As news began breaking very early Monday of President Trump’s scathing letter to Norway over the country’s failure to award him the Nobel Peace Prize, some pundits and journalists immediately questioned whether it is real.

But confirmation came soon after. In the letter addressed to Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Store, Trump explained that he no longer feels obligated to focus exclusively on peace, while repeating his intent for US control over Greenland. In essence he lays out that no Nobel might turn into no Greenland for Europe (as Denmark exercises control over the resource-rich autonomous territory).

“Dear Jonas: Since your country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for stopping 8 wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of peace, although it will always be dominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States,” the US President wrote.

Such is an example of kind of over the top and trolling-style rhetoric in the letter which has given people pause, questioning its authenticity. 

“Denmark cannot protect this land from Russia or China… The world is not secure unless we have complete and total control of Greenland,” he added.

As for whether Trump indeed wrote it, and concerning the bombastic letter’s authenticity, Forbes has noted that “According to PBS Newshour’s Nick Schifrin, who first reported on the matter, the letter has been forwarded by the National Security Council staff to multiple European ambassadors in Washington.”

The President also in the letter takes the opportunity to bash Denmark, saying it cannot protect Greenland from Russia or China, and again questioned its legal rights to Greenland: “There are no written documents; it’s only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there, also.”

The message in full, as first reported by a PBS correspondent:

Norway’s PM Store has since explained that letter came in response to a joint message he had earlier sent to Trump together with Finnish President Alexander Stubb, rejecting White House plans to impose higher tariffs on Scandinavian countries. Other leading EU countries have also complained and are pushing back publicly:

MERZ: GERMANY, EU ALLIES DETERMINED TO AVOID TARIFF ESCALATION

“We pointed out the need to de-escalate the exchange and requested a phone call between President Trump, President Stubb and myself,” Store said, and reiterated Norway’s stance on Greenland is unchanged.

Authored by Steve Watson via Modernity.news,

Books featuring graphic nudity and pushing contested LGBTQ+ ideologies are currently brazenly displayed in a children’s reading room at London’s Young V&A museum, sparking outrage from parents who see it as a direct threat to childhood innocence.

One visitor branded the material “a useful tool for paedos to groom children,” highlighting the dangerous normalization of adult themes in spaces meant for kids.

The setup, in the heart of Bethnal Green, East London, mixes classics like The Gruffalo and Peter Pan with titles that expose young eyes to naked adults and advanced sexual concepts. The museum, chaired by Keir Starmer’s chief economic adviser Minouche Shafik and run by former Labour MP Sir Tristram Hunt defends the choices as “age appropriate,” but critics aren’t buying it.

‘Willies aren’t silly’, V&A tells children in book blasted as ‘a tool for paedos’ https://t.co/gHOAZSqQK8

— Daily Mail (@DailyMail) January 18, 2026

The Daily Mail notes that one picture book, It Isn’t Rude To Be Nude, sits prominently at the front of the room, featuring a drawing of a naked man sprawled across its opening pages. Other illustrations include nude adults with exposed genitalia, accompanied by captions like “willies aren’t silly” next to drawings of penises.

The cover boldly states “contains nakedness – and that’s OK!” Images from the book’s interior include pages of diverse bums and nipples with messages like “Everyone has a bum” and “Nipples are normal.”

Parents visiting the museum expressed shock. One said: “Kids should not tolerate grown men in the nude around them. I was shocked to see it on display at a museum aimed at young kids. An essential part of safeguarding is to alert parents or teachers when strangers even discuss the subject of intimate areas, never mind actually showing them to kids, and here is this book, and a few others in the library, implying to kids that having nude strangers around you is acceptable.”

Another parent described having to “dodge” the “pornographic” books to prevent their toddler from spotting them, calling the selection “psychological warfare” on children.

The controversy extends to another title, Rainbow Revolutionaries, 50 LGBTQ+ People Who Made History, a graphic novel celebrating drag queens and transgender figures while presenting disputed trans theories as fact.

Its glossary defines terms for kids like “gender affirmation surgery” as “surgery that helps trans people feel more comfortable in their body,” “polyamorous: when someone openly has multiple partners at the same time,” and “asexual: not having any or having very low desire for sex.” It also details flags for transgender, pansexual, and gender-queer identities.

