5.8 C
London
Friday, April 24, 2026
Subscribe
Home Blog

Global shipping order may never recover from Hormuz

By
IwPost
-
0
global-shipping-order-may-never-recover-from-hormuz
Global shipping order may never recover from Hormuz

With the United States and Iran escalating confrontations along the Strait of Hormuz — including the seizure of ships — the waterway has become “pivotal to negotiations” between the two countries.

Washington escalated to direct interdiction of Iranian-linked shipping near the strait on April 19, with US forces boarding and seizing an Iran-bound container ship, as part of the blockade imposed by it. Meanwhile, on April 22, Iranian forces seized two ships, casting doubt on Trump’s earlier declaration that the strait is “open for business.”

Weeks of joint US-Israeli strikes, backed by Gulf partners, have failed to decisively degrade Iranian military capabilities or critically destabilize its government, while Iran has also been unable to force an American retreat.

The crisis has caused traffic through the Strait of Hormuz to plummet. The waterway is one of the most “critical oil transit chokepoints,” with roughly 25% of the world’s seaborne oil and about 20 percent of its liquefied natural gas (LNG) passing through it.

Even for crews willing to transit the narrow strait, soaring insurance costs have also held back trade. Despite Washington establishing a US$40 billion maritime insurance fund to encourage and secure maritime trade, contradictory signals from the US and Iranian sides, including inconsistencies from their official channels, have added to the uncertainty, preventing traffic from recovering. Commodity prices and financial markets initially reacted sharply, but have become less sensitive to sensationalist political rhetoric.

The crisis has been compared to attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz in the 1980s during the Iran–Iraq war. The US Navy escorted tankers through the strait and allowed foreign vessels to reflag as American, retaliating when its forces were targeted, and pushing both Baghdad and Tehran to scale back attacks. The affair effectively cemented Washington’s role as the global guarantor of maritime trade, an assumption now being tested once again by renewed US intervention.

While Washington continues to seek to keep the strait open, there appears to be a growing willingness to tolerate disruption, consistent with the Trump administration’s “America First” orientation, especially with US energy imports having diversified away from the Middle Eastern dependence, which is complemented by increasing domestic production. With Iran suffering from a blockade, the disruption to traditional resource flows and elevated oil prices has also benefited US producers and exporters.

Forcing the strait open is also not straightforward, with US Naval Forces now exposed to Iran’s arsenal of low-cost drones and ballistic missiles. Securing it by force risks human and material losses high enough to make a standoff approach more attractive. It would be far more beneficial to hold naval ships at a distance while managing economic pressure to sustain traffic through the strait.

While Operation Epic Fury, which aimed to dismantle Iran’s security infrastructure, marks a show of strength for US forces, its constraints show a new operating reality in the age of mass drones and ballistic missiles rather than a return to uncontested military control.

What the ongoing crisis in the Strait of Hormuz also reveals is how ambiguous and unevenly enforced maritime law remains, a reality long masked by US hegemony. Neither Iran nor the U.S. has ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and few international bodies or countries are able to provide neutral mediation.

Both operate on competing national interpretations of legal rights and obligations in the strait that have compounded obstacles to wider negotiations.

Mounting strains

Rather than reacting to crises, Washington’s approach to the Strait of Hormuz reflects an effort to anticipate and exploit disruption, shaped by a series of tests to its maritime order in recent years.

Since 2023, Houthi rebel drone and missile attacks on shipping in the Red Sea have kept tanker traffic below pre-crisis levels, even after US-led military intervention and a 2025 ceasefire. That agreement now appears fragile amid Houthi threats to resume attacks and Iran’s push to them “to prepare for a renewed campaign against Red Sea shipping if the US escalates its military actions against Iran, according to European officials,” stated to Bloomberg News.

Simultaneously with the Houthis’ Red Sea campaign, nearby Somali piracy has also rebounded. Driven in part by foreign fishing and toxic waste dumping in Somali waters­, piracy grew rapidly off the country’s coast in the late 2000s and early 2010s before a sustained international effort led by the US, NATO, and the EU brought it under control. Its resurgence is indicative of the weakening of international maritime security cooperation and the limits of US enforcement capacity.

There has also been a state-to-state maritime disruption before the Hormuz crisis. Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, war efforts have significantly reduced Black Sea traffic and undermined internationally-brokered agreements, turning much of it into a “no-man’s land.” Russian access to the Black Sea and the Danish straits has also been restricted by Western enforcement measures.

However, the global Western enforcement architecture that has helped support American maritime dominance for decades is itself coming under strain amid tensions within the transatlantic alliance.

The Trump administration’s renewed interest in Greenland, in particular, has raised tensions with Denmark and other EU members, exposing cracks in Western unity that complicate collective action at sea even before the current crisis in the Strait of Hormuz.

The Trump administration’s focus on expanding US power in the Americas also entails countering China’s extensive global trade influence, seen most visibly in the current competition over the Panama Canal.

Built between 1903 and 1914, the US began gradually transferring control of the canal to Panama during the 1970s. The US, however, invaded Panama in 1989 in part to secure the canal and to depose Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega. Full control was transferred to Panama in 1999, by which time Hong Kong-based CK Hutchinson had already secured concessions to operate major container terminals on both the Atlantic and Pacific sides.

At the Panama Canal and elsewhere, “by securing ownership stakes and operational leases in port infrastructure, Chinese firms can streamline global operations and grow their influence over supply chains while providing greater market access and reduced shipping costs for other Chinese companies,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. Formal and informal advantages in scheduling and berths add to these gains, giving China an edge on major shipping routes.

Panama now faces renewed US pressure to reassert influence and limit China’s role. In early 2026, Panama’s Supreme Court ruled that aspects of the agreement with CK Hutchinson were unconstitutional, triggering a state review and plans to rebid operating rights. A consortium of American companies led by BlackRock is now positioned to gain this critical logistics hub, drawing heavy criticism from Beijing.

“The canal is a critical component of global infrastructure, facilitating the transit of more than 5-6% of the world’s maritime trade. … the agreement with BlackRock, granting the American financial consortium access to port infrastructure, was a pivotal point in Panama’s strategic reorientation. This move not only curtailed China’s economic maneuvering space but also prompted a reconsideration of the control architecture over supply chains in the Central American region,” stated an article in the Transatlantic Dialogue Center.

The saga appears to be a costly but partial win, reflecting the Trump administration’s efforts to counter China’s global port network. Several Trump administration officials have also singled out China’s involvement in Peru’s Chancay port, while US Ambassador to Greece Kimberly Guilfoyle suggested that China sell its control over Greece’s Piraeus port, a major gateway into Europe. The Biden administration likewise backed efforts to offset China’s reach, including a $553 million agreement with Sri Lanka in 2023 to compete with Chinese trade infrastructure there.

