By Michael Every of Rabobank

The world is again waiting to see what comes out of US-Iran peace talks in Pakistan as the two-week ceasefire deadline looms. Again, it’s a binary outcome: war, with threatened strikes on bridges and power plants in Iran, then perhaps regionally, and an extended closure of Hormuz; or peace, and energy and key goods flowing again.

The markets have decided peace will be the outcome. Because markets. Yes, there are times when bad news logically justifies a rally, e.g., in a real threat of nuclear war, go long: it may not happen, and it can’t hurt if it did. However, when the threat is painful and potentially long-lasting, but not existential, does that logic hold? If so, why bother with geopolitical analysis (and many market participants don’t)? Everything works out in the end, you can’t afford to be the only fund manager who misses the inevitable rally, so just ‘buy all the things.’

Philip K. Dick’s ‘The Man in the High Castle’ is set in a 1962 where the Axis won WW2 and an occupied-US underground shares that on another plane of existence, things worked out differently. They are led by the ancient Chinese Book of Changes, the ‘I Ching’; today, markets view all existence as led by ‘I kerching!’ Yet both views can be flawed. The ‘reality’ where the Axis lost WW2 is also not our world – rather, the British Empire under Churchill is gaining the upper hand in a global struggle with the US. Nobody knows what happens next with Iran.

Is Mr Market ‘The High Man in the Castle’ in thinking everything always works out for him? Is whomever the actual Iranian decision maker the same if thinking the US won’t pull the trigger again if there is no deal, and that Iran wins from that pummeling? Is President Trump if supposing the Iranians are rational rather than theological? We may not have long to find out.

For those who pay attention to geopolitics, there are some potentially optimistic signs. In the Middle East, China’s Xi held talks with Saudi’s MBS and made clear Hormuz needs to reopen. At the same time, Pakistan was told not to send a $1.5bn order of weapons to Sudan, which the Saudis were paying for, and a $4bn deal for the Libyan National Army is also on hold. Likewise, another round of Israel-Lebanon talks are set for Thursday to try to extend their ceasefire, which Iran links to its own, as Syria is cracking down on Hezbollah. Even the European envoy to the Gaza Board of Peace is publicly optimistic about Hamas disarmament talks.

In Europe, Ukraine may be seeing a ‘Second Miracle Year’ and “For the first time in years, outright victory seems possible” via its drone strikes. That’s as the EU hopes to realise its €90bn Ukraine loan within 48 hours following the new government in Budapest. However, the new pro-Russian Bulgarian PM may see things differently alongside the Czech and Slovak leaders, while Romania’s government looks about to fall.

Moreover, the EU is bracing for delays to promised US weapons shipments due to the Iran war, as The Times says the UK isn’t seizing Russian shadow fleet tankers in its waters because berthing and maintaining them could cost too much(!) Meanwhile, France and Germany are said to be considering proposals to give Ukraine only “symbolic” benefits during a normal EU accession process, without granting Kyiv access to the EU’s common budget or voting rights. In the same way there may be only symbolic weaponry if the US isn’t able to step up? That’s as the Wall Street Journal notes, ‘In Germany, Everyone Is a Defence Manufacturer Now’ as firms “scramble to reinvent themselves as military vendors to tap into the country’s accelerated rearmament.”

There are also further US-Europe tensions. The US just signed a military defense agreement with Morocco, which some suspect may soon host US military bases now located in Spain, which has been a loud anti-US voice under its current PM; that might suggest the US ability to threaten the Strait of Gibraltar in line with its other recent agreement with Indonesia vis-à-vis the Strait of Malacca. The White House is reportedly also looking at a report that backs Spain having to hand back Ceuta and Melilla, territories it holds in Morocco. German Chancellor Merz has also stated that Cuba poses no risk to third countries, and he does not see on what basis an intervention should take place – which will infuriate the Americans and do nothing to stop them if they intend to act on that front. (Which seems likely.)

There are tensions in the Americas with Canada too, whose PM just stated that close economic ties with US are “a weakness that must be corrected.” He is also talking about boosting his armed forces – though the scale of the imbalance there should be clear when a headline today boasts, “Canadian military beats recruitment target after 1,400 permanent residents sign up.”

By contrast, as Trump pushes a $1.5trn Pentagon budget, he just invoked the Cold War Defence Production Act to force the private sector to move on coal supply chains, domestic petroleum production, natural gas transmission and LNG capacity, and power grid infrastructure. None of that is a quick fix in this crisis, but it is a fix the market won’t provide by itself.

