President Trump to be a] criminal. [The US must be] held accountable [for recent unrest]."

"America's goal is to swallow Iran."

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei 

Iran's supreme leader has for the first time publicly acknowledged that thousands of people were killed during recent protests, blames the West. Iranian leader press office via Getty Images

 

That Eureka! Moment

"We are already in the midst of a three-way arms race among Russia the United States, and China."

"A resumption in testing of nuclear warheads would make this unstable situation worse, possibly far worse."

William Hartung, Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft

 

"By foolishly announcing his intention to resume nuclear testing, Trump will trigger strong international opposition that could unleash a chain reaction of nuclear testing y U.S. adversaries and blow apart the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty."

Daryl Kimball, Executive Director, Arms Control Association

 

"The only one who would benefit from nuclear warhead testing would be China, because they haven't done as many as Russia and the U.S."

"[As far as  nuclear weapons themselves], everything is done now through computational testing."

"The U.S. is far ahead of Russia and China on how much data it has from this, so it really doesn't need it at the moment [explosive testing]."

"None of them actually want to return to testing, but because they're thinking the other is preparing for testing, then that's how we end up testing."

"So that's the big risk involved at the moment."

Doreen Horschig, Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)

A mushroom cloud rises from a test blast at the Nevada test site on June 24, 1957.

US Energy Department/AP

 

"First of all, every statement in that post [President Trump's musing statement on his social media site, Truth Social] is wrong."

"It’s not true the United States has the world’s most nuclear weapons. It’s not true that other states are carrying out nuclear tests."

"[Trump] seems to think it’s the Department of Defense that carries out nuclear tests. It’s not. It’s the Department of Energy."

Matthew Bunn, nuclear weapons expert, Harvard University 

 

"Neither China nor Russia has conducted a nuclear explosive test, so I’m not reading anything into it or reading anything out."

"[The Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation defines nuclear tests as] generally controlled explosions of [a] nuclear device, such as bombs or warheads [and Russia’s missile and torpedo tests do not meet that strict definition]."

U.S. Navy Vice Adm. Richard Correll 

Photo: CORBIS/Corbis/Getty Images

Once again, U.S. President Donald Trump's casual musing and extemporaneously-impulsive decision-making is turning incredulous heads in disbelief, shocking supporters and critics alike, and cutting like a buzzsaw through the corridors of international political diplomacy. This is a man who likes to keep people on their toes, a man who doesn't mind that what erupts from his mind and mouth is not particularly true, nor his decisions based on his warped perspectives creating blinding headaches for other world leaders; worth it all, and more, for the attention he garners. Attention that is proof-positive of the exalted political position he holds as the commanding, demanding most powerful man at the helm of the world's sole super-power.

 

What emerges from his mind and his mouth emits are his truths and if they're his truths then everyone must pay due attention and with it the homage he craves. Do otherwise and the wrath of this demi-God knows no bounds; his decisions can make and break the most carefully guarded quality of a nation's possessions; its economic health and security. While saying in one breath that he abhors conflicts and human death, he embarks on his own special eradication gambit, a 'war on terror' focusing on Venezuela and authorizing U.S. military assets to blow fishing boats out of the water in his measure of illustrating conflict/death.

 

U.S. testing, he announced, of nuclear warheads would commence "immediately", while on the other hand musing about the dire necessity of prolonging non-proliferation agreements for the good of humanity. It is not beyond reasonable to imagine the consequences that might ensue from his impulse of resuming nuclear tests; the risk of an expanded arms race becomes a huge potential. Nor that he announced his firm intention to proceed instanter comes at a time when internaional arms control has become wobbly.

 

If Washington's decision via its incendiary president was meant to match the positions taken by Beijing and Moscow, the president's decision would logically have been to remain wary in the realization that those he considers adversaries have the potential to resume nuclear testing, yet have chosen to refrain from so doing, in favour of continuing to honour the non-proliferation agreements they signed. Claiming that he authorized nuclear testing "on an equal basis" with Moscow and Beijing, is just Trump being Trump, take-it-or-leave-it. 

 

He has no realization that his 'immediate' decision itself cannot be implemented 'immediately'; it would take years of preparation before such resumption could take place, after a hiatus of decades. But it most certainly would spur Beijing and Moscow to rush to engage their own capabilities in a match with Washington's. All three of these world powers have in the interim engaged in testing delivery systems, not warheads; Russia's most recent of the platforms being tested appearing to have galvanized Mr. Trump's response, clearly demonstrating he cannot differentiate nuclear explosives from their delivery systems. 

 

Beijing responded politely indicating its hopes that Washington would reconsider and remain respectful ofits obligations to the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and "take concrete actions to safeguard the global nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation system", while Moscow took pains to carefully describe to the American president that testing its nuclear-powered and -capable weapons did not constitute a direct test of atomic weaponry. (It's the delivery systems, stupid!)

 

The United States and Russia together represent the world's two leading nuclear powers; China is behind them in developing its nuclear arsenal but still remains far behind the other two. It was likely that last year's Pentagon warning that China is moving quickly on nuclear arms, particuraly in the development of operational warheads, that lodged itself firmly in Mr. Trump's mind; he doesn't like to be upstaged by anyone, nor that any other country reach for a position too close to that of the United States in superiority of numbers of anything.

 

The New Start arms control agreement between Washington and Mosow limits each to 1,550 deployed strategic offensive warheads, including a suspended verification mechanism, to expire in February2026, which Russia has proposed extending for another year. "Sounds like a good idea to me", Trump responded, without committing to anything that solid. "We are starting to work on that, a big problem for the world when you take off nuclear restrictions", he averred, in direct contradiction with the position he now takes. China's warhead total is one-third of that of Russia and the U.S.

 

And then there is the existential question, querulous but potently aware: How many warheads does it take to destroy this Earthly home we share? A minute proportion of the total, presumably. Which brings us to another question: How absurdly, dangerously pathetic can the powers that threaten our survival possibly be? Their actions, needless to say answer the second question, and until and unless a final solution is seriouisly entertained we won't know the answer to the first. And wouldn't know it in any event, since there woould be no one left to do the calculations of that Eureka! moment. 

 

President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping look at each other after their summit meeting in Busan, South Korea, on Oct. 30, 2025. | Mark Schiefelbein/AP

"The post also comes just weeks after Putin offered to continue to observe the limits of the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) if the United States reciprocated. On October 28, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov expressed his “hope” that Trump would positively respond to Putin’s offer and the principles discussed at the Anchorage Summit, saying, “President Trump has repeatedly spoken positively about this initiative put forward by President Putin, so we are actually hoping that these positive reactions will be translated into some kind of official announcement.” Other than an off-handed remark by Trump that it sounded “like a good idea,” there has been no official announcement from the White House on the future of New START, which expires in February 2026 and is the last remaining bilateral strategic arms control agreement of its kind. Trump’s post could also be an effort to generate negotiating leverage with Moscow."

"Finally, the administration should also take the opportunity to clarify Trump’s statements and recommit to nuclear agreements that are in U.S. interests. Washington would be worse off if states, particularly China, return to nuclear testing, which it likely would in response to U.S. test plans. This would undermine the norm against nuclear testing and could result in a reverse normative cascade, with implications for other rules of the road, such as nuclear nonproliferation."

Heather Williams, director, Project on Nuclear Issues, senior fellow, Defense and Security Department, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington, D.C.