Kate Barker, CEO of the charity LGB Alliance, urged “This is grooming in plain sight: an egregious safeguarding failure and the latest example of organisations using the rainbow flag to cloak the sexualisation of children. After recent scandals like Pride in Surrey [a festival whose founder was jailed for child rape], ordinary LGB people are sick of being associated with the TQ+ and their Trojan Horse tactics of using gay rights to gain legitimacy for their sinister goals.”

Shadow equalities secretary Claire Coutinho added: “It is madness that the children’s section of the V&A bans children from wearing costumes but allows them to read about what it means to be ‘polyamorous’ or ‘pansexual’. Cartoons of naked adults saying it ‘isn’t rude to be nude’ are an obvious safeguarding risk.”

Other politically charged books in the mix include Act Now – Kids Fight Climate Change and Rise Up, which spotlight young environmental activists—further injecting leftist agendas into playtime.

A V&A spokesman responded: “The reading room at Young V&A is a free drop-in space for families to enjoy spending time reading together. All the books available have been reviewed by our staff to ensure they are age appropriate and grown-ups can choose which books they read with their children.”

This U.K. debacle mirrors a pattern of leftist efforts to sexualize children that’s plagued the U.S. for years.

As these institutions, often led by elitist ‘progressives’, prioritize ideology over innocence, the real victims are the kids. Safeguarding childhood means rejecting this grooming playbook outright—parents and policymakers must demand accountability to preserve freedom from such manipulative overreach.

Your support is crucial in helping us defeat mass censorship. Please consider donating via Locals or check out our unique merch. Follow us on X @ModernityNews.

Germany – whose chancellor just admitted they made a ‘serious strategic mistake‘ chasing green unicorns when they shut down their nuclear plants – has just forced Lexus to deactivate the remote start feature which pre-warms an owner’s car so they don’t freeze their nethers off first thing in the morning in the winter.

Toyota spokesman Ralph Müller confirmed the measure, telling BILD that the pre-heating feature, which was previously free via MyToyota or Lexus Link Plus apps – is now deactivated on all combustine-engine vehicles across the country, as legislators consider remote engine warm-up “unnecessary running” that creates “avoidable exhaust pollution.” 

What’s more, Toyota has used remote access to disable the function to comply with the order, protecting owners from potential penalties by German authoritarian regulatory enforcers. The feature is still available on pure EVs and plug-in hybrids, which allows for cabin heating without starting the combustion engine. 

🇩🇪‼️🚨 BIG BROTHER: German authorities forced Lexus to turn off the parking heating in Lexus cars! Just when it got cold and people needed it!

Imagine you bought a car and paid for specific features, but the government just turns it off because it’s NOT GREEN!

I’m not joking,… pic.twitter.com/x3wMmwVCNu

— Lord Bebo (@MyLordBebo) January 15, 2026

As Gadget Review notes further, Car idling bans stem from Germany’s broader assault on fossil fuel heating systems.

This crackdown connects to Germany’s Building Energy Act, requiring 65% renewable energy in new heating systems by 2024. The law aims to phase out gas and oil heating by 2045, but critics highlight massive costs and slow adoption rates—gas still heats 56% of Germany’s 43 million apartments.

Coalition plans to reform the controversial “heating law” by February 2026 promise more flexibility and technology openness. But car owners are collateral damage in this green transition, where authorities apparently can’t distinguish between heating a building and de-icing a windshield.

Your luxury car just became the latest battlefield in Europe’s climate wars, where bureaucrats decide which buttons work in your own vehicle. The real question isn’t whether remote start causes pollution—it’s whether you still own the features you bought.

Authored by Paul Craig Roberts,

In a democracy, the government in office cannot ban an opposing candidate from running on the grounds that the candidate would win and take the place of the current government.

But that is what President Macron has done to Marine Le Pen.

Le Pen heads the largest political party in France.

She has been banned by a French court from holding office for five years.

This prevents her from competing in the 2027 presidential election, where she has long been considered to be the leading candidate.

The excuse used by the French government to frustrate the popular will is that Le Pen was convicted of “misappropriating EU funds.”

She was convicted of using money intended for her European Union staff for her French staff.

Money, of course, is fungible, and the orchestrated charge succeeded only because the establishment presstitutes hyped it over and over.

Marine Le Pen is a controversial figure with the French establishment because she represents ethnic French nationalism, not the globalism of open borders and multiculturalism, that is, she stands for France, not for a Tower of Babel.

All over Europe the left-wing ideologues have succeeded in associating ethnic nationalism with Nazism.

An effort has been underway for decades to destroy the sovereignty of national states, and to merge them into the European Union.

