Update: 

President Biden has released a statement indicating that he will “block” Nippon Steel’s $14.9 billion takeover of US Steel.

Here’s the full statement: 

As I have said many times, steel production—and the steel workers who produce it—are the backbone of our nation.  A strong domestically owned and operated steel industry represents an essential national security priority and is critical for resilient supply chains.  That is because steel powers our country: our infrastructure, our auto industry, and our defense industrial base. Without domestic steel production and domestic steel workers, our nation is less strong and less secure.

For too long, U.S. steel companies have faced unfair trade practices as foreign companies have dumped steel on global markets at artificially low prices, leading to job losses and factory closures in America. I have taken decisive action to level the playing field for American steelworkers and steel producers by tripling tariffs on steel imports from China.  With record investments in manufacturing, more than 100 new steel and iron mills have opened since I took office, and U.S. companies are producing the cleanest steel in the world. Today, the domestic steel industry is the strongest it has been in years.

We need major U.S. companies representing the major share of US steelmaking capacity to keep leading the fight on behalf of America’s national interests. As a committee of national security and trade experts across the executive branch determined, this acquisition would place one of America’s largest steel producers under foreign control and create risk for our national security and our critical supply chains.

So, that is why I am taking action to block this deal. It is my solemn responsibility as President to ensure that, now and long into the future, America has a strong domestically owned and operated steel industry that can continue to power our national sources of strength at home and abroad; and it is a fulfillment of that responsibility to block foreign ownership of this vital American company. U.S. Steel will remain a proud American company – one that’s American-owned, American-operated, by American union steelworkers – the best in the world.  

Today’s action reflects my unflinching commitment to utilize all authorities available to me as President to defend U.S. national security, including by ensuring that American companies continue to play a central role in sectors that are critical for our national security. As I have made clear since day one: I will never hesitate to act to protect the security of this nation and its infrastructure as well as the resilience of its supply chains.

*   *   * 

Biden administration officials seem to have leaked the president’s impending decision, expected on Friday, to block Japan’s Nippon Steel from purchasing US Steel. The Washington Post was the first to report on the president’s planned move. 

The report states that two administration officials revealed President Biden chose to block the deal between Nippon Steel and US Steel, despite warnings from some senior advisers about potential negative consequences surrounding future foreign investment in US companies. 

On Dec. 23, the Committee for Foreign Investment in the United States, also known as CFIUS, notified the Biden administration it had not reached a consensus about whether Nippon’s potential purchase of US Steel would pose a national security risk, essentially leaving the decision up to the elderly president who doesn’t know what day it is.

The panel, chaired by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, said Nippon purchasing US Steel could reduce domestic steel production and pose “risks to the national security of the United States,” adding, “Potential reduced output by US Steel could lead to supply shortages and delays that could affect industries critical to national security.” 

CFIUS noted that Nippon’s global operations might not support ‘America First’ amid US Treasury trade actions against low-cost steel imports. They said this could leave “the US economy more exposed to dumping and unfair subsidization of steel.” 

On Monday, Nippon executives made a last-ditch attempt to sway Biden. The execs sent a proposal to the White House that would allow the government to veto any reduction in US Steel’s “production capacity.” 

For many months, Biden has publicly opposed Nippon’s $14.9 billion takeover of US Steel, ultimately siding with David McCall, the president of the United Steelworkers union. McCall has called Nippon’s bid as “bad for workers.” 

Meanwhile, President-elect Donald Trump has opposed the transaction and said he would support US Steel with tariffs and tax incentives. 

In premarket trading, shares of US Steel are down 6% in New York. 

If Nippon Steel’s purchase of US Steel is rejected due to national security concerns, foreign investors could reconsider allocating resources toward mergers, acquisitions, or investments in the United States.

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,

Other than exports, no country wants to be like China.

China Overindebtedness, Overbuilding and Overcapacity

The Wall Street Journal reports China’s Economy Is Burdened by Years of Excess. Here’s How Bad It Really Is.

Destiny deferred

China’s rapid growth meant that for years forecasters expected China to overtake the U.S. as the world’s largest economy. As recently as 2019, some forecasters were expecting China’s GDP to eclipse the U.S.’s around 2030. Today, it is the U.S. powering the global economy and China that is battling stumbling growth. Few now expect China to catch up with the U.S. before midcentury, if it manages to at all.

Ticking time bomb

China is also facing demographic headwinds that will make it harder to restore its economic vigor. China’s working-age population is shrinking, reversing the demographic dividend that powered its economic ascent.

China’s Working-Age Population

China’s economy has for decades been powered by heady levels of investment. At first, that yielded modern infrastructure and propelled the expansion of China’s manufacturing engine and its megacities. But sticking with that strategy year after year has meant China today is beset by colossal debts, unneeded apartments and industrial overcapacity.

Debt as Percentage of GDP China

Debt: Borrowing by government, households and corporations in China is approaching 300% of its annual GDP. “Hidden” borrowing by local governments—debt held off the books on their behalf by opaque investment companies known as local government financing vehicles—is a major problem. On some measures, the scale of those debts and the burden of servicing them in China is more severe than in the U.S. before the financial crisis or in Europe in the depths of its own debt crisis a decade ago.