That deal ultimately fell through in 2024, highlighting Washington’s difficulty in sustaining even limited foreign port developments. From 2000 to 2025, China directed $24 billion into 168 ports across 90 countries, building out logistics and networks and integrating them with a rapidly growing fleet that far exceeds that of the US.

Over time, the US Navy’s role in securing global shipping lanes for its own economic interests has also protected China’s trade, allowing Beijing to expand its global network without bearing the cost of keeping those routes open.

Uncertain transition

However, as the US Naval Institute has openly noted, “China’s dependence on extended overseas supply lines makes it politically and economically vulnerable. This is a critical vulnerability that, in the event of conflict, could be targeted. And US Marines could help.”

Despite the expansion of overland trade routes, most Chinese commerce still moves by sea. Changes to the status quo at chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz and Panama Canal, therefore, carry major security implications, as even China’s large and rapidly expanding navy lacks the global force projection and operational experience to reliably secure its maritime trade network.

China’s exposure is shared by most countries, including close European and other U.S.-allied economies. On April 1, the Financial Times reported that Trump threatened to halt weapons shipments to Ukraine until European countries sent forces to open the Strait of Hormuz.

Whether accurate or not, Britain and France announced a commitment weeks later to lead an international mission to help restore trade. However, the hesitation and ambiguity of the commitment, alongside Trump’s reaction asking European nations to “stay away,” have shown the limited capacity of other major powers to ensure the flow of international trade.

Washington’s introduction of a more transactional approach to maritime security raises global risks. National and regional fragmentation would weaken legal clarity, and contested control over chokepoints and disputed transit zones may fuel arms races and similarly push up trade costs.

Disruptions to international trade by Houthi militants and Somali pirates, meanwhile, demonstrate how non-state actors can use relatively low-cost technologies to challenge state forces and create de facto no-go zones. These challenges to shipping have helped drive demand for the growing private maritime security industry, which itself faces significant oversight and regulatory challenges.

A rapid resolution to the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz could avoid a major shock to the current maritime order. But it has been devolving for years, and Washington appears to be considering trading its global maritime “safety premium” for a narrower, concession-based presence.

Forfeiting control over major chokepoints and transit zones would weaken dollar-dominated commerce and generally reduce its geopolitical standing. It would also force China to divert resources and reflects Washington’s prioritization amid great power competition and new technologies that have eroded traditional deterrence measures.

With no clear successor system, selective US enforcement is likely to be met by parallel Chinese initiatives and more fragmented regional blocs. While US primacy at sea was never absolute, its stability benefited many countries, including its largest rival.

Letting that system dissolve without a credible alternative would be a major blow to international stability and cooperation.

John P Ruehl is an Australian-American journalist living in Washington, DC, and a world affairs correspondent for the Independent Media Institute. He is a contributor to several foreign affairs publications, and his book, Budget Superpower: How Russia Challenges the West With an Economy Smaller Than Texas’, was published in December 2022. Follow him on X @john_ruehl.

This article was produced by Economy for All, a project of the Independent Media Institute, and is republished with kind permission.

‘I Dream of Jeannie’ Star Mourns Co-Star After Sudden Death

By
IwPost
-
0
‘i-dream-of-jeannie’-star-mourns-co-star-after-sudden-death
‘I Dream of Jeannie’ Star Mourns Co-Star After Sudden Death


Hollywood is reeling after a sudden and heartbreaking loss — and one legendary star is speaking out.

“I Dream of Jeannie” icon Barbara Eden is mourning the shocking death of her former co-star Patrick Muldoon, sharing an emotional tribute that’s hitting fans right in the heart.

The 94-year-old actress took to Instagram to remember Muldoon, who died unexpectedly Sunday at just 57 years old after a sudden heart attack. The two worked together on the 2019 holiday film “My Adventures with Santa,” and Eden made it clear the bond they formed stuck with her.

“So saddened to learn about the sudden passing of Patrick Muldoon,” she wrote, calling him a “sweet man” who was “very personable.”

Eden didn’t hold back as she reflected on their time together behind the scenes, revealing that Muldoon brought a special energy to set. She said she genuinely cherished their moments between takes, describing him as someone who made the entire experience more fun and memorable.

And the shock of his sudden death clearly rattled her.

“While the passing of a loved one is never easy, it is especially difficult when it’s unexpected and sudden,” she added, before sending her condolences to his family and friends.

But Eden isn’t the only one grieving.

Muldoon’s former “Days of Our Lives” co-star Lisa Rinna and actress Denise Richards have also spoken out — and the reaction has been emotional. According to reports, Richards has been left completely devastated, with sources claiming she “can’t stop crying” following the tragic news.

The details surrounding Muldoon’s final moments make the loss even more chilling.

According to reports, the actor had been spending a quiet Sunday morning at his Beverly Hills home with his partner when he went to take a shower. After noticing he had been gone for too long, she checked on him — only to find him unconscious on the bathroom floor.

Paramedics were called, but it was too late. Muldoon was pronounced dead at the scene.

The actor, known for roles in “Starship Troopers” and beloved soap appearances, leaves behind a legacy of charm, talent, and a reputation as one of the genuinely kind figures in Hollywood.

Now, as tributes pour in and fans process the sudden loss, one thing is clear — Patrick Muldoon wasn’t just another face on screen. To those who knew him, he was unforgettable.

Carbon nanotube wiring gets closer to competing with copper

By
IwPost
-
0
carbon-nanotube-wiring-gets-closer-to-competing-with-copper
Carbon nanotube wiring gets closer to competing with copper

Shortly after their discovery, carbon nanotubes seemed to be a material wonder. There were metallic and semiconducting forms; they were tiny and incredibly light; and they could only be broken by tearing apart chemical bonds. The ideas for using them seemed endless.

But then the reality of working with them set in. It was hard to get a pure population of metallic or semiconducting forms. Synthesis techniques tended to produce a tangle of mostly short nanotubes; those that extended for more than a couple of centimeters remain rare. And while the metallic version offered little resistance to carrying electric current, it was hard to send many electrons down the nanotube.

Materials scientists, however, are a stubborn bunch, and they’re still trying to get them to work. Today’s issue of Science includes a paper describing the addition of a chemical to carbon nanotube bundles to boost their ability to carry current to levels closer to those of copper. While the more conductive nanotubes weren’t stable, the discovery may point the way toward something with a longer shelf life.

Doped nanotubes

Carbon nanotubes come in various forms. In the case of single-walled nanotubes, you can think of them as taking a sheet of graphene, rolling it up into a circle, and linking together the two opposite ends you just brought together. These can also be different diameters. There are also multi-walled carbon nanotubes, where a second nanotube (and maybe third, and maybe more beyond that) is wrapped around the first.