Le Pen has fought the effort to abolish France, and for her efforts she has been branded a Nazi.

Despite the French establishment’s attempt to demonize her, her party has the largest public support.

Over the years, the European left succeeded in branding national sovereignty “right-wing.” Even the Russian news site RT unthinkingly uses the propaganda term of the European left, thus demonstrating how unaware the Russian media is of the character of their European enemies.

When Le Pen appealed the ruling at the European court of human rights the court side-stepped the issue by ruling that she had not shown an “imminent risk of irreparable harm” to herself.

Of course, the harm was done to French democracy and to the French electorate, an issue that the court avoided.

Clearly “European democracy” stands unified in opposing democracy and has prevented the French people from exercising their will in a presidential election by banning the opposing candidate from running for the presidency.

Le Pen has again appealed and declared “I hope I will be able to convince the judges of my innocence.”

But for the establishment, the question is not one of innocence or guilt.

The the issue is that the European elite intend to prevent any revival of national sovereignty.

The people’s will is no longer tolerated in Western Europe.

Hundreds of people on Saturday rallied in London against Beijing’s controversial new “mega” embassy – days after the Daily Telegraph revealed that Chinese officials plan to construct secret underground chambers right next to some of Britain’s most sensitive communications infrastructure.

British politician Kemi Badenoch, a leader of the Conservative Party, took to the mic to excoriate Labour over the plans:

“For those of you who don’t know, I grew up under a dictatorship,” she said. “I know what it is like to live under a Government that you are terrified of. I know what it is like to be afraid of what will happen to you if you speak out.

“China is a country that has harassed and sanctioned our MPs like Iain. China is a country that has harassed and abused British nationals connected to China. It helps our enemies, like Russia. It keeps slaves. It disrupts the global trade system.” 

“And what worries me is that we have a Government right now that seems to be scared of China. We have a Government that is afraid, too weak, no backbone.“

🔴 Watch: Badenoch excoriates Labour over Chinese super-embassyhttps://t.co/Xf1Cfurq2a pic.twitter.com/Se23eeUisx

— The Telegraph (@Telegraph) January 17, 2026

Meanwhile, former Conservative leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith compared China to Nazi Germany, saying at the protest: “As we come forward now and watch the government trying to give away so much of what we believe in to an overarching, overweening, powerful dictatorship in China, we must remember that we have faced this before in the United Kingdom.

“We have faced it in the 1930s and 40s, when we made big mistakes in not recognising that a totalitarian state had its mind to overtake and overcome this marvellous democracy with its freedoms enshrined in law.

“Well, they failed then and almost too late. Did we realise that and stand against them? This embassy isn’t just about an embassy. This embassy is a token of what we believe in. It will be a blister on the face of freedom in the United Kingdom and all that we stand for.”

I believe the Government is acting recklessly in moving towards approving the new Chinese mega-embassy. I think this will prove to be a major failure and, frankly, a disaster for the UK. It would place an even larger Chinese presence right in the heart of London. China already…

— Iain Duncan Smith MP Chingford & Woodford Green (@MPIainDS) January 17, 2026

Plans for the embassy are expected to move forward if PM Keir Starmer approves them next week, however a residents’ group has vowed to bring legal action. 

As we noted last week via the Telegraph; The chamber forms part of an extensive subterranean complex comprising 208 rooms beneath the embassy site at the former Royal Mint.

The drawings show that a single concealed chamber will sit directly alongside fibre-optic cables transmitting financial data to the City of London, as well as email and messaging traffic for millions of internet users.

The same hidden room is fitted with hot-air extraction systems, possibly suggesting the installation of heat-generating equipment such as advanced computers used for espionage. The plans also show that China intends to demolish and rebuild the outer basement wall of the chamber, directly beside the fibre-optic cables.

The revelations have prompted sharp criticism from senior UK Conservative figures, including Alicia Kearns, the shadow national security minister, who described approving the plans as providing “a launchpad for economic warfare at the heart of the central nervous system of our critical national infrastructure”.

“The unredacted plans reveal a concealed room running immediately alongside the fibre-optic cables critical to the City and Canary Wharf. Telegraph readers don’t need me to spell out the obvious threats posed, nor China’s subterfuge – so why does the Labour Government?” Ms. Kearns told the newspaper.

The Telegraph further reports on why the proximity to the cables is cause for national security concerns:

Carrying signals bearing the innermost financial secrets of the British economy, the cables stretch between the Telehouse group of data centres in Docklands and other centres around the capital. Linked together, these form the core of the London Internet Exchange (Linx). Beyond London, they connect to Atlantic cables linking to the US.