Real estate: China’s real-estate boom was unprecedented—and so is the ongoing bust. New construction and sales have cratered since the government took steps to rein in the bubble in 2020. It has struggled to stabilize the market, despite measures to ease purchase restrictions and offer cheap credit to would-be buyers.

One sign of the boom’s excesses: There are as many as around 80 million vacant units in China, according to the latest estimates at the end of November, equivalent to half the total housing stock of the entire U.S.

Share of Global Manufacturing

Industrial Overcapacity

In response to the slowing economy, and to transform China into a technological colossus, leader Xi Jinping has been funneling investment into China’s already huge factory sector. The result has been a surge in industrial capacity and two years of falling prices for Chinese producers, which are increasingly looking overseas to find buyers for goods they can’t sell at home. That is sparking trade spats with the U.S.-led West and emerging markets such as Brazil and India.

Debt Deflation Trap

China is in a debt deflation trap of its own making.

It makes sense to add capacity if the debt is productive and can be serviced.

China should write down debts but much of that is in State Owned Enterprises (SOE), and the political class will not take a hit or admit mistakes (just like everywhere else).

Mirage of Growth

Image WSJ

For decades, China depended on property bubbles for growth. With building now crumbling, all of that growth was a mirage.

I have been writing about China’s “ghost cities” where no one lives for a decade. They are a result of malinvestment.

Building those cities added to GDP, but it was really 100 percent waste.

World’s Biggest Property Bubble

On March 23, 2011 I noted World’s Biggest Property Bubble: China’s Ghost Cities Revisited; 64 Million Vacant Properties

The true state of affairs is China’s banks are insolvent. China is building units for which there is little demand and few can afford. China will have to print money to pay for all of this malinvestment. The idea the Yuan is undervalued fails to take into consideration any of this.

Bonds of China’s Largest Property Developer Crash

On August 10, 2023, I noted Bonds of China’s Largest Property Developer Crash to 25 Percent of Notional Value

Hello there Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) GDP advocates and China horn tooters in general, let’s discuss real estate.

It was a long time waiting for the inevitable.

Flashback Hoot of the Day: When Will China Overtake the US?

On August 6, 2023 In Flashback Hoot of the Day: When Will China Overtake the US? I discussed a bet that Michael Pettis made with the Economist on when China would pass the US in GDP.

The Economist made a bet with Pettis in 2012 that by 2018 China would pass the US. The Economist lost the bet by a mile. China is still not close to the US in GDP. A couple of my readers say not so, based on PPP.

Fundamentally, PPP is horrendously flawed. 

Purchasing Power Parity Silliness and the Myth China Passed the US in GDP

On August 8, 2023, I discussed Purchasing Power Parity Silliness and the Myth China Passed the US in GDP

Some of my readers claim China passed the US in GDP based on Purchasing Power Parity (PPP). The rationale is hugely flawed.

Michael Pettis: “Adjusting GDP for differences in purchasing power makes a great deal of sense in certain cases, but the way it is done is so filled with problems that it is extremely difficult to find any economist who takes these measures very seriously.“

What I Said in 2011

All this talk about how undervalued the Yuan is, how China will rule the world, and why the Yuan will be the next global reserve currency is pure silliness.

China’s growth is nothing more than a credit bubble on steroids. Cities are vacant, yet China keeps building, and building and building.

Savings Glut Thesis

There is still rampant belief that China is this big nation of savers, and US trade deficits are the other side of the coin.

Ben Bernanke, Larry Summers, and even Michael Pettis believe in the savings glut thesis. It is my one ongoing disagreement with Pettis.

But Pettis is slightly different in that he calls it a savings imbalance. I still disagree, but “imbalance” is closer.

I highly respect Michael Pettis, he taught me nearly everything I know about trade.

Here’s my question: China now has a debt to GDP ratio of nearly 300 percent. So where the heck is the saving either in China or here?

We can look at M2 or money supply and the massive wealth of people like Elon Musk, but printing money (yaun or dollars) is not savings.

What is Saving?

Saving is production minus consumption. China’s property bubble is a great example.

People alleged “saved” their money by investing in property bubbles. But entire cities are now worthless. China needs to spend money to tear them down.

That savings has been rendered worthless, but the debt remains, and the cities are now of negative value (they need to be torn down).

That China made a few billionaires in the process is not a savings glut, not a savings imbalance, and not net savings.

Ghost cities do not constitute savings. They do constitute savings destroyed. And the process is still ongoing.

Hoot of the Day

People are still predicting the demise of the US and destruction of the US dollar. Nonsensical US hyperinflation talk has been ongoing the whole time.

China is a manufacturing miracle but all China did was replace a property bubble with an even bigger manufacturing bubble to keep people employed.

We are now at a point where China is subsidizing exports to an extent the world has never before seen, just to keep it’s economy growing (on paper).

This is a better use for “saving” than property bubbles that have been more than 100 percent wiped out (again think of cleanup costs), but the return on these manufacturing investments is less than zero.

Who’s Paying the Price?

Chinese consumers paid the price of now less than worthless property bubbles.

