Watch President Trump’s address to Davos live here (was due to start at 0830ET – reportedly delayed until 0900ET now):

* * *

President Trump’s trip to the World Economic Forum in Davos was briefly delayed after Air Force One returned to Joint Base Andrews, Maryland, shortly after departure due to a minor electrical issue identified on the 747. Flight crews did not declare an emergency or squawk 7700, indicating the situation was precautionary.

Real-time aircraft tracking platform AirNav Radar showed the flight path of AF1 as it departed Joint Base Andrews for Davos, Switzerland, in the overnight hours. While paralleling the coast of Long Island, pilots appeared to decide to return to Joint Base Andrews due to a “minor electrical issue.”

AF1 landed safely at Andrews around 2300 ET, after about an hour and 20 minutes in the air, according to AirNav Radar.  

Air Force One Returns to Joint Base Andrews After Takeoff Due to Electrical Issue 📰

Air Force One departed Joint Base Andrews for Davos, Switzerland, but returned shortly after takeoff when the crew detected a minor electrical issue. The aircraft turned back off the U.S. East… pic.twitter.com/kNakTeJBul

— AirNav Radar (@AirNavRadar) January 21, 2026

Trump and the delegation traveling with him quickly boarded a Boeing 757, typically used by the Vice President or other cabinet members, and took off around midnight en route to Davos.

Despite the brief travel delay, Trump has arrived in Switzerland. He is expected to address the Davos elites at 0830 ET.

NOW – Trump arrives in Davos, after a “minor electrical issue” caused a delay and plane change en route. pic.twitter.com/0GRUBreMf1

— Disclose.tv (@disclosetv) January 21, 2026

The focus of Trump’s speech is likely on the domestic agenda, particularly housing, according to Goldman’s Delta One desk-head, Rich Privorotsky, who noted that overnight headlines floated executive action aimed at curbing institutional home purchases, though legal scope looks narrow.

Expectations are also building around incremental flexibility in 401k usage as part of a broader affordability push.

Late chatter about tariff rebate checks feels legally doubtful without Congressional backing.

Polling on affordability remains weak, and foreign adventurism…Greenland in particular…has not helped approval ratings.

This speech has been framed as both a reset toward domestic priorities and given the relative outperformance of domestic stocks could be an important catalyst

But, earlier, at the Davos podium, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney delivered a historic rebuke to the U.S. under President Trump, declaring the rules-based order led by America “a pleasant fiction” (reiterating his recent remarks on the shifting world order)

“I will talk today about the breaking of the world order, the end of a pleasant fiction and the beginning of a brutal reality where the geopolitics of the great powers is not subject to any constraint,” said Mr. Carney.

“Every day we’re reminded that we live in an era of great-power rivalry,” he said.

“That the rules-based order is fading. That the strong can do what they can, and the weak must suffer what they must.”

He added, “Let me be direct: We are in the midst of a rupture, not a transition.”

“This bargain no longer works.”

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney delivered a stark warning to the world’s middle powers, describing a rapidly developing world order in which powerful nations abandon diplomatic traditions in pursuit of their interests. https://t.co/RM3oz9dHo6 pic.twitter.com/WJyRZkilKW

— The Washington Post (@washingtonpost) January 21, 2026

In his speech Mr. Carney called on medium-size countries like Canada to band together to offset the power of the United States, China and Russia.

“The middle powers must act together because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu,” he said. “Great powers can afford for now to go it alone.”

Carney, who received a standing ovation, spoke not long after Mr. Trump posted an A.I. image on social media that included a map of American flags superimposed over both Canada and the United States.

While the address has been front-run as being about domestic ‘affordability’, we suspect the President will diverge from the teleprompter a little and use this as an excuse to discuss his various recent escapades around the world (and take a shot at Carney and Macron).

JPMorgan may have summed it up best: “We thought the president was going to Davos to talk about housing and credit card affordability. Suddenly now it’s become about Greenland affordability.”

The President is due to speak at 0830ET.

De Beers, the world’s largest diamond mining company, has warned of a prolonged downturn in the gem industry after cutting prices for the first time since 2024. Botswana is the epicenter of De Beers’ diamond production, and declining output alongside falling prices is set to put significant pressure on the southern African nation’s finances.

On Monday, Bloomberg News reported that De Beers cut its diamond prices for the first time in over a year, abandoning efforts to prop up the market amid faltering demand.

A combination of soft Chinese luxury spending, expanding market share for lab-grown stones, and added pressure from US tariffs on India has pressured the world’s largest diamond exporter.

The Diamond Standard Index, a benchmark price measure for investment-grade natural diamonds, has fallen by more than half since peaking in early 2022. The index is now at a record low, with data going back to 2002.