There are additional tensions in Asia as China sends warships to the Pacific while Japanese forces take part in exercises with the US and Philippines. Meanwhile, the crisis in Hormuz has seen Thailand’s government to push ahead with its Landbridge project to connect the Andaman Sea to the Gulf of Thailand via new ports on each side connected by a railway and highway, in order to circumvent the Strait of Malacca. The project is seen as making little economic sense by the logistics industry, but that doesn’t mean it might not make geopolitical sense to some players – and then draw the attention of others.

On the trade front, China has released new regulations to counter the “unjustified” extraterritorial use of foreign laws, aimed at protecting its interests. This is seen as clashing with the EU’s proposed regulations in this area, placing European firms in China in potential conflict with either one or the other. The European Chamber of Commerce in China has raised concern that the “broad scope, vague language and wide discretion” of the new Chinese rules goes far beyond similar statutes in the West.

Yet if you are all about Mr Market then none of the above matters; all that does is today’s Senate confirmation hearing for FOMC Chair nominee Kevin Warsh. Then again, once upon a time, these were dry affairs for dry men and women, but not in our present reality. Even the Financial Times is carrying an op-ed arguing that the Fed needs to reinvent itself and its mission; but they are thinking more along the lines of ‘how much dot plot’ rather than ‘how do you finance a $1.5 trillion Pentagon budget?’, ‘How do you force dollar stablecoins on the world to boost fiscal space?’, and ‘What are central banks *for*?’

More narrowly, Warsh’s finances, which he has lots of, are seen as a potential line of attack for those opposed to his appointment: it’s not so much that he’s very rich, which is the assumed norm for Fed Chairs, but that some of those holdings might be opaque. Because we couldn’t have any vested interests represented in Washington D.C., obviously. That would be unthinkable.

Ask yourself what the version of you would have thought of these headlines in April 2016. Then ask yourself what you think they will read like in April 2036. Only then decide what to do.

“Can anyone alter fate? All of us combined… or one great figure… or someone strategically placed, who happens to be in the right spot. Chance. Accident. And our lives, our world, hanging on it.” – The Man in the High Castle.

After rising in February, US Pending Home Sales were expected to continue to improve in March (+0.5% MoM) but – despite apparently rising mortgage rates – sales rose 1.5% MoM (even with February revised up to +2.5% MoM). This dragged pending home sales up to +1.8% YoY (to the highest level since Nov 2024)…

Source: Bloomberg

…extending its bounce off record lows…

Source: Bloomberg

“Contract signings rose in March despite higher mortgage rates, pointing to pent-up housing demand,” NAR Chief Economist Lawrence Yun said in a statement.

“A greater supply of inventory will help translate that demand into more home sales.”

Pending home sales in the South, the biggest home-selling region in the country, increased 3.9% in March.

They rose 4.4% in the Northeast but decreased in the Midwest and West.

While mortgage rates did pick up at the start of March (Iran War), pending home sales have been disconnected from improving ‘affordability’ in recent months…

Source: Bloomberg

As a reminder, because houses typically go under contract a month or two before they’re sold, the pending home sales data tend to be a leading indicator of closings that are captured in the monthly previously owned home sales reports.

President Donald Trump’s nominee to lead the Federal Reserve, Kevin Warsh, is scheduled to appear before the Senate Banking Committee today at 10:00 a.m. ET for his confirmation hearing – his first public test in the high-stakes process to become the next chair of the central bank.

The hearing, set to take place in the Dirksen Senate Office Building Room 538 in a hybrid open session, comes less than a month before current Chair Jerome Powell’s term expires on May 15. Warsh, a former Fed governor who served from 2006 to 2011, was nominated by Trump on March 4 to serve as both a Board member and chairman.

Watch Live:

Warsh, a former Fed governor who has spent years criticizing the institution as directionless and in need of “regime change,” now has the chance to outline his vision for remaking the world’s most powerful central bank. But he faces a delicate balancing act: signaling loyalty to Trump’s push for lower interest rates while reassuring markets, lawmakers, and global observers that he will safeguard the Fed’s independence and keep inflation in check.

As of this writing, Polymarket currently assigns roughly 33% odds that Warsh will be confirmed in time to replace Powell when his term expires on May 15.

In prepared opening remarks released yesterday, Warsh strikes a deliberate tone on the politically sensitive issue of central bank independence. He plans to state that “monetary policy independence is essential” and that decisions must rest on “analytic rigor, meaningful deliberation and unclouded decision-making.” At the same time, he will argue that the Fed has sometimes “extended its reach” beyond its core mandate, eroding its credibility, and that presidents or lawmakers expressing views on interest rates does not inherently undermine operational independence.