Chinese consumers continue to pay the price of subsidizing exports.

China desperately needs a course correction but there are no signs China is about to do so.

So, What Country Wants to Be Like Germany Now?

On December 17, 2024, I asked So, What Country Wants to Be Like Germany Now?

The collapse of Germany shocks many. But I have been discussing why this was inevitable for over a decade.

The current chancellor has called for bailouts and subsidies to save jobs and prop up struggling carmakers, while Merz has floated a menu of supply-side measures such as lower taxes, less bureaucracy and steps that would make it cheaper for businesses to reach Berlin’s climate goals.

Shocked? I’m Not

This is all so predictable. The only thing debatably shocking is how it too so long.

Flashback April 11, 2013: Eurozone Math; One Size Fits Germany; Door Number Two

As a direct result of the unstable eurozone treaty, sovereign interest rate imbalances, Target II imbalance, and trade imbalances are out of control. Germany and the other European creditor countries are owed money that cannot be paid back.

Few have made the connection, but Germany and China are both following in the footsteps of Japan’s debt deflation trap.

Price deflation is a benefit. Debt deflation and writeoffs of debt are a curse.

We are in this mess because Central banks and governments fail to differentiate. Don’t be like central banks and confuse the two.

Authored by Stuart Englert via The Mises Institute,

Gold enthusiasts can celebrate a golden anniversary on New Year’s Eve and simultaneously mark a market manipulation milestone. Fifty years ago, President Gerald R. Ford legalized private gold ownership, allowing Americans once again to stack the regal metal as a wealth-preserving asset and safe haven against monetary inflation and dollar depreciation. Gold futures trading and market meddling also began in the United States a half-century ago.

On December 31, 1974, Ford issued an executive order revoking President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s 1933 decree that criminalized gold hoarding and prohibited American citizens from owning more than $100 worth (about 5 troy ounces at the time) of the demonetized metal. President Ford signed the order without celebratory remarks or public fanfare. He simply released an official statement citing the legal authority he had to take the action.

While no confetti flew or champagne corks popped in the White House to mark the momentous occasion, repeal of FDR’s 41-year-old edict sparked the largely dormant gold industry and restored trading of the yellow metal as a commodity. Gold could be owned, bought, and sold domestically as an investment without risking a $10,000 fine and 10 years in prison. However, gold coins weren’t US legal tender at the time and bullion wasn’t used in official foreign exchange after President Richard Nixon delinked the dollar from gold in 1971.

As the nation’s only unelected president and vice president, Ford didn’t have a political or public mandate to legalize gold, nor was he a fervent goldbug or hard-money proponent. “Mr. Nice Guy,” as the nation’s 38th president came to be known, merely went along with a bipartisan measure passed by Congress four months earlier. The no-name bill—Public Law 93-373—permitted “United States citizens to purchase, hold, sell, or otherwise deal with gold in the United States or abroad.”

Introduced by Sen. James Fulbright (D-Ark.), the legislation was approved by a coalition of Democrats and Republicans following a grassroots movement led by James U. Blanchard III, founder of the National Committee to Legalize Gold. The measure’s passage was attributed to support from free-market gold advocates and its link to a foreign aid package promoted by Nixon. Ford signed the bill into law on August 14, 1974, six days after the partial-term Republican took the presidential oath following Nixon’s resignation over the Watergate scandal.

Gold legalization wasn’t without its concerns and opposition. The decision raised alarms within the US Treasury Department and Federal Reserve, particularly after the gold price climbed to a record high, topping $195 an ounce on December 30, 1974. At the time, the statutory gold price was $44.22 an ounce and the nation’s gold stocks were undergoing a highly-publicized audit that began with a congressional, media-covered, and question-raising inspection of a single vault at Fort Knox (KY) Bullion Depository on September 23, 1974.

US Treasury & IMF Sold Gold to Cap Price

Treasury officials worried strong public demand for gold might drive prices higher, increase the nation’s trade deficit if the commodity were imported and further weaken the unbacked, devalued, and expanding supply of Federal Reserve notes. Those were valid concerns amid the inflationary spiral triggered by Nixon’s suspension of the international gold standard, the lingering effects of the 1973 Arab oil embargo, and persistent federal budget deficits and rising national debt.

To contain the price, the Treasury announced plans to sell 2 million ounces of gold bars. The first auction was held January 6, 1975, less than a week after Ford legalized private gold ownership. With a subsequent sale on June 30, a total of 1.25 million ounces of gold were sold at prices ranging from $153 to $185 an ounce. Sales of 25 million ounces of International Monetary Fund (IMF) gold commenced in 1976 and Treasury sales of 15.8 million ounces resumed in 1978 to curtail prices and defend the debased dollar.

Federal Reserve Chairman Arthur Burns called Congress’s decision to remove the ban on private gold ownership “ill-timed” and urged a delay. He feared investors might withdraw funds from savings accounts and sell stocks to buy gold, causing extreme price movements, widespread speculation, and financial market disruptions. He also expressed concern that US Treasury gold sales aimed at controlling the price might require future interventions. “Once some Treasury sales have been made, it might be difficult to resist pressures for further intervention in the future—either to support the price or to keep it from rising,” Burns wrote in a November 13, 1974 letter to Treasury Secretary William Simon.