When metallic, these offer little resistance to electron flow along the nanotube. But, because most of their electrons are tied up in the chemical bonding needed to form the nanotube, there’s not a lot of them available to carry current. So, a lot of people have tried developing dopants—chemicals that can be mixed in small quantities that change the behavior of the bulk material. In this case, the goal was to find chemicals that would act as electron donors, adding to the amount of current that could potentially be sent down the nanotube.

Obviously, isolated nanotubes can’t really have dopants, since they’re pretty self-contained. But the team behind the new work, based in Spain, was working with bulk nanotube fibers, which are a mixture of nanotubes of various lengths bundled into a larger fiber, with most individual nanotubes oriented along the fiber’s long axis. In this case, the fiber was made from double-walled nanotubes, given its interior a pretty consistent structure.

You can think of the interior space of these fibers as a bit like what you’d get if you were packing spherical objects into a box. Even under the most efficient packing arrangement, there will be gaps between neighboring spheres. In the same way, these fibers have internal spaces that can allow additional chemicals to be incorporated inside the fiber.

The nanotube fibers themselves came from a commercial supplier. To dope these fibers, the researchers decided to use tetrachloroaluminate, or AlCl4–, a charged molecule that has electrons to spare. To get it into the spaces between the nanotubes, they used a vapor composed of aluminum trichloride plus a source of additional chlorine. This seeped into the fibers themselves and formed the charged tetrachloroaluminate in place.

Current carrying

A large chunk of the paper simply consists of imaging and spectroscopy that confirms the expected chemical is present in the spaces between the nanotubes. There was also a fair bit of modeling using Density functional theory to confirm that the resulting doping would be expected to make additional electrons available to carry current. Overall, they estimate that the resulting material has a chemical formula of C39AlCl4 and that the chemical changes occur without altering the fiber’s physical size.

The interesting results come when the researchers start looking into the material’s current-carrying capacity. Doping with the aluminum stuff boosted the mean conductivity by a factor of 10. That is about as high as any previously tested dopant achieved. The highest individual fiber they tested saw this rise to an over 15x improvement and is about 70 percent as conductive as aluminum (which makes it a bit less than half as good as copper).

However, a key feature of this is that the doping doesn’t add much mass to what’s a very light material to start with. So, normalized by density, the doped carbon nanotube fibers actually outperformed copper.

This may sound like an artificial standard, but it could actually matter in applications where space isn’t a concern, and/or where weight is. So, if you could tolerate the wiring being a bit over twice the thickness, then it should be an option to just use a nanotube fiber that’s thicker than the copper wire you’d otherwise need. Another application might be high-capacity transmission lines, where getting the same performance with a lower weight could save money on the support towers needed.

Relevant to this last application, the doping doesn’t alter the durability of the (very tough) carbon nanotube fibers. They have higher tensile strength than either copper or aluminum, and they are closer to steel.

Before you rush out to invest in carbon nanotube futures, however, there is a major issue: The tetrachloroaluminate isn’t stable under normal environmental conditions, as it will react with water molecules in the air. The researchers could extend its useful life by sealing the fibers in a polymer coating, but it still had a lifetime measured in weeks rather than the decades we would want to see.

That doesn’t mean this research is useless. It clearly demonstrates the potential of these materials if the price of carbon nanotube fibers could be brought down. It has identified the structural and chemical features of a highly effective dopant that boosts conductivity, which may ultimately allow us to identify a similar yet more stable chemical to replace it.

Science, 2026. DOI: 10.1126/science.aeb0673 (About DOIs).

EU moves to start drafting Montenegro accession treaty 

By
IwPost
-
0
eu-moves-to-start-drafting-montenegro-accession-treaty 
EU moves to start drafting Montenegro accession treaty 


European Union countries decided to start work on drafting an ​accession treaty for Montenegro on Wednesday, ‌marking a new phase in the country’s path toward joining the bloc.

“This is a ​major step on the path ​to EU membership, a clear recognition of ⁠Montenegro’s progress, and an encouragement ​to accelerate reforms,” European Enlargement Commissioner Marta ​Kos said in a post on X.

“It also offers a chance to draw lessons from ​past enlargements and include new and ​stronger safeguards in future accession treaties to prevent ‌backsliding ⁠on the rule of law and fundamental values,” she added.

Montenegro’s government has said it hopes to join the EU by ​2028. A ​former ⁠republic of Yugoslavia, Montenegro became independent in 2006. It has ​a population of about 600,000.

European ​Council ⁠President Antonio Costa congratulated the country on Wednesday.

“The decision to establish the Working ⁠Party ​to draft the new ​Accession Treaty is a key milestone,” he said.

Sulfur squeeze: Gulf chaos is coming for Asia’s food prices

By
IwPost
-
0
sulfur-squeeze:-gulf-chaos-is-coming-for-asia’s-food-prices
Sulfur squeeze: Gulf chaos is coming for Asia’s food prices

Fertilizer input stress is beginning to rebuild upstream as shipping disruptions continue to constrain flows through critical energy and chemical corridors.

Recent developments across Middle Eastern routes, namely the blockades at the Strait of Hormuz, combined with tightening export conditions in key producing countries, are reshaping the availability and timing of essential inputs such as sulfur and sulfuric acid.

These pressures are emerging at a moment when global logistics remain unsettled and regional risks are elevated. The system is entering a phase where logistical execution is becoming a central variable.

Vessel availability, insurance constraints and routing risks are influencing the movement of materials that sit at the base of fertilizer production. These pressures are emerging even as headline energy prices remain mixed, creating a disconnect between upstream conditions and visible market signals.

Shipping data point to a sustained period of disruption. Freight, bunker and risk indicators remain elevated, with flow constraints persisting across strategic corridors. Traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has fallen sharply, with some industry trackers reporting that only a handful of vessels have crossed the corridor in recent days.

Chemical tanker rates on Middle East routes have risen in line with higher bunker costs and longer detours, with additional rerouting through the Red Sea and around the Cape of Good Hope increasing transit times and operational costs. Market participants continue to adjust routes and timing, although normalization remains limited as operational risks stay high.

These constraints are feeding directly into fertilizer markets. Nitrogen-linked producers have shown relative strength over recent sessions, supported by margin expansion as natural gas prices soften. This configuration reflects a system where cost structures are shifting in response to processing and delivery constraints.

Phosphate markets are particularly sensitive to this dynamic. Sulfuric acid remains a key processing input, and disruptions in its availability influence production schedules and output efficiency.

Delays in upstream inputs translate into slower throughput, introducing timing mismatches across the value chain. These effects tend to accumulate gradually before becoming visible in final product markets.

At the broader agricultural level, price action suggests that transmission remains selective. Wheat and other food grains are showing steady gains, supported by tighter input conditions and stable demand.