He also declares that “inflation is a choice” and that the Fed must take responsibility for price stability while staying firmly “in its lane” – avoiding fiscal, regulatory, or social policy areas where it lacks authority or expertise.

As anticipated, Senate Democrats are preparing to aggressively question Warsh, focusing on whether he can truly insulate the Fed from political pressure – especially given Trump’s repeated calls for sharply lower interest rates. Ranking Member Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and other Democrats have signaled they will press him on potential conflicts of interest, the adequacy of his financial disclosures (which revealed more than $100 million in assets but left some holdings opaque), plans to divest certain investments, and any private communications with the Trump administration.

All 11 Democrats on the committee are widely expected to oppose the nomination. Some had pushed to delay the hearing pending the outcome of Justice Department investigations involving Powell and Governor Lisa Cook, but those efforts did not succeed.

On the Republican side, support for Warsh appears solid, though not unanimous. A handful of GOP senators have voiced reservations linked to the ongoing probes, but the party holds the majority and is positioned to advance the nomination out of committee.

Markets and policymakers will be watching closely for any signals on Warsh’s views regarding the Fed’s balance sheet, the pace of potential rate cuts, and his overall approach to the dual mandate. Analysts describe him as pragmatic rather than a radical departure from current policy, but today’s testimony could shift expectations ahead of the next FOMC meeting.

According to Goldman, here’s what to watch for:

• On Econ (Mericle): i) How has the war affected his views – Has he shifted toward the FOMC’s wait-and-see approach, which might signal an intention to work toward building consensus? Ii) Does he talk about looking through tariff + energy passthrough? How will Warsh characterize where inflation stands + how the FOMC should treat tariff and oil effects? Iii) What does he say about shrinking the Fed’s balance sheet? Are incremental reductions related to regulatory + supervisory changes enough or is he still pushing for a more substantial reduction?
   
• Tillis block (Pastrick): Senator Tillis key to watch: No expectation that he will oppose Warsh as a candidate but we do NOT expect to see any openings from Tillis that outline a new position on not supporting the nomination while Fed Chair Powell is under legal scrutiny.
   
• On Rates markets (Marshall): i) Insight into where Warsh anchors his longer-run views could impact the distribution of risks around terminal rate pricing; ii) That Warsh supports a smaller balance sheet would come as no surprise, but details around how he might seek to achieve it, and what potential Fed/Treasury interaction might look like, would shape market perceptions on balance sheet trajectory; iii) Bank regulation: Emphasis on things like adjustments to the liquidity rules + internal liquidity stress testing could reinforce the case that meaningful shifts in policy follow a shift in reserve demand (rather than result from efforts to shift the reserve framework)

The confirmation process remains fluid. A committee vote would follow today’s hearing, with the full Senate expected to take up the nomination soon after. Warsh’s performance – particularly how he navigates questions on Fed independence amid White House expectations – will be pivotal in determining whether he assumes the role by mid-May.

Peak demand in the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) territory could more than quadruple to 367,790 MW by 2032, driven primarily by data centers as well as other large load customers, the grid operator said in a preliminary forecast published Wednesday and noted by Utility Dive.

ERCOT, which serves most of Texas, set its current peak demand record of 85,508 MW in August 2023. 

The forecast is based on ERCOT’s economic forecasts as well as information provided by utilities working with medium and large load customers, including data centers, cryptocurrency mining, industrial and oil and gas processes.

Large-load demand data from utilities was included at the direction of state lawmakers as part of SB 6, which was passed last year, but ERCOT officials told the Public Utility Commission of Texas that it may seek revisions to the forecast.

The grid operator “has concerns with using the preliminary load forecast values for the Reliability Assessment and any other transmission and resource adequacy analysis,” Chad Seely, ERCOT senior vice president of regulatory policy, general counsel and chief compliance officer, told the PUCT in comments on the forecast filed Wednesday.

“ERCOT would prefer to consult with Commission Staff to evaluate whether it is appropriate to seek adjustment of the forecast.”

“Texas is experiencing exceptional growth and development, which is reshaping how large load demand is identified, verified, and incorporated into long-term planning,” ERCOT President and CEO Pablo Vegas said in a statement. “As a result of a changing landscape, we believe this forecast to be higher than expected future load growth.” 

ERCOT’s comments on the forecast noted that the grid operator is currently projecting summer 2026 peak load to range between 90,500 MW and 98,000 MW — significantly more modest than the 112,000 MW forecasted peak demand in the preliminary long-term load forecast.

“We look forward to working with the PUCT on potential adjustments to refine how ERCOT ascertains the most accurate information for load forecasting and ensuring the system reliably and efficiently serves Texans,” Vegas said.