Within a few months, Burns negotiated a deal to restrict official gold purchases and restrain gold prices. A declassified letter—dated June 3, 1975—confirms Burns’ clandestine intervention. Burns wrote to Ford, who ostensibly was agreeable to the confidential agreement as no evidence has emerged to suggest otherwise,

I have a secret understanding in writing with the Bundesbank [German central bank] — concurred in by Mr. [Helmut] Schmidt [West Germany’s chancellor at the time] — that Germany will not buy gold, either from the market or from another government, at a price above the official price of $42.22 per ounce….

All in all, I am convinced that by far the best position for us to take at this time is to resist arrangements that provide wide latitude for central banks and governments to purchase gold at a market-related price.

Futures Market Intended to Increase Volatility, Reduce Demand

Various forms of market manipulation and price suppression have been ongoing since gold futures trading opened on the COMEX in New York and four other US-based commodity exchanges on December 31, 1974, which coincided with Ford’s executive order rescinding the ban on private gold ownership.

A telegram sent to the US Secretary of State from the US Embassy in London, England, on December 10, 1974, revealed the importance of gold sales and futures trading. In the telegram—presumably written by the embassy’s Deputy Chief Ronald Speirs—London gold dealers are described as praising the announced sale of 2 million ounces of US gold and predicting deregulation of—and volatility in—the futures market would reduce demand for physical metal.

“Each of the dealers expressed the belief that the futures market would be of significant proportion and physical trading would be miniscule by comparison,” reads the cable released by WikiLeaks.

“Also expressed was the expectation that large volume futures dealing would create a highly volatile market. In turn, the volatile price movements would diminish the initial demand for physical holdings and most likely negate long-term hoarding by U.S. citizens.”

Despite fears, opposition, and market meddling, the ability of Americans to own gold revived the retail and wholesale gold business in the United States beyond the dental, jewelry, and collectible coin trade, which were exempt from Roosevelt’s 1933 prohibitive edict. In anticipation of legal gold ownership, pre-1933s gold coins returned from overseas. Bullion dealers built or leased vaults to store gold. Private mints launched or expanded operations to produce gold rounds and foreign coins. Coin shops opened from coast to coast to meet pent-up public demand for gold as a hedge against currency debasement and price inflation. The sleepy gold industry was awakened from its four-decade slumber with the stroke of President Ford’s New Year’s Eve pen.

The consequential event warrants a toast to 50 years of legalized gold.

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

Britain’s Labour Party, led by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, is facing mounting criticism from voters, with fresh polling by YouGov for The Times newspaper painting a grim picture of the government’s performance and public sentiment.

Descriptions of Labour as “incompetent,” “dishonest,” and “unsuccessful” have become prevalent among a majority of respondents, with only 12 percent of voters considering the government a success so far.

Labour’s once-strong lead on economic trust has dissipated, with just 21 percent of voters now favoring the party on economic management compared to 24 percent for the Conservatives. This marks a significant reversal from last year when Labour held a nine-point advantage. Economic dissatisfaction is widespread, with 71 percent of respondents expressing a negative view of the government’s handling of the economy, up from 4 percent earlier.

📊 POLL: How the govt is handling the economy in the UK (30 Dec)

✅ Well 16% (-2)
❌ Badly 71% (+2)

(+/- versus 23 Dec)

Buyers’ remorse for the British electorate. We are all picking up the tab for this awful Labour govt. 🔖 pic.twitter.com/bXmu42bNFY

— Anthony Boutall (@anthonyboutall) January 2, 2025

Labour’s own voter base is increasingly disillusioned. Among those who backed the party in last year’s general election, 46 percent now feel disappointed, and only 34 percent believe the party has performed well. Starmer’s personal approval ratings are similarly faltering, with 42 percent of Labour voters expressing dissatisfaction with his leadership.

The emergence of Reform UK, led by Nigel Farage, poses a significant challenge to the traditional two-party system. Farage’s party is gaining traction on key issues like immigration, where it leads with 30 percent of voter trust compared to Labour’s 17 percent. Recent Ipsos polling shows Farage enjoying the highest favorability rating among political leaders, surpassing Starmer and Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch.

According to a new Ipsos poll more British people have a favourable view of @Nigel_Farage than any other political leader.

Real change is coming to Britain. pic.twitter.com/HhAIfJF8fF

— Zia Yusuf (@ZiaYusufUK) November 23, 2024

Labour’s struggles extend to local elections, where it has lost 33 of 150 contested council seats since the July general election. Controversial policies, including tax hikes for businesses, inheritance tax changes affecting farmers, and reduced winter fuel payments for pensioners, have fueled dissatisfaction.

A More in Common poll published last week predicted a deeply fragmented parliament, with Labour projected to hold a slim lead of six seats over the Conservatives.

Reform UK’s growing popularity is reflected in seat projections, with estimates suggesting the party could secure 72 parliamentary seats — a dramatic increase from its current standing. If a general election were held today, Nigel Farage could theoretically become Britain’s kingmaker.