As for Botswana, the Finance Ministry warned that diamond income could fall to 10.3 billion pula ($744 million) in FY2025-26, less than half the historical average of 25.3 billion pula, and that revenues may never fully recover.

“The recovery in mineral revenue is expected to be prolonged,” the Finance Ministry wrote in a report ahead of the annual budget next month. “The shortfall is likely to persist over the medium to long term with a possibility of a non-recovery.”

Bloomberg wasn’t clear about the size of the price discount De Beers offered buyers for diamonds.

The children of Iran’s political and military elite are back in the spotlight for their opulent lifestyles amid reports that they fled the country to party in Turkish nightclubs, even as the regime’s security forces carry out its deadliest crackdown on nationwide protests in years, the New York Post reports.

The phenomenon of Iran’s affluent youth first drew international attention more than a decade ago through the Instagram account @richkidsoftehran (now with approximately 477,000 followers), which features eyebrow-raising posts of luxury cars such, watches, and designer gear.

Among the most infamous “Rich Kids of Iran” is Sasha Sobhani, the son of a former Iranian ambassador to Venezuela, who relocated to Spain in 2019 and has posted videos of his Lamborghini and other vehicles.

Another account belongs to Anashid Hoseini, who is married to the son of Iran’s former ambassador to Denmark and whose Instagram account with over 1.7 million followers regularly displays expensive bling and designer handbags.

 

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A post shared by Anashid Hoseini (@anashidhoseini)

The New York Post reports:

Amid an enforced internet blackout that allows an oppressive regime to commit “genocide under the cover of digital darkness,” according to one outraged expert, reporters from The Telegraph are said to have observed “rich Iranians” partying at a nightclub in a popular holiday hotspot on the border with Turkey.

And as the Telegraph reports:

The province of Van, in far-eastern Turkey, shares a mountainous border with Iran, making it a popular holiday destination for Iranians looking to party.

Despite the chaos at home – where more than two weeks of protests had been halted by deadly force and a total communications blackout – The Telegraph witnessed elite Iranians gathering to drink, socialise and party in Van city.

Locals said that in recent days, wealthy Iranians – some said to support the Islamic regime – had arrived in Turkey to escape the political instability, fearing the protesters might turn on them as well.

“They left Iran for now because they were worried about staying there. Here, they can feel safe. They have made a lot of money from their businesses in Iran, and then they come here to spend it,” one Iranian said of the partygoers. 

“Imagine if, in your country, thousands of people had been killed. Would you have the heart to go out dancing in a bar?” another Iranian told the outlet. 

The renewed attention on Iran’s showdy elites has come into focus as Iranian authorities have now acknowledged that it’s brutal crackdown on protesters have resulted in significant casualties.

In a public address, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei conceded that “several thousand” Iranians died in the violence, which he unsurprisingly attributed to foreign-backed “rioters” and “terrorists” incited by President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

An unnamed Iranian official cited by Reuters estimated the verified death toll at least 5,000, including roughly 500 security personnel. Independent monitoring groups face challenges due to a near-total internet blackout, but the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency (HRANA) has confirmed more than 3,900 deaths, while other activist and medical sources inside Iran have cited figures ranging from 12,000 to 20,000 protester fatalities, according to CBS News.

Trump has repeatedly condemned the crackdown, urging protesters to continue their efforts and stating that “help is on its way.” The president has warned Tehran of “very strong action”—potentially including military measures—should executions of detained protesters proceed or the violence persist. The White House has said that all options remain under consideration, though to the eternal chagrin of warmongers like Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), recent assessments suggest a possible deescalation.

Will the Telegraph cover ‘rich kids of Israel’ partying it up while bombs drop on Gaza?

Via The Last Refuge,

Germany has a severe electricity shortage and cost problem, and it’s getting worse.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz recently made the admission that shutting down the German nuclear power reactors was a “severe strategic mistake.”

“To have acceptable market prices for energy production again, we would have to permanently subsidize energy prices from the federal budget,” Merz said, adding:

“We can’t do this in the long run.”

“So, we are now undertaking the most expensive energy transition in the entire world,” Merz said with pronounced frustration.

“I know of no other country that makes things so expensive and difficult as Germany.”

Merz’s government aims to solicit bids to build 8 gigawatts of new gas-fired power plants this year with the goal of having them online by 2031.

Another 4 gigawatts of capacity are foreseen for lower-carbon energy sources or gas plants that can switch to hydrogen more quickly.

Merz said on industry power price cuts that “the European Commission will also approve the combination of several options.”

Keep in mind, Germany represents the largest contributing economy in the European Union. 

The German industrial sector is the backbone of the European economic model.