ERCOT staff will discuss the forecast at tomorrow’s PUCT open meeting and at the ERCOT board of directors meeting on April 21.

Global electricity demand rose by 3% in 2025, with growth nearly triple compared to the 1.3% increase in total energy consumption, as data centers and electric vehicles continued to push power use higher, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said in a report on Monday.

Overall global energy demand growth slowed to 1.3% in 2025, slightly below the previous decade’s average of 1.4% and significantly lower than in 2024, as global economic growth slowed and cooling demand in Asia was lower than in 2024, the IEA found in its annual Global Energy Review report published today.

While total energy demand growth cooled, electricity demand continued to grow strongly, with an annual rise of 3% last year, the IEA found. 

The growth rate dropped from 4.4% in 2024, when intense heat waves in India and Southeast Asia had boosted electricity consumption. Still, the 2025 growth rate in electricity demand remained above the 2.8% annual average between 2014 and 2024 and was also well over twice the 1.3% rate of overall global energy demand growth in 2025.

The global numbers mask the important role played by China. The country’s energy intensity improvements slowed sharply from nearly 4% per year between 2010 and 2019 to just 0.6% per year from 2019 to 2024. In 2025, China’s energy intensity improvement jumped back to above 3%. Putting China aside, global energy intensity improvements would have appeared more stable in recent years. Understanding why China’s energy intensity slowed so dramatically in recent years requires further analysis. However, it appears to be in part because of adverse weather and partly due to structural changes in China’s economy after Covid-19 towards a more export- and industry-intensive model of growth.

Electricity demand in the United States grew by 2% last year, slower than the 2.8% growth seen in 2024 but more than three times as fast as the average growth rate over the previous decade, the IEA said.

The buildings sector accounted for 80% of US power demand growth in 2025, boosted in particular by rapidly-increasing data center loads. Data center power demand alone contributed around half of the entire increase in electricity consumption in the U.S. last year. A cold winter, with a nearly 10% increase in heating degree days, also supported power demand in 2025 by boosting space heating needs, according to the Paris-based agency.

Solar power met the most of the energy demand growth globally last year, followed by gas, the IEA said.

In the electricity sector, the additional 600 terawatt-hours of solar PV generation worldwide in 2025 marked the largest structural increase ever recorded in a single year for any electricity generation technology, contributing to a decline in coal-fired electricity generation globally. Battery storage was the fastest-growing power sector technology in 2025. The roughly 110 gigawatts of new battery storage capacity added during the year exceeded the largest-ever annual capacity additions for natural gas. Meanwhile over 12 gigawatts of nuclear power reactors began construction in 2025, amid renewed momentum for nuclear projects in several regions.

“Global energy demand continued to increase in 2025 against a complex economic and geopolitical backdrop, with one trend unmistakeable: the expanding electrification of economies,” said IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol.

“Electricity consumption is growing much faster than overall energy demand – and one energy source is growing much faster than any other. Solar PV accounted for over a quarter of all of the world’s energy demand growth – more than any other source, for the first time – followed right after by natural gas. In today’s rapidly shifting landscape, countries that prioritise resilience and diversification will be best placed to manage volatility and deliver secure and affordable energy in the years ahead.”

Here are the reports’ key findings summarized:

• All major energy fuels and technologies grew in 2025 – but at very different rates. Overall global energy demand growth slowed to 1.3%, just below the average for the previous decade. Slower economic growth and slower growth in energy-intensive industries in some regions, lower cooling demand, and faster efficiency improvements all contributed to slower demand growth.

• Solar PV, the largest single source of growth, met more than 25% of higher demand, followed by natural gas, which contributed 17%. This was the first time on record that a modern renewable source contributed the largest share of global energy demand growth. Demand for oil, natural gas and coal all grew in 2025, but at a slower rate than in 2024. Low-emissions sources combined – solar, wind, nuclear, hydropower and other renewables – contributed nearly 60% of the growth in global demand.

• Demand growth in the United States rose to its second highest level since 2000, excluding post-recession rebound years, boosted by strong electricity demand from data centers, robust industrial growth and colder temperatures. The People’s Republic of China (hereafter, “China”) accounted for the largest overall share of global energy demand growth, but at 1.7% its growth rate slowed sharply due to the rapid growth of renewables and efficiency improvements.