Corn is holding a firmer profile, although downstream signals remain mixed. Soybean meal and parts of the feed complex are not confirming the move, indicating that the adjustment is progressing at different speeds across segments.

This selective transmission reflects differences in input intensity, regional exposure and timing. Crops with higher sensitivity to fertilizer inputs and more immediate planting cycles tend to respond earlier. Others remain anchored to existing supply conditions and inventory buffers, which delays the full expression of upstream stress.

Soft commodities illustrate this divergence clearly. Cotton is strengthening on the back of firmer input conditions and stable demand expectations, while coffee is trading under pressure due to regional supply dynamics. These movements show how the same upstream environment can produce varied outcomes depending on crop structure and exposure.

Asia sits at the center of this evolving configuration. The region’s agricultural system relies heavily on imported inputs, particularly for fertilizer production and application.

Dependence on external suppliers for sulfur, ammonia and processed fertilizers creates a structural sensitivity to disruptions in global flows. When upstream constraints emerge, they tend to propagate through import channels with a lag.

A second layer is beginning to take shape. The combination of higher maritime insurance premia, dollar-denominated freight costs and tighter compliance requirements is encouraging some Asian buyers to explore alternative settlement channels and diversified routing options.

This shift reflects a broader trend toward multipolar logistics, where producers and importers seek to reduce exposure to single-corridor risks and concentrated insurance markets.

This lagged transmission is critical for understanding potential inflation dynamics. Food price adjustments rarely occur simultaneously with input shocks. They develop as inventories are drawn down, production cycles adjust and procurement strategies shift. This process can create a period of apparent stability followed by more pronounced adjustments once buffers weaken.

Policy implications are beginning to emerge. Several Asian economies maintain fertilizer subsidy frameworks to stabilize farm costs and protect household budgets. Rising input prices and tighter supply conditions could place pressure on these systems.

Countries with large agricultural sectors and significant subsidy exposure may face difficult policy choices if procurement costs rise or delivery schedules slip. The interaction between market dynamics and policy response will influence outcomes over the coming months.

The current environment suggests that the system is entering a phase in which upstream constraints are becoming more visible, while downstream effects remain in the early stages of transmission. Logistics, routing and processing capacity are emerging as central variables in determining how these pressures evolve.

As shipping conditions remain constrained and input flows continue to face friction, the effects are likely to build progressively within the agricultural system. Asia’s exposure to imported inputs places the region in a position where these dynamics can influence pricing and policy with a delay, shaping the next phase of food market adjustments.

The broader implication is that the next phase of food-system stress may stem from delayed access to the inputs that enable production. As these constraints accumulate, Asia could enter a period in which inflationary pressures emerge after policymakers assume the system has stabilized.

This timing gap is becoming a central vulnerability and is beginning to take shape now.

Luca Mattei is founder and chief analyst at LM Trading & Development, EcoModities Research Initiative

US accuses China of “industrial-scale” AI theft. China says it’s “slander.”

By
IwPost
-
0
us-accuses-china-of-“industrial-scale”-ai-theft-china-says-it’s-“slander.”
US accuses China of “industrial-scale” AI theft. China says it’s “slander.”

The US is preparing to crack down on China’s allegedly “industrial-scale theft of American artificial intelligence labs’ intellectual property,” the Financial Times reported Thursday.

Since the launch of DeepSeek—a Chinese model that OpenAI claimed was trained using outputs from its models—other AI firms have accused global rivals of using a method called distillation to steal their IP. In January, Google claimed that “commercially motivated” actors not limited to China attempted to clone its Gemini AI chatbot by promoting the model more than 100,000 times in bids to train cheaper copycats. The next month, Anthropic accused Chinese firms DeepSeek, Moonshot, and MiniMax of using the same tactic to generate “over 16 million exchanges with Claude through approximately 24,000 fraudulent accounts.” Also in February, OpenAI confirmed that most attacks it saw originated from China.

For the US, these distillation attacks supposedly threaten to help China quickly catch up in the AI race. In a memo that FT reviewed, the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, Michael Kratsios, warned that “the US government has information indicating that foreign entities, principally based in China, are engaged in deliberate, industrial-scale campaigns to distill US frontier AI systems.”

According to Kratsios, Chinese campaigns were “leveraging tens of thousands of proxy accounts to evade detection and using jailbreaking techniques to expose proprietary information.” His memo said that US firms would soon gain access to government information to help them combat the apparent attacks.

So far, AI firms have alleged that such attacks violate their terms of service, but Congress may update laws soon to further equip US companies fighting the alleged fraud.

Kratsios confirmed in his memo that the US is exploring measures “to hold foreign actors accountable for industrial-scale distillation campaigns.”

Congress has already received some marching orders, but it remains unclear how fast lawmakers will act. In an April report, the House’s Select Committee on China advised that Congress “should direct the Commerce Department’s Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS) and the Department of Justice (DOJ)” to “treat model extraction as industrial espionage” and “impose penalties severe enough to deter Beijing’s theft of American innovation.”

Specifically, the committee recommended that the State Department assess whether the distillation attacks violate laws like the Economic Espionage Act and the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. They also want “adversarial distillation” clearly defined and officially categorized as a controlled technology transfer, which would make it easier to restrict fraudulent Chinese access to models.

If such steps were taken, the US could prosecute bad actors and impose heavy financial penalties that might dissuade Chinese firms from treating “serious violations as a tolerable cost of doing business,” the committee’s report said.

China slams accusations as “pure slander”

Kratsios’ memo threatening a crackdown comes ahead of Donald Trump’s highly anticipated meeting with China’s president Xi Jinping next month.

Trump has claimed that the meeting will be “special” and “much will be accomplished.” However, at least one analyst told the South China Morning Post that the war in Iran means that Trump has “lost almost all his bargaining chips” at a time when the US and China are seeking to stabilize a trade relationship that has been tense since Trump took office.

China seems unlikely to tolerate Kratsios’ allegations. Liu Pengyu, a spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in Washington, DC, told FT that the White House accusations were “pure slander.”

“China has always been committed to promoting scientific and technological progress through cooperation and healthy competition,” Pengyu said. “China attaches great importance to the protection of intellectual property rights.”

Whether Trump will side with AI firms that want to see China cut off from their models and sanctioned for distillation attacks has yet to be seen. Trump has, in the past, been accused of making big concessions to China on export control matters that experts have claimed threaten US national security and the economy, as US firms claim the distillation attacks do.

Some of Trump’s concessions may need to be reversed to fight the alleged “industrial espionage.”