All of these realities paint a very tenuous picture for the economic future in Europe, when combined with a new trade relationship with the USA, increasingly cheap goods dumped into the EU by China and the EU promising to continue spending on the war effort in Ukraine against Russia.

Latvia’s central bank governor, Martins Kazaks, has warned European leaders against downplaying the danger posed by Russia, describing in a fresh interview the European Union is already “at war” with Moscow and must be ready for further escalation, particularly in its financial systems.

This is raising eyebrows at the Kremlin, but many Russian officials might actually agree with this grim assessment: “It’s naive to think that we are not at war” with Russia, Kazaks told the Financial Times.

He cited as examples of an active war situation the ongoing cyberattacks on Europe, alleged acts of sabotage targeting infrastructure in the Baltic Sea, as well as drone violations of Danish and other EU airspace – the latter which has involved plenty of speculation and accusations leveled among EU officials, but no final or clear proof of links to Russia or its intelligence services.

Kazaks acknowledged that as of yet, the conflict connected to Ukraine is not being fought directly on EU soil, but he stressed “we need to be resilient to deal with that.”

In response, Latvia’s central bank has intensified contingency planning in recent years, prioritizing uninterrupted access to cash and digital payments during emergencies and the ability to carry out offline card transactions for essential purchases. On this Kazāks emphasized, “We are in many cases best in the class.”

He further cautioned that an armed conflict involving a eurozone member could trigger “financial stability issues” – but ironically he claimed that more and constant European/NATO support to Kiev would make these risks “marginal”, also as the EU has newly sought to greatly bolster its own defensive capabilities.

This is in line with his own government’s consistently hawkish anti-Moscow stance, along with the other tiny (but loud) Baltic and former Soviet satellite states.

We can say at the very least that Russia-NATO proxy war has been in full swing for quite a while now. As a reminder, the world just reached the following tragic milestone:

Russia’s full-fledged war against Ukraine has already lasted longer than the Soviet fight against Nazi Germany in World War II—as discussed in Steve Gutterman’s RFE/RL. “None of the conditions for a final resolution of the conflict are in place,” Ruth Deyermond of King’s College London told Gutterman for his analysis entitled “Will Russia’s War Against Ukraine End In 2026?” Deyermond believes neither Ukraine nor Russia are “in a position to achieve a conclusive victory on the battlefield” or to collapse under pressure. According to Deyermond, the main obstacle to peace is Moscow’s stance: “Russia… seems to have no interest in an end to the fighting, let alone the war,” she says, while CSIS analyst Mark Cancian argues the Russians’ “stated goals are totally unacceptable” and their intransigence “stems from their belief that they are winning.” At best, a cease-fire or “temporarily frozen conflict” is possible so long as Putin’s presidency remains tied to the war, according to Crisis Group’s Olga Oliker.

But the above doesn’t address the other pressing question: can Ukraine and its dwindling and fatigued armed forces last? While the West believes it is weakening Russia, there is little doubt that Ukraine is being fast drained and weakened to the brink of collapse. It is being propped up by the Western powers, financially, militarily, and really on almost every level.

For example, on the pressing issue of the country’s collapsing power infrastructure, regional media warns amid rolling blackouts, power outages could begin to last over 16 hours a day under newly proposed emergency schedules. The country can’t get parts fast enough to replace damaged substations, and this is an area where no amount of external support can keep up, ultimately.

Authored by Ian Proud,

The ugly truth is that an end of the Ukraine war may have as devastating economic and political consequences for Europe as its continuance…

Ukraine already faces a $63 billion U.S. dollar funding shortfall in 2026 and I would be surprised if this figure doesn’t increase if the war continues. Ukraine’s massive fiscal splurge is driven by two factors

• The enormous cost of maintaining a standing army of almost one million people;

• The vast expense of importing weapons from the west to fight the war.

Weapon purchases are not sources of productive investment as they are literally burned in the heat of battle.

The same, of course, is true for Russia.

Both countries saw reducing economic growth in 2025, with Ukraine’s at 2.1% and 1.5%.

And, western pundits would point to this as evidence that Ukraine’s economy is performing better.

But the opposite is true.

Russia’s economy is around twelve times larger than Ukraine’s nominally and just over ten times larger when you look at GDP using purchasing power parity.

You can see this in the defence spending numbers.

Russia spent a record $143 billion on defence in 2025 compared to around $60 billion for Ukraine, so around 2.3 times higher. Yet, Russian defence spending amounted to just 6.3% of its GDP whereas for Ukraine it was 31.7%. So, massive spending on defence is a much less pivotal issue for Russia in terms of its economic fortunes.

Defence spending represents a far smaller proportion of total economic activity than it does for Ukraine. And Russia can afford to pay for its defence needs with its own finances, while Ukraine is entirely dependent on money from western donors to keep the war going.