• Demand for electricity grew at well over twice the rate of energy demand, reaffirming that the world has entered the Age of Electricity. Growth of nearly 3% remained above the average of 2.8% over the last decade, but was slower than in 2024, largely due to one-off factors such as lower demand for cooling in India and Southeast Asia. Electricity demand growth was again driven by a wide range of end uses in buildings and industry. Although only contributing a small share of this total growth, demand from electric vehicles and data centres grew rapidly. In the United States, data centres made up half of all growth in electricity use.

• Oil demand growth slowed further in 2025, increasing by 0.65 million barrels per day (mb/d) or 0.7%, down from 2024’s already muted 0.75 mb/d of growth. The increase in both years, which was in line with IEA projections, remained well below the average annual rise between 2010 and 2019 of 1.4 mb/d. The slower increase mainly reflected weaker growth in petrochemical feedstocks, notably in China, while continued growth of electric vehicles kept oil demand for road transport in check. Electric car sales continued their rapid growth, climbing over 20% to more than 20 million units – around one quarter of new car sales in 2025.

• Gas demand growth slowed markedly in 2025, rising by around 1%, down from the 2.8% recorded in 2024, amid relatively high prices in the first half of the year. Incremental demand was largely concentrated in the United States and European Union, supported by colder winter weather, and in the Middle East, where gas use in the power sector grew quickly. By contrast, Asia Pacific demand grew at its weakest pace since the 2022 energy crisis.

• Coal demand in 2025 grew only modestly above 2024 levels, rising by around 0.4%. In the United States, gas-to-coal switching and strong growth in electricity demand supported a 10% rise in coal use, reversing the trend of recent declines. Coal demand was flat in China: strong renewables growth pushed down coal use in electricity generation, while in industry, lower coal use in steel and cement production was offset by increased use for chemicals. Coal demand for power generation decreased in India, mostly due to an early, strong and long monsoon.

• The increase in generation from renewables and nuclear power in 2025 exceeded the total growth in electricity supply. The 2025 increase in solar PV of 600 terawatt-hours (TWh) was the largest-ever electricity generation increase by any source in one year, outside of periods of post-crisis recovery. The rise in solar PV alone met around 70% of electricity generation growth. Renewables combined now virtually match total global generation from coal. In the European Union, the share of solar PV and wind reached 30% in 2025, surpassing that of fossil fuels for the first time. Electricity generation from natural gas and from nuclear power continued to grow at the global level in 2025.  

• Annual global renewable capacity additions rose to a record 800 gigawatts (GW), of which solar contributed 75%. Battery storage was the fastest growing power technology: capacity additions rose by around 40% in 2025 to reach almost 110 GW, more than the highest-ever annual capacity additions from natural gas. In addition, construction started on over 12 GW of nuclear power capacity in 2025.

• Global growth in energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions slowed further in 2025, rising by around 0.4%. Emissions from China fell due to the boom in renewables, structural declines in energy-intensive industry, and overall slower demand growth. India’s energy-related CO2 emissions were flat for the first time since the 1970s, largely due to cyclical effects from a strong monsoon combined with structural growth in renewables. A cold winter and higher natural gas prices pushed up emissions in advanced economies. Due to these trends, emissions from advanced economies grew faster (+0.5%) than those from emerging market and developing economies (+0.3%) for the first time since the 1990s.

• The rollout of clean energy technologies since 2019 avoided more than 35 exajoules of annual fossil fuel demand in 2025, equivalent to around 7% of global fossil fuel use annually. Deployment of solar PV, wind, nuclear, electric cars and heat pumps since 2019 also prevents 3 billion tonnes of CO2 annually, or around 8% of global emissions. The avoided coal demand (around 800 million tonnes of coal equivalent) equates to more than the entire coal use of India in 2025. Estimated avoided gas demand (over 260 billion cubic metres) is equivalent to almost half the global liquefied natural gas (LNG) market.

Full report here.

Authored by Jonathan Turley,

The defeat of Viktor Orban in Hungary last weekend was celebrated by many who saw the former president as establishing single-party rule in his central European nation. The irony is that this claimed victory for democracy may fuel the establishment of a global governance system that is neither democratic nor accountable to citizens.

The European Union was criticized by many for taking sides in the Hungarian election and for undermining Orban, who asserted national priorities in disputes with the EU. 

No sooner had Orban conceded defeat than a jubilant European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen called for the final coup de grace for national identity and sovereignty: the elimination of the ability of nations to stand against EU policies.

Orban was controversial for his ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin and his lack of support for Ukraine. He was also accused of authoritarianism and corruption. I shared in some of those criticisms.

However, the unintended consequence of this election could be the removal of a single autocrat in favor of a global bureaucracy.