Political analyst and Tory peer Lord Hayward described the situation as unprecedented, stating, “There’s no precedent in this country for any government who has lost support so quickly and so heavily.”

The polling results even drew international attention, with Elon Musk suggesting on X that a new election should be called and endorsing Reform UK as Britain’s best hope. Speculation is rife that Musk may financially back Farage’s party in the upcoming elections.

A new election should be called in Britain https://t.co/qavxToRa7j

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 2, 2025

In his New Year’s Day address, Starmer acknowledged the pessimism felt by a majority of the British people but said he wanted 2025 to be the year Brits “rediscovered the great nation that we are.”

“Until you can look forward and believe in the promise and the prosperity of Britain again, then this government will fight for you,” he added.

Read more here…

Authored by Charles Kennedy via OilPrice.com,

Norway set yet another record in electric vehicle (EV) market share in 2024, as nine out of ten new passenger car sales were battery EVs, data from the Norwegian Road Federation OFV showed on Thursday.

A total of 88.9% of all new passenger car sales were battery EVs, up from 82.4% in 2023, according to the data.

Tesla Model Y was the best-selling car in Norway last year, followed by Tesla Model 3, Volvo EX30, Volkswagen ID.4, and Toyota bZ4X.

The EV sales in Norway are expected to reach new heights in 2025, said Christina Bu, head of the Norwegian EV association.

The government incentives for EV purchases, combined with rising taxes for new cars with internal combustion engines (ICEs), are driving the continuous increase in the share of battery EV sales in Norway, the association’s head noted.

Norway is a global leader in EV market share. The country, which is Western Europe’s biggest oil and gas producer, has strong incentives for EV purchases for its 5 million residents. The second closest developed country in terms of EV market share, Denmark, has just crossed the 50% share mark.

The average EU share of EV sales out of all new car sales is just over 13%, and the biggest European market, Germany, has around the same share, too.

This year, Norway has been more or less an outlier in EV sales in Europe, as electric car sales in the continent have dropped.

The share of battery-electric car sales in the EU – which does not include Norway – fell to 15% in November from 16.3% a year earlier, while volumes dropped by 9.5%, the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association, ACEA, said last month.

Earlier this year, Germany’s car manufacturing giant BMW warned that an EU ban on the sale of gasoline and diesel cars from 2035 is “no longer realistic” amid slow EV sales as the European auto industry will see a “massive shrinking” with such a ban.

Authored by Thomas Brooke via Remix News,

Prominent figures in Germany’s center-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) — expected to become the country’s largest party after next month’s elections — have confirmed a policy proposal to deport asylum seekers once they have been convicted of two crimes. However, the rival Alternative for Germany (AfD) has already slammed the proposal as a weak proposal that will do little to stem the crime crisis involving foreigners.

The move is designed to signal a tougher stance on migration policy, with CDU General Secretary Carsten Linnemann telling WELT TV the country needed to act decisively against criminal offenders with residence permits, advocating changes to Germany’s Residence Act to ensure that committing a crime results in automatic expulsion after a second offense.

“We need to end the cycle of repeat offenders,” Linnemann declared, referencing recent attacks, including the Christmas market massacre last month in Magdeburg, which reignited calls for stricter measures.

Crimes such as theft, assault, drug offenses, and fare evasion on public transport would all count as intentional acts warranting deportation, he added.

Linnemann clarified that these measures would apply to individuals with valid residence permits, not those already obligated to leave the country.

The CDU’s proposed migration overhaul extends beyond criminal deportation. Union Chancellor candidate Friedrich Merz echoed Linnemann’s stance, advocating deportation to unstable countries like Syria and Afghanistan. While acknowledging Syria’s instability, Merz argued that exceptions should not shield criminals, including members of the Assad regime or its militias, from being turned back at Germany’s borders.

“We cannot allow Germany to become a safe haven for those who committed atrocities elsewhere,” Merz said, emphasizing the importance of screening migrants at the border. He also criticized the current strain on Germany’s infrastructure, citing overwhelmed municipalities and calling for a separation between labor migration and asylum migration.

The right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD), however, criticized the CDU’s proposals as political posturing. AfD Chancellor candidate Alice Weidel accused Merz of failing to act despite a potential majority in the Bundestag, highlighting the Union’s refusal to collaborate with the AfD despite its gaining popularity and growing electoral success at the state level and expected gains in February’s federal election.

🇩🇪🔥AfD co-leader Alice Weidel SLAMS Angela Merkel and the CDU party, says she destroyed Germany in powerful 13-minute speech.

“And then came a CDU chancellor (Angela Merkel). Nine years ago, this chancellor wiped away this existing law with the stroke of a pen and established a… pic.twitter.com/EQTXAphgyk

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) September 16, 2024

The party also wrote in a statement that the “‘deportation hammer’ is a CDU smokescreen: With us, criminals won’t even be able to enter the country.”

The CDU’s push for reform comes amid rising public frustration over migration and growing support for stricter policies, with the AfD gaining traction as an alternative voice. Because with consistently protected borders, we will ensure that the mass import of criminals is already prevented in advance. The CDU would have had the chance to implement such measures a long time ago if it had agreed to corresponding initiatives of the AfD — but it’s just about campaign spectacle, to then coalition with the Greens after the election and leave everything to the old Merkel politics.”