Despite the massive cost of war, Russia ran a fiscal deficit of just 1.7% of GDP in 2025.

That is still well below the EU fiscal rule of 3% of GDP with some countries like France and Poland having deficits at or more than double that figure.

Ukraine’s fiscal deficit on the other hand was around 20% of GDP.

That gap had to be filled by foreign funding as it has debt of 107% of GDP and is cut off from foreign lending.

So, hence the EU stepping up with a loan of 90 billion Euros, two thirds of which is earmarked for defence.

Russia on the other hand has debt of around 15% of GDP and doesn’t really need to borrow heavily to keep its war effort afloat. By the way, 15% of GDP is far lower than the U.S. or any European nation, many of which, like Ukraine, have debt levels of over 100% of GDP.

Ukraine is defending itself with money Europe doesn’t have.

Despite the shock of sanctions, Russia doesn’t have to break the bank nor boost its lending significantly.

This also means that when the war eventually ends, Russia will be able to make the economic transition back to peace in a less painless way.

Russia will be under no pressure to impose massive cuts to defence spending to live within its means and can instead do so gradually.

Ukraine on the other hand faces a massive financial cliff edge when the war ends.

Ukrainian economic growth according to the OECD is set to fall further to 1.7% in 2027 if the war continues.

And that assumes continued large injections of capital from outside countries. In 2025, Ukrainian defence spending made up 31.1% of Ukrainian GDP, and two thirds of state budgetary expenditure. None of that spending goes into improving Ukraine’s weak economy.

With all of the support that it receives, Ukraine’s GDP in 2025 amounted to just under $210 billion according to the IMF.

Bear in mind here that Ukraine received $52.4 billion in external financing in 2025, or around one quarter of its GDP at the end of the year.

Take away foreign funding and Ukraine suddenly sees its economy shrink by over 20%.

Or, put it another way, take away the war and Ukraine sees its economy shrink by over 20%.

Russia simply does not face the same problem.

Rather, an end to the war may help Russia to get inflation – perhaps its biggest economic challenge – under control as economic activity returns to its normal rhythm.

But still the question arises, how come Ukraine has grown so little when it received so much foreign funding?

One big reason is that Ukraine recorded a trade deficit of $30 billion over the same period, a record according to the National Bank of Ukraine.

So, $52 billion in foreign money came into Ukraine during the year and $30 billion went straight back out again.

Because Ukraine’s massive trade deficit is fuelled by two things.

• First, a huge increase in the import of weapons from western suppliers which have doubled since 2022, not least as they are no longer being provided free of charge.

• Second, Ukraine has increased its imports of natural resources, in particular a massive increase in gas imports, because domestic production has been hit hard by the war. Coal is another area, as Russia has swallowed up important coal mines in the Donbas.

Not all of that deficit in trade will be recoverable even after the war ends, even if Ukraine was able to reduce the overall size of its trade deficit.

By comparison, Russia’s surplus of trade in goods was already at over $100 billion by October 2025, although the overall trade picture is narrower, at around $36 billion because of a significant deficit in services trade, including from large numbers of Russians who have moved overseas since the war started.

An end to the war, if anything, may allow Russia’s trade surpluses to grow further. A future relaxation on the import of natural resources into Europe could mean that Russia benefited from already increased trade with Asia and renewed trade with Europe.

In any case, the consistent surpluses that Russia pulls in both help shore up economic growth and foreign exchange reserves, which in 2025 grew by over $135 billion to a whopping $734 billion.

And just to be clear, Russia put their reserve funds almost completely into gold which now stand at over $310 billion.

One big reason for Russia storing its reserves in gold is to keep them clear of the stealing hands of western bureaucrats, who froze around $300 billion in reserves at the start of the war.

This means that Russia has a surplus of $434 billion in foreign exchange reserves which is almost completely insulated from western expropriation. The $10 billion rise in foreign currency reserves in 2025 was undoubtedly caused by an accumulation of reserves in non-dollar, Euro and sterling currencies, suggesting the move to greater trade in Chinese Yuan and Indian rupees.

An end to the war may at some point lead to the unfreezing of immobilised Russian assets in the U.S., Europe and Japan.

Ukraine’s reserve position is also comparatively strong, at $57.3 billion at the start of 2026, a record figure. However, that rise is completely down to inflows of foreign capital to fund the war effort. An end to the war would likely shrink Ukraine’s reserves as its stubborn trade deficit was not being offset by foreign inflows of funds as they had been during war.

But it’s the sudden and shocking loss of foreign funding that accompanies an end to the war which will cause Ukraine’s economy to shrink dramatically.

But fear not, Europe is determined that Ukraine maintain an army of 800,000 personnel when the war ends. However, this seems more about economic survival than about security.