Van der Leyen helped elect the pro-EU Peter Magyar in order to remove a barrier to the EU’s ultimate exercise of power. The EU had been squeezing Hungary over its defiance by holding back billions in funds. Despite his tough talk on negotiations with the EU, Magyar is expected by EU bureaucrats to be a suppliant, willing to fall into line with the EU agenda.

The EU Chief has reportedly already given Magyar a list of 27 demands he must meet before she will turn the spigot back on. She did not try to hide the agenda, announcing that the EU needed to “use the momentum now” to consolidate its power.

With Hungary out of the way, Von der Leyen is calling for the EU to finally do away with the last vestige of national sovereignty: the veto exercised by its member states.

Under the plan, member states would lose control of their policy and could be forced to adhere to the priorities and values of the EU majority.

The EU Chief celebrated the new day of global governance in the making: “Moving to qualified majority voting in foreign policy is an important way to avoid systemic blockages, as we have seen in the past.”

In “Rage and the Republic,” I discuss the dangers posed to the American republic this century by the rise of global governance systems like the EU. The book explores how globalists planned to gradually get nations to yield their authority to the EU — destroying national identity and sovereignty in favor of an EU bureaucracy in Brussels.

As the EU moves to kill off national sovereignty, EU commissioners are calling for a single European military command, completing a longstanding globalist goal.

The 250th anniversary of our republic is occurring as we face an unprecedented EU threat. Our revolution was fought against a foreign empire. It now faces an even greater threat from a global government asserting the right to compel American companies to censor Americans and comply with environmental, social and governance or ESG policies.

At the same time, American figures such as Hillary Clinton are encouraging the EU to deprive Americans of their First Amendment rights using the infamous Digital Services Act to restore speech controls to social media. Other Americans have testified before the EU, calling on it to fight the U.S. Banners are now flying in Europe declaring, “We are the Free World Now,” as the globalists attempt to supplant freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

If the American Republic is to survive another 250 years, it must preserve key rights that the EU has been systematically destroying in Europe — freedom of speech, division of powers and political accountability of decision-makers.

That is why, I believe, the EU is inherently unstable and likely to ultimately collapse.

The EU has worked very hard to dismantle national sovereignty and identity in its member states. Historically, such collapses have been followed by different forms of tyranny.

Whatever comes next — and I could be wrong in my pessimism about the EU — the U.S. must take seriously the threat that this global governance system poses to our own values and sovereignty.

Von der Leyen is right that there is “momentum now” for the globalists, but the momentum of history still rests with the U.S. and its unique experiment in self-governance.

We saw this threat before, and we defeated a world empire. If we are to survive and thrive in this century, we will need to return to our own creation as a republic — to dig deep down and remember who we are as citizens.

Ours was the first Enlightenment revolution that embraced natural rights originating not from government but from God. We remain a unique people, joined by an article of faith found in our own Declaration of Independence. If this republic is to survive, it will be up to each of us, in the words of Benjamin Franklin, to “keep it.”

Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.”

More than $71 billion will be required over the next decade to recover and rebuild Gaza following the brutal Israel-Hamas war, according to a new report. Hamas leadership has been largely decimated, though the group has yet to be completely disarmed, and there are still calls within the Israeli government among some hawkish officials to simply conquer and promote Jewish settlement of the whole territory.

In their final Gaza Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA) which was released Monday, the European Union and the United Nations said the conflict has had a “catastrophic impact on human development” and left the enclave in urgent need of massive funding.

A massive $26.3 billion will be needed in just the first 18 months to restore essential services and rebuild infrastructure, per the report. And much more will be needed in the years to follow if Gaza is ever returned to ‘normal’.

“Physical infrastructure damages are estimated at $35.2 billion, with economic and social losses amounting to $22.7 billion,” a joint statement said.

Gaza official remains under a fragile ceasefire agreed in October following two years of war triggered by the October 7, 2023, Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel. Gaza health officials have stated over 75,000 people died in 2+ years of heavy Israeli bombardment, as well as ground operations.

The hardest-hit sectors include “housing, health, education, commerce, and agriculture, and the war has set back human development in Gaza by 77 years – per the report, also as reviewed by Al Jazeera.

There currently doesn’t really seem to be much of a serious plan or much momentum toward rebuilding, however, given there are currently two competing visions for reconstruction of Gaza: one is Trump’s ‘Board of Peace’ and the other is an UN-backed approach.

The United Nations and the European Union have said reconstruction must be “Palestinian-led” and based on “approaches that actively support the transition of governance to the Palestinian Authority.”

But part of Washington’s approach is to establish a sprawling multi-national military base inside Gaza. This could include some 5,000 troops – including potentially American soldiers.