The party also raises the question of why the CDU is only waiting to act after the second offense.

“One wonders on what grounds Mr. Linnemann wants to have the right of residence abolished only during the second offense. Why not after the first one? If you don’t adhere to our culture and values and stand out here with crime, we can’t use them – and they shouldn’t even come to us. From the CDU, which has been the Prime Minister in Saxony-Anhalt for more than 20 years, and in the last year, only 449 people deported out of more than 5,000 people who had to leave, we have nothing to expect for our safety.”

BREAKING: “Only the AfD can save Germany.”

Elon Musk announces his support for Germany’s AFD party in upcoming elections.

However, it remains unclear what kind of support this could entail, whether free advertising on X or direct funding. pic.twitter.com/jWEpUsaDSI

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) December 20, 2024

The anti-mass-migration party has gained notable support from influential voices such as U.S. billionaire Elon Musk in recent times, who recently claimed that the AfD is Germany’s “only chance” to turn the tide on the demographic and cultural change enveloping the country.

Read more here…

Authored by Patrick Drennan via RealClearDefense,

Drone boats, drone planes, trolly drones, drone traffic lights and more…

The 2024 word of the year was controversially proposed as either Brat (Collins dictionary), Polarization (Miriam Webster dictionary), or Brain-Rot (Oxford University Press) – however no word has more impact on the modern psych than the word Drone.

The weird and extravagant reactions to drones spotted in the night sky of New Jersey recently reflects that fascination. One member of Congress speculated that they came from outer space.

From drones that can soar through the stratosphere, to rotor drones that hover a few feet above the ground, and submersible drones that glide 50 feet underwater, drones have transformed our lives and modern warfare.

Their impact mainly comes from daily news and internet video images of war footage – particularly the fiery, innovative, and futuristic use of drones in Ukraine.

Cost effective FPV (First Person View), and kamikaze drones excel in reconnaissance, artillery spotting, and direct strikes, proving highly effective at targeting enemy positions…but they have been upgraded for much more than that –

Sea Drones

Ukraine use their Magura V5 and Sea Baby drones to sink Russian barges, attack oil rigs and devastatingly, sink billion-dollar Russian warships.  In February 2024, a video depicted a Ukraine sea drone sinking a Russian battleship. Later, Ukraine used a sea drone with a mounted remote-controlled machine gun to shoot at Russia helicopters. The Russians called in jet fighters to sink these drones, but it is only a matter of time when the sea drones will be mounted with MANPAD ground-to-air missiles.

Trolly Drones

The Palianytsia drone is actually a converted heavy missile powered by a turbojet engine and guided by GPS. It motors down a runway on a wheeled trolley, abandoning the trolley as it gains lift. 

Plane Drones

The Ukrainians have adapted small kitset sports planes into combat drones – flying them by remote control, loaded with explosives. They extend the range of normal drones and increase the payload. On December 15, a video was released showing a Aeroprakt A-22 Foxbat drone aircraft damaging a Chechen/Russian military facility 500 miles from the Ukrainian border.

Drone Swarms

Both sides in the Russian/Ukraine conflict use cheap plastic, polystyrene and wooden drone swarms to confuse and confound sophisticated radar systems, like the Russian TombStone system. The drones are often used in conjunction with more sophisticated drones and ballistic missiles. The Russians combine swarms of Iranian HESA Shahed 136 drones with Kalibr cruise missiles, and 9K720 Iskander ballistic missiles to attack Ukrainian infrastructure and civilians.

Both sides effectively use electronic jamming equipment to counter drones. In response both sides are increasingly reverting to algorithm trained drones that fly by visual navigation without ground signals. Ukraine also cheekily diverted some attacking drones into the territory of Russian ally Belarus.

Drones Operated by Long Fiber Cables

In response Russia developed drones that were operated by attached thin fiber-optic cables that were over 6 miles long. With no radio signal the drone was impossible to detect, and impossible to jam. However, when former U.S. Marine Troy Smothers saw this, he built similar drones for Ukraine with an incredible range of 15 miles.

Ground Combat Drones

Robot ground drones are being used for a variety of purposes including delivering equipment such as landmines, and astonishingly Ukraine has developed a tracked drone armed with a Browning 12.7 mm machine gun – the Droid TW 12.7. It has a range of eight miles and is also equipped with hi-tech cameras for reconnaissance. They are limited in number but have great potential.

Drone Traffic Lights

A telegram user posted a video of a Russian military traffic light system. It flashes a yellow light when a distant hostile drone is detected. The light turns red when there is a high-level threat, and green when there are no nearby threats at all.

Drone Detection From Space

The Chairperson of the Russian Center for Unmanned Systems,  Andrei Bezrukov claimed on December 14 that the center developed the “Kalinka” monitoring system to detect drones that connect to satellite systems, including Starlink. Bezrukov claimed that the system can detect Ukrainian aerial and maritime drones up to 10 miles away.