Chris McGuire, a technology security expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, told FT that “Chinese AI firms are relying on distillation attacks to offset deficits in AI computing power and illicitly reproduce the core capabilities of US models.” To stop them, the US may need to tighten export controls that Trump loosened, such as allowing Nvidia chip sales to China so long as the US gets a 25 percent cut. That bizarre deal made “no sense” to experts who warned that Trump’s odd move could have opened the door for China to demand access to America’s most advanced AI chips.

Strait of Hormuz: Iran’s ‘nuclear deterrent’

By
IwPost
-
0
strait-of-hormuz:-iran’s-‘nuclear-deterrent’
Strait of Hormuz: Iran’s ‘nuclear deterrent’

This is the text from The Conversation UK’s World Affairs Briefing email. Sign up here to receive weekly analysis of the latest developments in international relations, direct to your inbox.

Napoleon Bonaparte is said to have commented in connection with his invasion of Russia that “geography is destiny”. Take a look at a live maritime tracker to see how Napoleon’s aphorism is playing out in the Middle East today. There are presently hundreds of vessels either side of the Strait of Hormuz, idling in either the Persian Gulf or the Gulf of Oman. But nothing is passing though.

In normal times, 20% of the world’s oil flows through this waterway. But since the US and Israel began to launch attacks at the end of February, Iran has effectively closed down the Strait, both by depositing mines and by threatening to board any ships trying to pass without their permission.

The US has countered with its own blockade. And both sides have demonstrated how serious they are in recent days by threatening, boarding or forcing vessels to reroute.

That Iran would close the Strait of Hormuz should have come as no surprise to anyone. The leaders of the Islamic Republic have threatened to do so every time they have felt under threat over more than four decades. Christian Emery, an expert in US-Iran relations and Persian Gulf security at University College London, believes this is why no previous US president has chosen to launch a full-scale attack on Iran.

As we’ve already seen, the ability of Iran to hugely disrupt the global economy by shutting down the Strait was obvious: “The only person who seems not to have understood this is Donald Trump,” Emery concludes.

Read more: Has the Strait of Hormuz emerged as Iran’s most powerful form of deterrence?

So now there appears to be a deadlock. It’s an unwinnable war, write Bamo Nouri and Inderjeet Parmar, experts in international security at City St George’s, University of London. The US and Israel may enjoy massive military superiority over Iran, but this is beside the point, Nouri and Parmar believe.

While both the US president, Donald Trump, and Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, need to be able to demonstrate to their voters that they have emerged triumphant, Iran isn’t looking to win. It is looking to endure – while making sure that the cost of this conflict becomes unsustainable. And not just for the US and Israel, but for pretty much everybody else besides.

We’re already seeing that. Oil prices have surged and reserves are coming under strain. Supply chains are disrupted. And political friction is stressing relationships, not just between the US and its Nato allies, but – more ominously – with China, which typically buys between 80% and 90% of Iran’s oil exports and said this week that the Strait must be opened without delay.

Iran, our experts conclude, “does not need to win. It only needs to prevent its adversaries from achieving their aims. So far, it has done exactly that.”

Read more: Middle East conflict looks increasingly like a war nobody can win

There’s a principle in classical game theory which explains why Iran’s position is so strong. It’s known as Rubinstein bargaining, writes Renaud Foucart, an economist at Lancaster University. As Foucart explains it, this holds that in a conflict the respective strength of adversaries each depends on two things: “how badly off it would be without a resolution, and how impatient it is to get things resolved”.

As we’ve heard, all the pressure is on the US, while the leverage is mainly in Iran’s hands. “The US’s position is much weaker than first thought because of a stretch of water the world can’t do without,” he concludes.

Read more: The Strait of Hormuz shows how everything is now about leverage

On Tuesday, as we waited to see what might happen if the 14-day deadline imposed by Trump on April 8 expired without Tehran opening the Strait, it was clear that both the US and Iran, to varying degrees, were looking for an off-ramp. The blockade is financially ruinous for Iran – whether it is losing US$500 million (£370 million) a day, as Trump claims, we don’t know. But the shutting down of its oil exports is hitting an already parlous economy and this week the social security minister said 2 million people had lost their jobs since the beginning of the war.

For Trump, it’s soaring prices at the gas pumps and the prospect of rising inflation angering voters ahead of November’s midterm elections. The war is very unpopular with Americans – and, significantly, it’s beginning to fracture the Maga coalition which brought Trump to power in the 2024 election.

A gas station in the US showing high prices at the pumps.

Fuel prices have risen in the US and across much of the rest of the world. EPA/Jim Lo Scalzo

But there are ways both sides can find off-ramps, writes David Galbreath of the University of Bath. The key thing is to find a settlement that the leaders of both sides can sell as a “win”.

For Iran, this could be an easing of sanctions and access to some of the many billions of dollars of frozen assets held overseas. It could be a recognition of its right to enrich uranium to the level needed for medical uses – particularly given the recent assertion by the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, that such a solution would “safeguard its [Iran’s] national sovereignty”.

We know a little about what Iran is prepared to offer because a great deal of it was on the table in February when the US and Israel launched their strikes. But one of the stumbling blocks for the US president appears to be that Iran’s proposals may too closely resemble the deal struck in 2015 by his predecessor, Barack Obama.

Map of Strait of Hormuz with magnifying glass.

Signalling it is willing to open the Strait of Hormuz could be one way for Iran to signal it is willing to make concessions. But this would need to be matched by the US. Sipa US/Alamy Live News

But Galbreath concludes that as things stand, some combination of opening the Strait of Hormuz, acceptance of limits on uranium enrichment and agreeing to stringent inspections could be made to appear a “win” for Trump. This could be a starting point, writes Galbreath, in what is known in conflict resolution as “sequenced de‑escalation”. It could deliver an initial settlement and allow negotiators on both sides to get to work and hammer out the details. Obama’s treaty took 20 months to agree. It’s early days yet.

Read more: Middle East conflict: how the US and Iran could step back from the brink

One stumbling block is likely to be that there appears to be something of a power struggle raging at the top of Iranian politics. This was seen very clearly last weekend, when Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, announced that the Strait of Hormuz was completely open, only to be swiftly overruled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), which said it would decide when and how the Strait would be opened.

Since then, a new figure has emerged at the head of the IRGC: a longtime guards member and hardline former commander of its elite Quds force, Ahmad Vahidi. And it seems that with Iran’s freshly minted supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, badly injured after the attack that killed his father on February 28, Vahidi is now calling the shots in Iran. Andreas Krieg, an expert in Middle East politics at King’s College London explains the power struggle that has led to Vahidi assuming control.

Read more: Who is calling the shots in Iran?

Sign up to receive our weekly World Affairs Briefing newsletter from The Conversation UK. Every Thursday we’ll bring you expert analysis of the big stories in international relations.