However, the Trump administration has consistently stated it doesn’t plant to put ‘boots on the ground’ in Gaza, but that could change. Turkey has been poised to offer some troops, but this is highly controversial from the West’s perspective.

Via Remix News,

Volodymyr Zelensky’s head of his Presidential Office in Ukraine, Kyrylo Budanov, has announced plans to import migrant laborers from Africa. Essentially, this entails Ukraine establishing new laws for the legal entry and residence of foreign workers.

The government will introduce a new list of “migration-risk” countries to facilitate this plan, according to remarks Budanov made at the CEO Club Ukraine.

“They enter, obtain documents, and then move on. This is a problem that creates barriers for business,” Budanov reportedly said, emphasizing that Ukraine will now move to make it easier for migrants to stay and work in Ukraine.

Last October, rumors swirled that Ukraine was directly recruiting mercenaries from Latin American drug cartels to fight in its war against Russia. Kyiv’s forced conscription policies at home, which often resort to violence, have already raised numerous concerns about the brutal practices of Zelensky’s military as well as the desperate situation Ukraine is in due to loss of life on the frontlines.

It has long been known that Ukraine faces a serious demographic crisis, now exacerbated by men who have died in the war or fled to other countries. Already, there have been voices pushing for mass immigration in Ukraine since the war began. Last year, Remix News reported that Vasyl Voskobojnik, president of the Ukrainian Association of Foreign Employment Agencies, said the population decline can no longer be offset by simply increasing the birthrate. Instead, immigration from Third-World countries is the only solution.

Voskobojnik said the Ukrainian government must develop a migration policy by 2026 that focuses on reducing this shortage.

However, importing foreign workers and foreign warriors (who may or may not have criminal ties) will only add to concerns that Ukraine will ever be a desired member of the European Union, as the EU faces its own crises brought on by mass immigration.

🇭🇺🇺🇦 PM Orbán: Europe’s wars lead to fewer White Christian Europeans and more migrants

Hungary’s leader says the war in Ukraine is a demographic disaster, just like WWI and WWII were for Hungary. Now, migrants will be being used to fill the missing gaps. pic.twitter.com/IEwMOcJmxv

— Remix News & Views (@RMXnews) May 28, 2024

Last autumn, Ukraine’s former minister of foreign affairs, Dmytro Kuleba, flatly stated that Ukraine may have to open its borders to Asian migrants because of its demographic crisis, with Ukraine already having the worst population growth in Europe, even before the war. 

Kuleba said Ukraine has to focus on people “who need this country and are ready to rebuild it.” These people exist, he said, although they are in the minority, then indicating that the only solution is to bring in migrants. 

These migrant newcomers will also need adequate housing, wages and a working environment to make them choose Ukraine. However, it is questionable how a country whose economy and state administration are in ruins as a result of war could handle mass immigration from the Third World. Unlike how migration was marketed, many of the migrants who came to Western Europe have ended up draining state coffers through social welfare, education, housing, and integration. In Germany, for instance, foreigners cost the government nearly €50 billion in 2023.

Ukraine also does not have as many resources for integrating migrants as Western states, and as already noted, integration has been far from a success story there. Even groups that have lived there for centuries, such as the Hungarians, are actively discriminated against, even at the government level.

Since Ukraine will mostly be rebuilt using Western funds, it is likely that Americans, Germans, and French people, already hit hard by the costs of mass immigration, will be the ones paying for social welfare and integration for Ukraine’s newly arrived welfare recipients.

As the Russian-Ukrainian war drags on, the chances that Ukrainian refugees and their children, who have been living and working abroad for three years, will not return to economically devastated Ukraine are increasing. 

Read more here…

There’s been yet another major attack on Russia’s major Black Sea energy hub and port of Tuapse, after just a few days prior a drone wave had unleashed a fire so big it cold be seen from space, given the over 100-mile smoke plume that had spread over the Black Sea. 

In this latest overnight Ukrainian assault reported Monday, the drone attack killed least one person and resulted in more major fires, and now emergency crews are battling their second huge blaze at the site in under a week. There’s been a massive oil spill into coastal waters to boot.

Last week’s fires (which began with the last Thursday strike) had only just been extinguished at the Rosneft-owned refinery.

The prior drone wave had damaged residential areas, while this fresh attack has damaged a gas pipeline, a church and two schools – according to regional reports.

“Fire crews and rescue services are currently engaged at every site,” Tuapse Mayor Sergei Boyko said, confirming that several locations along the export terminal were struck.

Ukraine’s military took responsibility for the attack, as well as hits on two oil depots in nearby Crimea.