Ukraine would not be able to pay for such as large army with its own money, as it doesn’t have any money. So, once again, Europe will be forced to step in to meet Ukraine’s financing needs to pay the salaries of soldiers who are no longer in war fighting mode.

This will lead to debt and taxes rising in Europe, according to a recent Kiel Institute study. But it will also lead to a loss of business for European defence firms. Because peace time will inevitably mean a sharp drop in the munitions and military material being burned on a daily basis in the fog of war.

Two thirds of the EU’s recently 90 billion Euro loan to Ukraine will be spent on military support, including weaponry. That has sparked an argument between Germany and France over a proposed ‘buy European’ clause, with France wanting to prevent Ukrainian purchases of U.S. equipment. Perhaps with one eye on the future, the French in typical fashion, are trying to ensure that their firms get a decent share of what could amount to dwindling Ukrainian orders for weapons.

A bit like the French army, Europe is reversing itself inevitably into economic defeat when the war ends.

Obligated to keep an economically failed Ukraine on life support.

Having to increase its debt and taxes to support bad foreign policy decisions it has been taking since 2014.

Trying to boost its defence industrial complex but losing business with the end of war.

For the mainstream political parties in Europe, this adds to the trend of them heading towards electoral Armageddon when they start putting themselves to the polls from 2027 onward.

Until then, they are stuck, knowing that continuing the war will kill them electorally, and knowing that ending the war will too.

To quote my old British soldier dad, they are like the mythical oozlum bird, continually going round in circles until they disappear up their own backsides.

Authored by Pepe Escobar,

The whole planet is somehow convulsed by neo-Caligula’s latest scam: because he did not get his “peace” Nobel from Norway, part of his megalomanic narcissist revenge is to bag Greenland from Denmark (in Empire-speak, who cares? These Scandinavians are all the same anyway).

In neo-Caligula’s own words: “The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland.”

That seals the Empire of Chaos completely morphed into the Empire of Plunder and now the Empire of Permanent Strikes.

Assorted Euro-chihuahuas dared to dispatch a tiny bunch of dog-sled conductors to defend Greenland from neo-Caligula. To no avail. They were instantly hit with tariffs. The strike remains in effect until the “complete and total purchase” of Greenland.

Euro-chihuahuas – following the Global South – may have finally woken up to the new paradigm: Strike Geopolitics.

Neo-Caligula did not get regime change in Caracas – and his oil mirage was refuted even by US energy majors. He did not get regime change in Tehran – even if CIA, Mossad and assorted NGOs worked full time to deliver.

So Plan C is Greenland, essential for imperial lebensraum purposes, as collateral for the unpayable $38 trillion – and rising – debt.

By all means that does not imply ditching the Iran obsession. The USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier is moving into a position in the Sea of Oman/Persian Gulf where it would be able to strike Iran before the end of the week. All attack scenarios remain in place.

Assuming all hell breaks loose, this may become an even more humiliating replay of the 12-day war in June last year, which the death cult in West Asia spent as much as 14 months planning.

The 12-day war not only failed as a regime change op; it engendered a sample of Iranian retaliation so hardcore that Tel Aviv still has not recovered. Tehran has been explicit, over and over again, that the same fate awaits neo-Caligula’s forces in Iran and across the Gulf in case of renewed strikes.

Why the regime change obsession endures

As for the equally, miserably failed regime change op on Iran these past few weeks, it featured on the forefront the pathetic Clown Prince Reza Pahlavi, safely ensconced in Maryland, massively plugged by US media as a “unifying political figure” capable of reassessing the “lived catastrophe of clerical rule”.

Neo-Caligula was too busy to care about these ideological niceties. What he wanted was to accelerate the proceedings by – what else – applying Empire of Permanent Strikes logic: bombing Iran.

Diversionist spin, predictably, went ballistic. The death cult in West Asia may have asked Moscow to tell Tehran that they would not strike if Iran did not strike first. As if Tehran – and Moscow – could trust anything coming from Tel Aviv.

The Gulfie crowd – Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and Oman – may have asked neo-Caligula not to strike, because that would have set the whole Gulf on fire and generate “grave blowback”.

The real deal – once again – was TACO. There was simply no gamed US strike scenario that would have allowed lightning quick regime change, the only acceptable outcome. Thus back to bagging Greenland.

It took only a few days to unmask the massive propaganda campaign across NATOstan about “mass casualties” among Iran protesters.

The – fake – figures came from the Center for Human Rights in Iran, located in, where else, New York, and financed by the CIA-infested National Endowment for Democracy (NED) in Washington and other assorted disinformation entities.