Spy drones are compromising America’s nuclear triad

By
IwPost
-
0
spy-drones-are-compromising-america’s-nuclear-triad
Spy drones are compromising America’s nuclear triad

On March 8 a single high altitude drone crossed the perimeter of Barksdale Air Force base in Louisiana late at night, then disappeared. Some thought it was just another civilian operating a drone, but that theory became suspect when the drone carried out maneuvers over weapon storage areas on the base.

The use of spies and drones is part of an intensifying pattern of Chinese intelligence gathering with a long term aim of neutralizing US nuclear capabilities.

What happened

(The timeline data below were gathered from Gemini AI by Google.)

After the March 8 single drone event at Barksdale, on March 9 between 3 am and 7 am, 12 to 15 drones appeared over the Barksdale flight line. These came in “waves” and stayed over the base for as around four hours. Reports say that the drones had their lights on. This forced all air operations and loading work to halt and, for an undisclosed period, workers and personnel were instructed to shelter in place.

Between March 10 and March 13, smaller drone groups (three to five drones each) appeared intermittently, usually between 10 pm and 2 am. These drones did not loiter as long – typically 45 to 90 minutes – but moved in “racetrack” patterns around the base’s northern and southern boundaries of the base.

On March 15, a final drone formation was detected moving at high speed toward the Bossier City side of the base before vanishing from radar.

Very little is known about these drones. According to eye witnesses, the drones flew at relatively low altitude (around 1,000 feet) and were tracked, for a time, on radar. They were seen from the ground and, no doubt, photographed. However, no photos of the drones have been released. It is not clear whether the drones were electrically powered or used liquid fuel, but electrically powered drones normally can’t stay aloft much longer than 90 minutes. Although they were seen from the ground, no one has disclosed the type of drone.

Drones with lights are usually associated with commercial drones used for photography, agriculture, mapping and other tasks. US military drones also are equipped with navigation and anti-collision lights, similar to those on manned aircraft. Personnel at the base were equipped with shotgun-like handheld electronic jammers. Efforts to jam or confuse the drones failed.

Most commercial jammers are designed to handle typical drone frequencies, which are similar to wireless and cellular telephones.

Modern drones, if not autonomous, are controlled by remote operators and the drone flight path is determined by GPS, if present.

Autonomous drones, on the other hand, do not link back to remote operators but are programmed to carry out a task or sequence of tasks. They may use GPS, although they could also use a modern form of feature and terrain recognition, and they may send information linked to satellites, either Starlink, which has become a major drone combat feature in the Ukraine war, or another satellite service. Or they could simply store information onboard until they return home.

It is likely the drones over Barksdale used frequency-hopping radios and encryption, making jamming difficult to impossible. Many countries now produce software-defined radios, frequency-hopping platforms and software to encrypt the hopping pattern. A number of Chinese companies sell such components commercially.

Speculation #1

No one can say exactly what kind of navigation or communication systems were involved in the Barksdale case, although ground personnel were impressed at how the drones functioned and how they “scattered” making tracking them outside the base impossible.

There is considerable speculation on the purpose of the intrusions.

One early theory is that the drones were run by the War Department or another US agency (such as NSA or CIA) and were evaluating how the air base would respond and what actions they would take.

If that was their purpose, they found that the answer was “not much” other than to learn that the jammers did not work. Nonetheless there are good reasons to dismiss this speculative theory, because the War Department and other national security agencies and organizations were aware of the few capabilities at US domestic bases, since none of them have air defense systems. Moreover, the incursions happened when the B-52s were needed in wartime.

Barksdale AFB is home to the US 2nd Bomber Wing that is made up of three squadrons of B-52H aircraft, and also the home to the 307th B-52 Bomber Group, made up of two squadrons, an Air Force Reserve unit.

An image of the new RR F130 engines. Photo: Rolls-Royce

Barksdale supports the venerable B-52 strategic bomber, an aircraft that has been around for many decades but has often been modernized. Today the Air Force is ordering newer, more efficient engines for the behemoth bomber (it features 8 engines made by Rolls Royce – F130 engines) and will be changing out the radar to the latest AESA standard and creating a fully digital cockpit. The newly modified B-52s will become the B-52J, although it will take at least a decade before the “J” modifications are completed.

A JASSM Missile loading onto a B-52 at Barksdale.

The B-52 is a dual-capable bomber – it can carry both conventional and nuclear weapons. Conventional weapons include AGM-86B cruise missiles, AGM-158 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles (JASSM), and Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM), along with Harpoon anti-ship missiles. Included in this list is the 5,000-pound class GBU-72/B Advanced 5K Penetrator. It is not certified to carry the biggest bunker buster, the 30,000-pound GBU-57, which is carried on the B-2 stealth bomber.

An ALCM being loaded on a B-52 at Barksdale.

The B-52 also carries nuclear weapons. Approximately 46 of the active fleet carry the nuclearAGM-86B ALCM (carrying 20+ air launched cruise missiles), and in the past nuclear gravity bombs such as the B61, B83, and high-yield B53.

The fleet is transitioning to carry the upcoming AGM-181 Long-Range Standoff (LRSO) cruise missile, which will replace the aging ALCM.

The AGM-86B is called a “dial a yield” weapon, in which operators can select a nuclear explosion between 5 and 150 kilotons (kt). For reference, the uranium Hiroshima atomic bomb had a yield of about 15 kt. The AGM-86B ALCM dates to 1982, although it has been updated. When released at altitude, it drops down to tree-top level and uses terrain mapping (TERCOM) and GPS. AGM-86B has a range of about 1,500 miles.

A newer, extended-range LRSO is in the works, but the current version will be retained until at least 2033. A non-nuclear version of the AGM-86B, designed AGM-86C/D has been used on missions since 1991 (it is designated as a Conventional ALCM or CALCM).

It is noteworthy that there are 76 active duty B-52 aircraft, 58 in the 2nd and 5th bomber squadrons, and 18 operated by the Reserves. While not all the B52s are approved to carry nuclear payloads, 46 of them are certified and are part of the US strategic Nuclear Triad.

Speculation #2

The US Nuclear Triad consists of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and strategic aircraft (bombers).

A second theory regards storage, starting from the fact that Barksdale being part of the Triad can store or at least handle nuclear weapons. Barksdale is also completing, if it has not already finished, new storage areas for nuclear weapons. The idea is Barksdale will replace the current nuclear weapons storage (for B-52s) at Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota. In practice it removes the delay time to move nuclear weapons down to Louisiana from Minot, a little less than three hours’ flight time, but the time calculation must include the availability of aircraft and the time to load and unload and then reload.

Were the drones trying to determine if any nuclear ALCMs were transported down from Minot or already locally stored, or whether they were being loaded on the B-52s being dispatched to Iran? It is impossible to know, but otherwise what purpose would there be for Iran, or for its partners – especially China, which has been providing battlefield intelligence to Iran using high powered spy satellites – to perform risky drone intrusions over a US base part of America’s Nuclear Triad?