As for last week’s initial assault, Russian media says it resulted in a significant oil spill into the waters of the Black Sea, with TASS providing the following details:

• An oil product spill into the Black Sea waters occurred in Tuapse after the UAV attack carried out by Ukrainian forces on the night of April 16, according to the regional operational headquarters’ Telegram channel.
• On April 19, an oil slick was detected in the sea on a satellite image.
• The oil slick is located about one and a half miles from the port of Tuapse.
• The area of contamination of the Black Sea with oil products amounts to 10,000 square meters, according to the Telegram channel of the Krasnodar Region operational headquarters.
• Specialists have also contained the oil spill in the Tuapse River following the UAV attack on the night of April 16.
• A total of 750 meters of containment booms and five specialized oil recovery devices have been deployed, and an oil trap has been installed.

These daily and nightly cross-border attacks have however largely slipped from mainstream headline coverage, given their frequency – to the point of being ‘routine’ (a grim reality).

Rosneft’s Tuapse Oil Depot and Export Facility in Krasnodar Krai, Russia, is currently ablaze, with dozens of tanks seen burning as thick black smoke pours into the sky, following a large-scale drone attack tonight by Ukraine against oil infrastructure across Southern Russia. pic.twitter.com/ZmtlLljYiI

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) April 20, 2026

Often even when refineries or major infrastructure is hit in either country, the event barely gets coverage in Western media at this point. With the globe’s attention focused on the Iran war and blockaded Hormuz Strait, and Russia-Ukraine negotiations having long effectively collapsed, the war in eastern Europe is expected to grind on for some time to come.

Authored by Andrew Korybko,

This might be the US’ final warning before it takes drastic action to punish those who continue to reject Trump’s demands.

Under Secretary of War for Policy Elbridge Colby gave an important speech at mid-April’s Ukraine Defense Contact Group in which he urged the Europeans to step up their transition to something that he described earlier this year as “NATO 3.0”.

As was explained here, “The idea is that NATO should return to focusing on defending itself instead of overextending itself in the Indo-Pacific, West Asia, Eastern Europe, and elsewhere”, and the preceding hyperlinked analysis explains how it aligns with Trump 2.0’s policies.

Circling back to Colby’s speech, he demanded that “Europe must accelerate its assumption of primary responsibility for the conventional defense of the continent”, including arming Ukraine through the “Prioritized Ukraine Requirements List” (PURL) program in which the US plays the most significant role.

To that end, “The need to quickly rebuild European munitions stocks is paramount, as is the need to remove protectionist trade barriers that stifle the continent’s industrial potential.”

He added that “Developing a robust, capable, and integrated European defense industrial base cannot simply be an aspiration, but an absolute pre-requisite for credible deterrence and defense.”

Knowing how obsessed they are with Ukraine, Colby then threw in that “This will be critical to achieving an end to the war in Ukraine, on terms that support an enduring peace.”

He then called for more “deeds and a fundamental change in attitude” from them to “accelerate this transition to a ‘NATO 3.0’”.

Colby concluded that “If Europe rises to this moment – truly embracing primary responsibility for the defense of the continent in line with our vision of a rebalanced ‘NATO 3.0’ – we will all be stronger and more credible in defending our people and our national interests.”

He also ominously warned them midway through his speech that “I underline the criticality of [NATO stepping up to help secure the Strait of Hormuz per Trump’s expectation] for our relationship going forward.”

As was assessed here last month and was just implicitly reaffirmed by Colby, the US might speed up its planned military reprioritization away from Europe to the Americas and the Indo-Pacific if they reject Trump’s request by ending its significant PURL contributions before NATO can replace them. That would facilitate a full Russian victory in Ukraine, or at least spook the Europeans into fearing that this is inevitable if they don’t step up right after he cuts off arms again, thus getting them to do what he wants.

If some members of the bloc refuse to contribute while others do, then Trump might impose his reportedly considered pay-to-play model that was described here, which would remove “dissidents” from decision-making processes and withdraw the US’ Article 5 support from them. These punishments could also be imposed for refusing to spend 5% of GDP on defense. It’s very likely that Colby conveyed these punitive plans to his counterparts on the sidelines of the event even if he only hinted at them.

His urging of them to step up their transition to “NATO 3.0”, which is his brainchild, can therefore be considered the US’ final warning before it takes drastic action to punish those who continue to reject Trump’s demands.

Imposing the pay-to-play model is one form that this could take while cutting off arms to Ukraine once again could be another.

Both could also happen together.

It’s unclear what NATO as a whole will do, let alone its individual members, but it’s obvious that Trump is losing patience with them.