The list of reasons for urgent regime change in Iran though remains off the charts, featuring, among others, these four key elements:

1. Tehran must ditch the Axis of Resistance across West Asia supporting Palestine.

2. Because Iran is at the privileged crossroads of trade/energy connectivity corridors in Eurasia, both its connections with the
   International North–South Transportation Corridor (INSTC) and China’s New Silk Roads (BRI) must be severed. That means blowing up from the inside organic intra-BRICS cooperation between Russia, Iran, India and China.

3. As over 90% of Iranian oil exports go to China – and are settled in yuan – that’s a serious threat to the petrodollar: the ultimate anathema. That’s where in Empire of Permanent Strikes terms, Iran aligns with Venezuela. It’s our – petrodollar – way or the highway.

4. The staying power of the never-ending dream of an Iran under the Shah remix – complete with a Shah-style SAVAK secret police; cozy Mossad ties to rein in those Arab barbarians; and a sprawling CIA-run net of surveillance hubs targeting both Russia and China.

How to counter a “regime-change war”

Tehran is not spooked by sanctions – as it has endured over 6,000 of them over four decades, designed to totally strangle its economy and even bring oil exports, in imperial terminology, down “to zero”.

Even under maximum pressure, Iran was capable of building the most extensive industrial base across West Asia; relentlessly invested in self-sufficiency and state of the art military hardware; joined the SCO in 2023 and BRICS in 2024; and for all practical purposes developed a top Global South knowledge economy.

Tsunamis of – digital – ink have been spent on why China has not properly helped Iran so far against imperial maximum pressure, for instance supporting Tehran against the speculative attacks on the rial. That would have cost Beijing almost nothing – compared to its level of foreign reserves.

The speculative attack on the rial was arguably the essential trigger of the protests across Iran. It’s essential to remember that hunger salaries were a key contributor to the collapse of Syria.

It’s up to Beijing to – diplomatically – answer this uncomfortable question. The spirit of BRICS Plus – call it Bandung 1955 Plus – may not survive when we all know this current world war is essentially about resources and finance, which need to be mobilized and properly deployed.

And that brings us to China’s leadership seriously evaluating whether it’s worth to remain a sort of larger version of Germany: embryonically self-centered; harboring fear; and fundamentally selfish in economic and financial terms. The – auspicious – alternative is for China to create sufficiently sized credit facilities within BRICS to an array of friendly nations.

Whatever happens next, it’s clear that the Empire of Permanent Strikes not only will remain “actively hostile” to a multipolar, multi-nodal world; the hostility will be marinated in a toxic sludge of anger and revenge, and subordinated to the ultimate, panic fear: the Empire’s slowly but surely, inexorable expulsion from Eurasia.

Cue to White House Special Representative Witkoff – the real estate Bismarck – enouncing the imperial diktats to Iran:

1. Stop enriching uranium. Out of the question,

2. Reduce missile stockpiles. Out of the question.

3. Reduce approximately 2000 kg of enriched nuclear material (3.67–60 %). That might be negotiated.

4. Stop supporting “regional proxies” – as in the Axis of Resistance. Out of the question.

Tehran will never bow down to the diktats. But even if it did, the – promised – imperial reward would be the lifting of sanctions (the US Congress will never do it) and a “return to the international community”. Iran is already part of the international community at the UN and inside BRICS, SCO and the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU), among other institutions.

So the neo-Caligula regime change obsession – in fact mirrored as a NATOstan obsession – will keep ruling. Tehran is not intimidated. Cue to the strategic advisor to Iran’s Parliament Speaker, Mahdi Mohammadi:

“We know that we are facing a regime-change war in which the only way to achieve victory is to make credible the threat that, during the 12-day war, although it was ready, did not get the opportunity to be carried out: a geographically expansive war of attrition, focused on the Persian Gulf energy markets, on the basis of steadily increasing missile firepower, lasting at least several months.”

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

A man styling himself “biz_dave” on Threads claims to have orchestrated what can only be described as the Resistance’s most feather-brained gambit yet: training crows to pilfer red baseball caps in service of opposing President Donald Trump. Naturally, this has elevated him to something approaching sainthood among the online Resistance.

Dave claimed that the operation involved conditioning a murder of crows – a term that has never seemed more apt – to recognize a feeding station and subsequently engage in aerial larceny against red headwear. The sad man’s admirers have dubbed the result an “anti-MAGA flying army,” a phrase that does more to explain the current state of progressive activism than any think-piece possibly could, the Daily Star reports.

Dave has meticulously chronicled his ornithological jihad on Threads, offering videos, photographs, and a veritable field manual for those inspired to conscript their own backyard fauna into the culture wars. He began with the fundamentals of corvid care: “The crows will eat lots of things, but I recommend sticking to peanuts, chicken scraps, mealworms, and dog kibble.” One pictures him at the grocery store, carefully selecting provisions for his feathered shock troops.