If the idea was only to see how many B-52s were launched, all that would be necessary is to stand near the end of the Barksdale runway and count takeoffs.

Clearly the nuclear activities at Barksdale are of great significance to countries like China and Russia. We have seen nothing of the Russians recently, but China is uber-active.

Speculation #3

The Barksdale drone incursions are part of an intensive Chinese effort to try and find ways to compromise the US Nuclear Triad. The use of spies and drones is part of an intensifying pattern of Chinese intelligence gathering with a long-term aim of neutralizing US nuclear capabilities.

Unlike Speculations #1 and 2, Speculation #3 is proven by spies captured and incidents recorded.

The Chinese have been photographing US naval and air bases. A number of their agents, typically the most amateurish ones, have been caught.

On April 9, 2026, a 21-year-old Chinese student, Tianrui Liang, was arrested at JFK International Airport while attempting to flee the country. He is accused of using a high-powered telephoto lens to photograph aircraft at Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska in March 2026. Offutt is the headquarters of US Strategic Command (STRATCOM), which oversees the US nuclear command and control (NC3) system.

He also attempted to photograph B-1B strategic bombers at Ellsworth AFB in South Dakota, but the bombers had been moved. He also reportedly visited Tinker AFB in Oklahoma City. Tinker supports the E-3 AWACS and KC-135 refueling tankers.

Internal Department of War (DOW) and FBI tracking indicates that there have been over 150 documented incidents of Chinese nationals attempting to access U.S. military installations and other sensitive government sites since early 2023.

In late January and early February 2023, China launched a number of “weather” balloons. One of them flew over Alaska, then Canada, and then into the United States. It made a number of loops around Malmstrom AFB focusing on the 341st Missile Wing which manages 150 Minuteman II ICBM silos. Reports say the balloon operated over the base between 24 and 48 hours; was linked by the Iridium satellite to China, which maneuvered the craft; and sent data through US internet service providers.

Sailors assigned to Explosive Ordnance Disposal Group 2 on Feb. 5, 2023, recover portions of a high-altitude Chinese surveillance balloon off the coast of Myrtle Beach, S.C. A U.S. fighter jet shot down the balloon over U.S. territorial waters on Feb. 4, 2023. Photo: Tyler Thompson / US Navy

The balloon was finally shot down along the coast of South Carolina after a public outcry forced the Biden administration to take action. There is, allegedly, a 75-page report on the exploitation of the balloon’s electronics (which would have filled three school buses), but the report has not been released.

While China knows exactly what was onboard the spy balloon, and the US probably knows almost as much, very little information has been released, leaving Americans guessing.

Over the last two years, Malmstrom AFB in Montana has reported multiple instances of unidentified drone swarms operating over its missile silos and launch control centers. Malmstrom operates, maintains, and secures the Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) system, America’s number one nuclear strike force.

A schematic of a missile in its silo. Photo: US Air Force

A national security scandal

The use of drones over strategic nuclear bases and other sensitive locations is a national security scandal. The fact that not a single drone has been captured or shot down, and that the government continues to be in denial, is extremely worrisome.

Because drone intrusions have taken place in the northeastern, north-central and southern United States suggests that there are secret foreign drone teams operating on US territory, or very close to US territory. Yet despite multiple drone observations, the launch points remain undiscovered and no operators have been apprehended.

America’s nuclear bases and command centers do not have air defenses and are sitting ducks.

The government’s response to the threat is far below any acceptable standard, suggesting the government is more interested in burying the evidence than catching the malefactors.

Stephen Bryen is a former US deputy under secretary of defense. You can read this article and many others on his newsletter Weapons and Strategy.

Trump Says ‘Clock Is Ticking’ for Iran as Talks Stall, Israel Signals Readiness for Renewed War

By
IwPost
-
0
trump-says-‘clock-is-ticking’-for-iran-as-talks-stall,-israel-signals-readiness-for-renewed-war
Trump Says ‘Clock Is Ticking’ for Iran as Talks Stall, Israel Signals Readiness for Renewed War


President Donald Trump said Thursday that “The clock is ticking for Iran” as peace talks remain stalled and fighting continues over the Strait of Hormuz. In addition, Israel’s defense minister declared readiness for renewed war against Iran pending US approval. 

President Trump wrote that he was not under pressure to reach a ceasefire, criticizing media coverage of his position. “For those people, fewer in number now than ever before, that are reading The Failing New York Times, or watching Fake News CNN, that think that I am “anxious” to end the War (if you would even call it that!) with Iran, please be advised that I am possibly the least pressured person ever to be in this position. I have all the time in the World, but Iran doesn’t—The clock is ticking!” 

He also pointed to recent US military actions, stating: “Iran’s Navy is lying at the bottom of the Sea, their Air Force is demolished, their Anti-Aircraft and Radar Weaponry is gone, their leaders are no longer with us, the Blockade is airtight and strong and, from there, it only gets worse — Time is not on their side!” 

President Trump added: “A Deal will only be made when it’s appropriate and good for the United States of America, our Allies and, in fact, the rest of the World.” 

On Tuesday, President Trump extended the ceasefire, with no indication of its duration or when negotiations may resume. 

Separately, Defense Minister Israel Katz held a security assessment Thursday evening at the Kirya military headquarters and said Israel is prepared for further conflict. 

“Israel is prepared to renew the war against Iran. The IDF is ready in both defense and offense, and the targets have been marked.” 

“We are waiting for a green light from the United States,” he continued, to “complete the elimination of the Khamenei dynasty” and “return Iran to the Dark Ages” by exploding energy facilities and economic infrastructure. 

 

The mandate to speak: Before the world goes dark

By
IwPost
-
0
the-mandate-to-speak:-before-the-world-goes-dark
The mandate to speak: Before the world goes dark

In 2017, twenty-seven psychiatrists and mental health professionals broke their profession’s long standing ‘Goldwater rule’  against diagnosing public figures from afar.  They published a book titled  The Dangerous Case of Donald Trump, and in it, they wrote a sentence that should have stopped the world cold: 

‘Trump is now the most powerful head of state in the world, and one of the most impulsive , arrogant, ignorant, disorganised, chaotic, nihilistic , self-contradictory , self-important and self-serving.  He has his finger on the triggers of a thousand or more of the most powerful thermonuclear weapons in the world.  That means he could kill more people in a few seconds than any dictator in past history has been able to kill during  his entire years in power’

That was nine years ago. Today, that warning is no longer prophecy, it is the reality.

The man who sits in the White House governs not by deliberation or diplomacy,  but by impulsive digital barks fired into the atmosphere every few minutes, often forgetting what he himself said an hour earlier.