Linx is one of the biggest internet exchange points in the world, handling vast volumes of data spanning everything from financial transactions to instant messages and emails.Its cables carry the financial transaction data relied upon by banks to update withdrawals and deposits, such as ordinary people’s salary packets and payments for goods bought online.

Professor Alan Woodward, a security expert at the University of Surrey, told The Telegraph that China’s plans pose a “red flag.”

“There’s a long history of cable-tapping by East and West alike. Anyone who can do it has done it,” Woodward said. “Espionage isn’t just about state secrets. Economic intelligence is central to the mission of foreign intelligence services.”

“If I were in their shoes, having those cables on my doorstep would be an enormous temptation,” he added.

Authored by Andrew Korybko,

Trump declared in a letter to Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi that he shared on social media that “I am ready to restart U.S. mediation between Egypt and Ethiopia to responsibly resolve the question of ‘The Nile Water Sharing’ once and for all’, adding in tacit support of Egypt’s position that “no state in this region should unilaterally control the precious resources of the Nile”.

He concluded that “Resolving the tensions around the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (GERD) is at the very top of my agenda”.

The fact is that “GERD Is Just A False Pretext For Egypt To Pressure Ethiopia” and “Ethiopia’s Final Filling Of Its Grand Renaissance Dam Debunked Years Of Egyptian Disinformation” in 2023. It was also assessed last summer that “Trump’s Latest Remarks About GERD Raise Questions About His Understanding Of This Dispute”, which weren’t corrected as proven by the substance of the abovementioned letter. Egypt might therefore be manipulating him into supporting its regional containment campaign against Ethiopia.

To explain, GERD is a pretext for Egypt to justify meddling inside of and around Ethiopia by resuming its Old Cold War-era policy of backing armed anti-government groups and allying with Eritrea, whose independence was achieved with the help of Egyptian military aid during the decades-long civil war. The Ethiopian Foreign Minister suggested late last year that Eritrea is becoming an anti-Ethiopian state at its Egyptian patron’s behest just like Ukraine became an anti-Russian one at its NATO patrons’ behest.

Egypt also exploited Ethiopia’s MoU with Somaliland in early 2024 for recognizing its 1991 redeclaration of independence in exchange for access to the sea to assemble a containment coalition with Somalia and Eritrea. Last week, Bloomberg reported that Saudi Arabia is finalizing an alliance with Egypt and Somalia for removing Emirati influence from Somaliland, which follows the Somali Defense Minister requesting that the Saudis replicate their successful South Yemeni campaign there sometime soon.

Circling back to Trump’s letter to Sisi, his tacit support of Egypt’s position on GERD – which is a faux dispute since this megaproject is purely about powering Ethiopia’s economic rise and not cutting off water to Egypt – might embolden Cairo to more aggressively contain Ethiopia.

After all, Trump’s implicit backing of Egypt could predispose him to believing that any Ethiopian response to its potentially intensified regional containment is “unprovoked aggression”, which could lead to US pressure upon it.

For example, Ethiopia might use force to expel the Eritrean troops that still occupy parts of its restive Tigray Region and/or deter a Saudi-led coalition campaign against Somaliland by recognizing it and deploying troops there (possibly in coordination with Israel).

Given the influence that Sisi now clearly wields over Trump due to how pleased Trump is with Sisi mediating the Israeli-Hamas ceasefire, which Trump considers to be an historic achievement, Trump might lash out at Ethiopia in those scenarios.

Ethiopia might therefore soon find itself in a difficult position where it’s coerced by the US through various means, from tariff threats to support for Egypt’s regional containment campaign, into strategic concessions at the expense of its sovereignty.

If Ethiopia can’t incentivize Trump via a minerals deal into pivoting to its side or being neutral, then maybe its close Israeli partner can help due to their convergent interests in Somaliland, Israel’s own tensions with Egypt, and its much greater influence with Trump.

By Jeanny Yu, Bloomberg Markets Live strategist and reporter

Nearly a year after DeepSeek’s AI breakthrough rattled global markets, China is entering 2026 with a fresh wave of technological advances that are powering a stock rally, even as its economy remains fragile.

Thanks to fresh progress in sectors from commercial rockets to robotics and flying cars, Chinese tech shares have begun the new year with a bang. An onshore Nasdaq-like tech gauge has shot up almost 13% so far this month, while a measure of Hong Kong-listed Chinese tech firms has climbed nearly 6%. Both have outperformed the Nasdaq 100.