Specialized Military Drone Branches

Ukraine and Russia have both established large, dedicated military drone branches.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky ordered  the establishment of a separate branch within the Ukrainian Armed Forces on February 6, 2024, called the Unmanned System Forces (USF). The USF is responsible for interactions with already existing unmanned systems units and with supporting these units. The USF is also responsible for supplying units with drones, training specialists, planning military operations involving unmanned systems, and cooperating with domestic unmanned systems manufacturers.

In response the Russian Ministry of Defense (MoD) launched a coordinated effort in August 2024 to create a centralized separate branch for unmanned systems, likely to reorganize informal specialized drone detachments and centralize procurement of unmanned systems. The Russian MoD is mainly trying to consolidate the state’s control over Russian drone operators and developers, some of whom had enjoyed relative semi-independence from the Russian military bureaucracy.D

While Russia seeks centralized control, Western armies are offering different tactics. Every British and American army platoon will now have a drone operator. The 75th Ranger Regiment at Fort Benning is being trained in using the RQ-28A short-range reconnaissance (SRR) quadcopter drone.  “The SRR RQ-28A capability will provide game-changing technology to Army platoons, enhancing both soldier lethality and survivability,” said Carson L. Wakefield.

Peaceful Drones 

Drones have incredible value in the civilian world. They assist in humanitarian and disaster response, engineering, construction, crop monitoring, weather forecasting, and search and rescue. They even have drones that can clean high-rise windows.

Despite all the remarkable innovations above, drones are not as destructively effective on the battlefield as artillery, missiles and landmines. However, drones are what captures the public imagination. Now imagine drones that are not operated by humans at all, but by AI programmed robots. Are you ready for that?

Patrick Drennan is a journalist based in New Zealand, with a degree in American history and economics.

Amid reports of over 45,000 Palestinians dead following well over a year of fighting in the Gaza Strip, Israel is warning that it is preparing to escalate its offensive against Hamas even more.

Defense Minister Israel Katz issued an ultimatum Wednesday, telling Hamas to immediately release the some 100 hostages that remain or else Israel deal it “blows with a force not seen in Gaza for a long time.”

At this point the hostages have been held for more than 450 days, and many of the remaining one hundred are feared dead.

“The IDF will intensify its activities against the terrorist nests in Gaza until the release of the hostages and the elimination of Hamas,” Katz warned while touring the southern Israeli city of Netivot.

“I call on Gaza’s residents to rise up against the murderous Hamas group, which also uses you as human shields, and to bring about the release of the hostages, to prevent suffering and end the war,” Katz said.

Netivot had witnessed a New Year’s Day salvo of Hamas rockets fired on it. The defense minister touted Israel’s “willingness to make far-reaching compromises in accordance with the principles outlined by the U.S. president.”

On Thursday Reuters cited PM Netanyahu’s office as saying he has authorized the resumption of negotiations by an Israeli delegation in Doha. “Hostage negotiations are reportedly not stuck and there has been progress,” The Jerusalem Post additionally said.

A new Israeli military statement has said that warplanes continue to be engaged in heavy operations over the Gaza Strip. “Air Force aircraft and control rooms are in direct contact with the fighting [ground] forces and support the fighting in the various sectors,” a statement said.

The IDF added, “This is an early warning. Terror groups are again firing rockets from this area, which has been warned several times in the past.”

TODAY: A UN delegation managed to reach northern Gaza for the first time

There is not a single building standing

It’s a wasteland of rubble and destruction

The Palestinians have suffered unimaginable horror

This couldn’t have happened without the support of America pic.twitter.com/CGkz0YtcE3

— Khalissee (@Kahlissee) August 18, 2024

But with much of the Strip already completely leveled and devastated, it’s hard to know how or in what ways Israel can still escalate. Hamas leadership has been degraded, but likely there are still many thousands more Hamas militants operating from the vast tunnel system, waging guerilla war.

Authored by Andrew Korybko via substack,

South Asia is generally thought of as a comparatively stable region whose primary problems are socio-economic development, which shouldn’t be underestimated but isn’t the same as the geopolitical turbulence that West Asia and Europe have recently experienced. That might be about to change.

From Afghanistan to Myanmar, the latter of which can be included in South Asia due to its former role in the British Raj, the entire region is bracing itself for a tumultuous 2025.

Beginning with Afghanistan, the latest tit-for-tat attacks between the Afghan Taliban and Pakistan across the Durand Line bode ill for the future of their bilateral relations. Kabul never recognized the British-imposed border between Afghanistan and what later became Pakistan. It’s also accused by Islamabad of harboring the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, also known as the “Pakistani Taliban”, which is a designated terrorist group. The Afghan Taliban, meanwhile, accused Pakistan of killing civilians in its latest strike.

At the same time, Pakistan’s relations with the US are also deteriorating. The Biden Administration imposed new sanctions on its ballistic missile program, unprecedentedly targeting a state agency, while the State Department just condemned a military court’s conviction of 25 civilians. Returning US President Donald Trump’s envoy for special missions Richard Grenell is also advocating for the release of imprisoned former Pakistani Prime Minister Imran Khan. Ties will likely become more complicated.