He has embraced AI-generated deepfakes as a routine tool of political communication , blurring reality into propaganda.  In his most recent foray AI kitsch, (April 12) while attacking Pope Leo XIV as ‘weak on crime’, Trump  cast himself as a digital messiah.  Yet, beneath this surreal veneer of virtual omnipotence, the world cannot afford to forget that the same man holds, in his trembling hand, the nuclear codes of the most powerful military the world has ever known.

READ: Trump orders Navy to shoot any boat laying mines in Strait of Hormuz amid ceasefire

I’m not here to repeat the obvious labels of ‘mad’ or ‘deranged’ that already saturate the airwaves. Stating he is ‘crazy’ is just describing the scenery. I am here to connect the dots and raise a warning: we aren’t headed for chaos—we are headed for catastrophe, and we are standing on the edge of something much worse than a personality flaw.

The Unprecedented Triple Threat

History offers echoes of erratic leaders: Caligula’s cruelty, Nixon’s calculated ‘madman’ bluff, the Cold War’s existential brinkmanship. But none of those parallels capture the lethal novelty of today. What makes this moment peculiar is the fusion of three elements:

  1. A president whose cognitive decline and emotional instability are now widely acknowledged, even by former allies, and increasingly by members of his own party. 
  2. The speed of AI and social media , which allows a single delusional or enraged thought to circle the globe in seconds, triggering markets, and rattling  allies and adversaries alike.
  3. The absence of any filter- no diplomatic cable to revise, no national security advisor to intercept, no adult in the room to say ‘ Sir, you cannot tweet that’.

The result is a structurally incoherent foreign policy that mystifies  the entire global stage.  And beyond the bombs and threats of war, there is another casualty: the collective peace of mind of billions who go to bed wondering if tomorrow will bring a trade war, a military confrontation or an inexplicable reversal, all because one man woke up in an uncouth mood and recklessly started scrolling his screen. 

The Evolving Regional Inferno 

We have already seen what this president’s mental state, combined with his unconditional acquiescence to Benjamin Netanyahu and Israel’s lobby in Washington, has produced. 

The genocide in Gaza happened  because of US weapons and diplomatic cover flowing without pause. Now the same president is openly threatening to obliterate Iran within hours,  and all this not through careful diplomatic channels, but through profane,  erratic and often contradictory social media outbursts.

His threats about ending civilisation , his obscene demands to open strategic waterways,  his messianic AI generated postings – all of this is public, and all of it is terrifying. This incoherent impulse-driven governance is nothing less than a direct enabler of mass death.  And the world watches in horror.  

In the last two weeks , the Iran war has frozen into a stalemate that looks increasingly like a strategic defeat for the United States.  A fragile ceasefire , repeatedly extended, now has ‘no time frame’, a clear admission that Trump’s promised victory has not arrived as Iran still blocks the strait of Hormuz. Trump is trapped: renewing the war risks catastrophic casualties and economic pain across the board. So he does nothing, hoping the problem will solve itself. Meanwhile Israel quietly  pushes for chaos, not only in Iran but the whole region,  knowing  that a weaker and distracted America is easier to drag into a wider war.  

READ: US extends sanctions waivers on Iran, Russia

The Iranian Psychiatrists’ Letter

It is worth noting that the alarm is no longer confined to American professionals. On 7 April 2026, the Iranian Psychological Society published an open letter to their US counterparts calling for a formal , scientific examination of Trump’s behavioural patterns,  which they say pose a direct threat to global peace.  They pointed to his ‘ hostile rhetoric, extreme attention- seeking trait, lack of empathy and narcissism, impulsivity and delusional thoughts, disconnecting from reality , disregarding others’ rights , threats and insults toward other nations, contradictions, and antisocial and inhuman behaviour’.   They further stated that Trump ‘ is not bound by any rules, and like a psychopath, has led the world into a pit of fire and destruction’.  They concluded with a powerful statement:  ‘Regardless of geographical borders, we share a common responsibility to uphold the mental health of humanity and contribute to global peace and justice’. 

This should  not be read as a political statement from an adversarial state.  It is a professional plea from mental health experts who recognise that the psychological stability of world leaders directly affects the fate of us all.

The Moral Question the World Cannot Escape. 

If this man’s madness only affected his own country, we might look away and say ‘ This is America’s problem’. But his decisions , or whims, can level a city, start a war, and shatter global alliances. Every nation on earth now has a stake in the mental state of the American president. 

 This brings us to the concept the United Nations adopted in 2005 : The Responsibility to Protect, ( or R2P).  R2P holds that sovereignty is not absolute.  When a state manifestly fails to protect its own people from mass atrocities – or as here, actively enables them elsewhere – the international community has a moral , and in extreme cases, a legal duty to intervene. 

Though the legal reality is clear, and there is no mechanism for the world to step in and say: ‘This president is too dangerous to remain at the helm’ , yet,  the absence of a legal mechanism does not erase the moral imperative. The world has a duty to speak, loudly, clearly and without hesitation.

READ: 27 journalists killed in Israeli attacks in Lebanon, press union says

What Speaking Looks Like

Speaking means  every foreign leader, every international organization , every major newspaper, every professional body of psychiatrists and psychologists,  every religious authority and every ordinary citizen on every continent saying the same thing: 

‘The president of the United States is not mentally fit to command a nuclear arsenal. His behaviour is erratic, his memory is failing, and his impulsive use of social media and AI -generated disinformation is a direct threat to global peace. We demand that those with constitutional power to remove him- the Vice president and the cabinet invoke the 25th Amendment . And if they will not, we demand the American people vote him out of office before it is too late’ .

This is not interference in American  democracy. This is self-defence by the rest of the world, because we live in the unprecedented dangers of governing by tweet, AI and cognitive decline. No nation has a right to hold the world hostage to its internal failures.

The 2017 Book was a Warning.  2026 Is the Reckoning

Those twenty-seven psychiatrists were ridiculed and marginalised for breaking their professional norms. They were told they were being hysterical, that they should stay in their lane, and that a president’s mental health was not their concern.  But they were right.

 As the world navigates this volatile climate, the primary threat is no longer just the prospect of reckless action, but the equally grave danger of reckless inaction. This is the true peril of the Trump era. Rather than looking away, the international community must undertake the urgent task of refusing  to normalize the situation.

It is time to speak the truth—that a mentally deteriorating man now holds ultimate power, enabling current atrocities while openly courting catastrophic new wars.

Because if we look away, and the unthinkable happens, we will have no one to blame but ourselves. 

OPINION: Fascism for the digital age

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.

123...337Page 1 of 337
0FansLike
0FollowersFollow
0FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe
- Advertisement -
Google search engine

Recent Posts

POPULAR POSTS

POPULAR CATEGORY