View on Threads

View on Threads

View on Threads

View on Threads

Dave confessed that the true obstacle was less philosophical than practical.

“Getting the crows to come regularly to the feeding place took the longest. That was about a 4-month endeavor,” he claimed. Four months – roughly the length of time required to master a foreign language or complete a professional certification – devoted instead to establishing diplomatic relations with local scavengers. Following a reliable peanut subsidy and months of patient courtship, the birds apparently agreed to join the cause. “Once they were coming regularly, it was only about three months to get them to the hat removal stage,” Dave said, according to the Daily Star.

As is customary with such internet crusades, the project eventually metastasized from quirky stunt into moral imperative. Dave solemnly declared his political awakening: “I tried to be centrist for a long time but I no longer believe that is a moral option.” Centrism having been ruled out, training crows to harass strangers was evidently the next logical step.

Even Reddit – not typically a bastion of leftwing restraint – produced some skeptics.

“OK, so I love this for the people wearing those red hats, but this would absolutely not be good for the crows,” one user noted.

Another observed: “I really don’t like pulling wild animals into stupid human shit like this.”

A third commenter offered a tactical suggestion with a certain elemental appeal: “Now train it to poop on the hat.“

After attempting to jail and assassinate Trump, training crows is all the anti-MAGA crusaders have left.

Authored by Naziya Alvi Rahman via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

The Australian Parliament has passed two new bills that will set up a national gun buyback scheme, and attempt to combat anti-Semitism and hate speech in response to the Bondi terror attack.

In Australia’s lower house, the gun buyback bill passed 96 to 45 with the Liberal-National Coalition opposing, while the hate and extremism-focused bill passed with amendments, securing 116 votes to just seven.

Later on the evening of Jan. 20, both bills made it through the Senate.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese wrote on X that the government was “standing against hate and strengthening” national security.

New Gun Buyback Passes Lower House After 3 Hours

The Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Firearms and Customs Laws) Bill 2026 introduces not only the national gun buyback scheme, but new restrictions around background checks, the sale of firearm types, and new offences relating to accessing information online about firearms, ammunition, and accessories.

Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke told parliament that had such measures been in place earlier, the Bondi Beach attackers would not have been able to legally obtain weapons.

The father of the terrorist duo, Sajid Akram, owned six firearms, despite his son being interviewed and cleared by intelligence agencies over concerns of radicalisation.

The bill was debated for close to three hours, with several MPs proposing amendments.

Independent MP Zali Steggall sought to ensure firearms background checks explicitly included “criminal history or proceedings relating to domestic violence or AVOs issued in local courts.”

Bob Katter, the federal MP of Kennedy, moved an amendment that would automatically revoke a firearm licence for anyone placed on an ASIO watchlist. That amendment was defeated, 88 votes to 13.

Katter, who opposed the broader reforms, blamed the Bondi attack on failures in the immigration system and argued the legislation undermined gun ownership.

“If they get their way, then the only people that will have guns are the people in uniforms. And we know what sort of society that is, that the only people that have guns are the people in uniforms,” he said.

Nationals Leader Warns Gun Control a Diversion From Real Issue

Nationals leader David Littleproud opposed the bill, describing it as a diversion.

“This is nothing more than a cheap political diversion, a cheap political diversion that is not facing up to the real problem in this country, which is radical Islamists,” Littleproud said.

He argued the Bondi attack reflected failures in enforcement rather than licensing.

“The fact is, the authorities did not act and take away the licence and the weapons as they should have,” he said.

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese defended the reforms, stressing they were not aimed at lawful firearm owners.

“This legislation is not about targeting farmers. It’s not about competitive shooters. It’s not about … law-abiding firearm owners,” he said.

“The federal bill will establish a national gun buyback scheme to purchase surplus, newly banned and illegal firearms. The gun buybacks scheme is based on the same scheme that was introduced under John Howard, Tim Fischer and Kim Beazley, three leaders who all stood up at an important moment for Australia.”

Victims Only Need to Feel Fear Under New Hate Laws

The Combatting Antisemitism, Hate and Extremism (Criminal and Migration Laws) Bill 2026 also passed with amendments from the opposition.

The legislation introduces a new federal offence making it illegal to publicly promote or incite racial hatred where the conduct would cause a reasonable person to feel intimidated, harassed or fearful of violence.

The offence applies to speech, symbols, gestures and online communication targeting people “because of the race, colour or national or ethnic origin of the target.”

The law does not require proof that hatred was actually generated or that a victim felt fear—only that the conduct itself would reasonably cause intimidation or fear.