Enthusiasm about homegrown technologies has been the single biggest driver of China’s equities bull run since April, even as the world’s second-largest economy remained mired in a housing slump and anemic consumption. The momentum may gain further support in the coming months as DeepSeek rolls out a new AI model and China unveils a five-year economic blueprint prioritizing technological self-reliance.

“The stock market is telling us that what China is doing in technology sector is going to be very exciting going forward,” Mark Mobius, managing director of Mobius Emerging Opportunities Fund, told Bloomberg TV on Friday. “You must remember China’s goal now is to overtake the US in technology, in high-level chips, in all kinds of AI. So the money is going in that direction.”

Since DeepSeek shocked global markets with its cheap and equally well-performing AI models on Jan. 27 last year, fellow Chinese firms have accelerated efforts to develop their own versions. Adoption of generative AI has also surged among the country’s Internet giants from Alibaba Group Holding Ltd. to Tencent Holdings Ltd.

Elsewhere, Chinese robots have competed in marathons, sparred in boxing matches and performed folk dance routines. In manufacturing, large language models are being embedded into advanced equipment, such as flying taxis and precision machine tools. The developments are recasting China in investors’ eyes from a low-cost manufacturing base into a credible challenger to US tech leadership, just as global capital hunts for the next growth engine.

In a basket of 33 Chinese AI stocks tracked by Jefferies Financial Group Inc., the rally in the past year expanded their combined market value by about $732 billion, the brokerage said in a Jan. 13 report. Jefferies said it sees further upside because China’s AI’s market capitalization represents only 6.5% of the US’s.

The exuberance is spilling beyond the secondary market. A flurry of recent listing debuts of Chinese AI-related companies posted blockbuster gains, emboldening their peers to tap public markets. Among those in the pipeline are Xpeng’s flying-car unit, rocket maker LandSpace Technology and BrainCo, a potential rival to Neuralink Corp.

“Looking ahead, we anticipate that the next major breakthrough in AI will occur at the application layer,” said Joanna Shen, JPMorgan Asset Management’s emerging market and Asia Pacific equities investment specialist. “China, in particular, is well-positioned to lead this evolution, given its vast array of user cases across wearables, edge devices, and internet platforms.”

To be sure, the stellar rally has triggered concerns about stretched valuations. Cambricon Technologies Corp., an AI chipmaker that competes with Nvidia Corp., is trading about 120 times to forward earnings. A gauge tracking Chinese robots is trading at more than 40 times forward earnings, higher than the Nasdaq 100’s 25 times.

Beijing’s latest decision to tighten margin financing was also a sign of authorities’ growing unease with speculative excess, especially in pockets of the technology sector.

That said, some investors remain optimistic about the industry’s prospects due to advantages such as a low-cost base and strong state backing and planning. 

“China’s low-cost model for AI may well pay off faster” than its US peers, Gavekal Research’s technology analyst Tilly Zhang wrote in a note dated Jan. 16. “The ‘DeepSeek moment’ encouraged China to focus on a strategy of cheap, good-enough models.”

Expected within this quarter, the release of DeepSeek’s R2 model may provide the next catalyst. The new model, which will likely boast leading-edge performance at an ultra-low cost, “has the potential to disrupt the sector again, underscoring China’s position as the main rival to US AI supremacy,” Bloomberg Intelligence wrote in a recent note.

Details of China’s new five-year plan due for release in March, which places great emphasis on technological self-sufficiency, may offer stock bulls another reason to buy. 

Chinese stocks may further outperform their US counterparts if earnings growth continues to accelerate, especially in sectors with advanced technologies and strong exports, said Vivian Lin Thurston, portfolio manager at William Blair Investment. “I expect to see attractive investment opportunities in these industries as we have seen in 2025, including internet, AI, semiconductor-related hardware tech, robotics, automation and biotech.”

Authored by Jerry Rogers via American Greatness,

Over and over again, we’re told to be outraged.

An individual is detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). He is later released. And before the facts can catch their breath, Democratic politicians and activist megaphones are already screaming ‘abduction’, ‘fascism’, and ‘state violence’.

Cue the mob. Cue the cameras. Cue the chaos.

It plays out over and over again.