India’s found itself in a similar situation. A former Indian official was charged in October with organizing the attempted assassination of a Delhi-designated terrorist with dual American citizenship on US soil in summer 2023. Earlier this year, Russia gave voice to Indian suspicions that the US meddled in its general election, while some Indians believe that the US’ charges against billionaire business Gautam Adani are politically motivated. Others accuse the US of overthrowing the friendly government in Bangladesh too.

On that topic, ties between these neighbors took a huge hit after former Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina fled her country during increasingly riotous protests over the summer. The new ruling arrangement in Bangladesh has adopted an ultra-nationalist position towards India, while India accuses it of turning a blind eye to retributive mob violence against the Hindu minority. Dhaka earlier accused Delhi of playing a role in August’s floods. This rising mutual distrust might soon have regional security consequences.

And finally, Bangladesh would do well to a closer eye on Myanmar than on India, where the Buddhist nationalist Arakan Army just seized control of their narrow border and reportedly reaffirmed its prior accusations that Dhaka backs jihadist Rohingya groups. The speed at which rebels swept across the country since the start of their 1023 offensive in October 2023, which has since led to them reportedly capturing over half of the country, raises concerns that Myanmar might soon follow in Syria’s footsteps.

As can be seen, socio-economic developmental problems are no longer South Asia’s greatest challenge, with geopolitical issues now coming to the forefront of policymakers’ attention instead. Three of them concern worsening inter-state relations between Afghanistan-Pakistan, India-Bangladesh, and Bangladesh-Myanmar, which add to exiting tensions between India-Pakistan. If there’s any geopolitical silver lining from the past year, it’s that India and China are now trying to patch up their problems.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Xi Jinping met on the sidelines of the latest BRICS Summit in Russia’s Kazan in late October. This followed the announcement that their countries had reached a long-awaited deal to mutually de-escalate their border crisis that led to lethal clashes in summer 2020. Provided that their incipient rapprochement remains on track, then it could alleviate their security dilemma, which would reduce military pressure along India’s northern border.

On the flip side, however, the returning Trump Administration might disapprove of any meaningful improvement in Sino-Indo relations due to expected prioritization of containing China. This might lead to the US trying to incentivize India into slowing the pace of its rapprochement with China in exchange for relief from some of the pressure that the Biden Administration previously placed upon it. The existing charges would have to run their course, but there might be an informal agreement to not hype them up.

India is the most important country in the region due to its demographic, economic, and military weight, which makes it a rising Great Power in what’s been described as the emerging multipolar world order, so its balancing act (known in Indian parlance as “multi-alignment” between other major players can have an outsized role on the region. In particular, this concerns its relations with the US, China, and Russia. Ties with Russia are excellent, they’re improving with China, while they remain complicated with the US.

Trump is expected to bargain hard for American trade and investment interests the world over, and he criticized India for its high tariffs just several months ago, so he’s unlikely to propose any related concessions for incentivizing India to decelerate its rapprochement with China. What he can do, however, is pressure Bangladesh’s new ruling arrangement on the issue of minority Hindu rights and holding truly free and fair elections as soon as possible, which would be deeply appreciated by Delhi.

Worsening US-Pakistani ties over the issue of the latter’s ballistic missile program, which Deputy National Security Advisor Jon Finer said could one day reach American soil, and Khan’s imprisonment would obviously be smiled upon by India but might not be enough to reach a deal on China. That’s why the aforementioned Bangladesh proposal would be a more realistic means to that end, but even if something is agreed to, India is unlikely to turn against China and become a US proxy.

The most that it’ll do is slow down the pace at which their ties are improving in the hopes that more American pressure on the People’s Republic in the coming future, which would follow Trump’s plans to broker a ceasefire, armistice, or peace deal between Russia and Ukraine, could improve its hand. If India can once again position itself as the US’ top regional partner, which it was during the Obama years and Trump’s first term, then it’ll be much better placed to manage any forthcoming regional turmoil.

Bangladesh and Pakistan don’t have anywhere near the importance for the US’ geostrategic interests as India does since they can’t serve as a partial counterweight to China like it can. Trump, who’s known to favor transactional deals, might thus privilege its regional interests so long as he can get something in return to justify this. Bangladesh might therefore be pressured to hold truly free and fair elections as soon as possible while Pakistan might be coerced into releasing Khan and then doing the same.

From India’s perspective, it’s imperative to ensure that relations with Bangladesh’s new ruling arrangement don’t worsen, which the US can help it with. India also wants to contain the consequences of any Syrian-like collapse in Myanmar instead of risk having them spill over into its historically unstable Northeast States. The US can’t help as much in that regard, but some rebel groups are considered US-friendly and politically backed by the US, so it might be able to exert some positive influence on them.

Another thing that India wants is a relief in American political pressure, including acceptance of the role that India and Russia play in each other’s complementary balancing acts vis-à-vis China, which meets US interests despite this not yet being widely acknowledged. The future of Indo-US relations under Trump 2.0 will ultimately play the largest role in determining the degree of tumult that South Asia experiences next year. A noticeable improvement would greatly reduce the scope of regional turmoil next year.