Maximum penalties of up to five years’ imprisonment apply, with higher penalties for aggravated offences, including cases involving religious officials or attempts to radicalise children. A narrow defence applies where speech or writing consists solely of quoting religious texts for teaching or discussion.

Opposition Leader Sussan Ley confirmed Liberal MPs supported the amended bill.

“In the national interest, the Liberal party has today stepped up to fix legislation that the Albanese government badly mishandled,” Ley said in a statement issued after passing of the bill.

Ley said the amendments narrowed the bill’s scope to anti-Semitism and Islamic extremism, ensured new powers focused on serious criminal conduct, and required consultation with the opposition before extremist organisations could be listed or de-listed.

Crossbench Concerns About Bill’s Scope and Speed

Independent Teal MP Allegra Spender criticised both major parties for removing anti-vilification provisions from the bill, saying those measures had been sought by Jewish community groups and the government’s anti-Semitism envoy.

“My question is, what are the mechanisms you are saying that we can use now because you have rejected something that the Jewish community has been calling for a long time,” she said.

Spender warned that the current law was not specific enough, arguing Muslim and other migrant groups could be made to feel “suspect by association by failing to confront hateful individuals and ideologies directly.”

“We drift towards a culture of guilt by association rather than accountability,” she said.

Independent MP Helen Haines also raised concerns about the legislative process.

“The inquiry into this bill was only tabled this morning,” she said. “But the consequence of haste, as a legislator, is the missed opportunity to carefully consider and improve this significant legislation.”

United States Antimony Corporation announced this morning that it has completed the acquisition of a fully operational critical minerals flotation facility in Radersburg, Montana, strengthening the company’s domestic processing footprint for antimony and other strategic minerals. As a reminder and as we noted late last year, UAMY operates the only two antimony smelters in North America.

The company said it closed on the $4.75 million all-cash purchase of the property and equipment on January 16, 2026. The Radersburg facility, located between Helena and Bozeman, sits within roughly 250 miles of US Antimony’s Thompson Falls smelter, which is currently undergoing a major expansion and modernization that remains on track for completion and commissioning in February.

According to the company’s press release, the Radersburg Mill is equipped with both gravity and flotation circuits, allowing it to concentrate a wide range of minerals, including stibnite, the primary ore mineral for antimony, as well as gold, silver, copper, tungsten, and other metals. The facility includes crushing and grinding circuits, slurry-based recovery systems, and tailings storage ponds with water recycling capabilities.

Gravity concentration equipment at the site has historically been used to produce high-grade gold concentrates, while the flotation circuits can be tailored with specific reagents to recover various metals. The company noted the mill has previously processed gold, silver, copper, lead, and zinc, and could be adapted to concentrate cobalt, tungsten, platinum group metals, rare earth elements, and other critical minerals.

In addition to the purchase price, US Antimony has budgeted approximately $2 million for future capital improvements to enhance specific equipment at the facility.

Commenting on the acquisition, Chairman and CEO Gary C. Evans said the flotation mill is a necessary link in the company’s production chain. “In order for us to concentrate our raw ore from both Alaska and Montana, we must first utilize a modern flotation mill to properly concentrate the material to a high enough level that we can then feed the various furnaces located in our smelters in order to produce mil-spec antimony trisulfide,” Evans said.

He added that owning the Radersburg facility outright provides greater operational control compared with leasing. US Antimony previously leased a similar mill in Philipsburg, Montana, but canceled that lease in September 2025 after negotiations with the owners became difficult. “Making necessary capital improvements to a leased facility versus one that we control 100% made this an easy decision,” Evans said.

Evans described the acquisition as another step in reinforcing the company’s vertically integrated model. “This transaction announced today is another ‘leg on our stool’ as a fully integrated antimony company in order to maximize profitability, control our destiny, and meet the ever-growing needs of our customers whether they be industrial or the federal government,” he said.

United States Antimony announced in Q4 last year that it had received a $10 million delivery order under its newly signed indefinite delivery, indefinite quantity sole-source contract with the US Defense Logistics Agency. The order covered 315,000 lbs. of antimony metal ingots, which will be used to replenish the US National Defense Stockpile.

Antimony, a critical mineral which is used in munitions, batteries, flame retardants, and military-grade compounds, has been flagged by defense officials as a vulnerability in the U.S. industrial base.

The Trump administration has made domestic supply-chain resilience a policy priority. Trump has taken a series of executive and policy actions aimed at securing U.S. access to critical minerals, citing national security and economic independence.

Recall, last year we laid out all the winners in the coming critical mineral scramble in “The Coming Rare Earth Revolution And How To Profit: All You Need To Know About The “Ex-China Supply Chain.” Those who put on the recommended baskets are currently enjoying high double-digit gains.