Remember the viral video of a woman screaming ‘I’m a U.S. citizen’ as ICE agents pulled her from a car in the Florida Keys? The media and politicians pounced – ICE ‘arrested an American citizen’. Turns out this person was detained by ICE because she refused to identify herself and was driving her boyfriend’s vehicle. Afterwards, reports disclosed that the boyfriend was in the country illegally. She chose not to comply. Perhaps she wanted the situation to escalate? Much of the debate about ICE has become political theater.

Let’s slow this down and apply something increasingly rare in modern politics: the facts.

ICE detains individuals pursuant to its lawful authority. That happens every day. Sometimes people are held. Sometimes they’re released. Detention and release are not evidence of wrongdoing by law enforcement—they are the process. But in today’s political climate, process doesn’t matter. Optics do. Rage does. And outrage is politicized and monetized.

What does make these encounters dangerous is not ICE. It’s the reckless rhetoric that surrounds them.

When Democratic elected officials tell people that law enforcement officers are ‘kidnappers’ or ‘stormtroopers’, when they suggest citizens have a moral duty to interfere with federal agents, they are not encouraging peaceful protest—they are inciting confrontation. And when mobs take that cue and physically obstruct officers doing their jobs, the risk to everyone involved skyrockets.

This is not complicated.

What happens?

Lawful orders are given. They’re ignored. Resistance follows. A crowd interferes.

Officers are forced to manage a volatile situation that never needed to exist in the first place.

If individuals simply comply with lawful commands—no dramatics, no resistance, no posturing—these could be routine encounters. No drama; no chaos, no violence. If the mob allows officers to do their work instead of inserting themselves into a federal enforcement action, there would be no spectacle, no video clips, no political fundraising emails.

But compliance doesn’t trend on social media.

What we’re witnessing is a dangerous feedback loop. Politicians inflame tensions with extreme language. Activists show up looking for confrontation. Law enforcement is placed in an impossible position. Then, when things escalate—as they predictably do—the very people who lit the fuse rush to the microphones to condemn the explosion.

That’s not leadership. That’s negligence.

No one is above the law, but justice isn’t served when the law is deliberately obstructed either. ICE officers are not free agents; they operate under rules, supervision, and due process constraints. Pretending otherwise may be politically useful, but it is factually false—and dangerously so.

If Democrats truly cared about safety, about de-escalation, about justice, they would stop encouraging resistance and obstruction.

They would tell their supporters the truth: you don’t get to decide, in the moment, which laws you’ll obey and which officers you’ll recognize as legitimate.

These incidents don’t have to happen. They are not inevitable. They are manufactured—by irresponsible rhetoric, by mob interference, and by a political class more interested in chaos than consequences.

And the next time it happens—and it will—remember who made it dangerous.

The Space Weather Prediction Center issued an alert Sunday afternoon after a powerful X1.9 solar flare erupted on the Sun, with the space weather event expected to produce an Earth-directed coronal mass ejection (CME).

Stefan Burns, a geophysicist and space weather forecaster, wrote on X that the X1.9 flare is “insane” and will produce a “huge coronal mass ejection.”

Major X1.9 solar flare detected at 18:08 UTC (Jan 18) around AR 4341. Earth directed CME likely. More to follow. https://t.co/aqK4Q6XdAY pic.twitter.com/CJUq1SAsQt

— SolarHam (@SolarHam) January 18, 2026

“A huge coronal mass ejection has been launched toward Earth at high velocity. We will have a BIG solar storm impact in 2 to 3 days. Expect at least G3 geomagnetic storming. Early forecasts are liable to revision as more data comes in,” Burns said.

This 1.9 X-flare that just exploded on the Sun IS INSANE. A huge coronal mass ejection has been launched out towards Earth at high-velocity, we’ll have a BIG solar storm impact in 2-3 days, expect G3 geomagnetic storming minimum (early forecast liable to revision with more data). pic.twitter.com/v7uDX1JdIW

— Stefan Burns (@StefanBurnsGeo) January 18, 2026

Space Weather News’ Ben Davidson streamed a live analysis on YouTube earlier about the X-class solar flare and what to expect…

The X-class flare can disrupt radio and navigation immediately. The larger risk comes from the expected CME in the coming days, which can trigger geomagnetic storms that affect power grids, satellites, aviation, and the modern economy built on chips and data centers.

Submitted by Thomas Kolbe

America’s intervention in Venezuela is just days old, and the world seems unable to settle. The heated debate over Greenland’s future overshadows the main thread of a new world order emerging—one that is being decided between the U.S. and China. Europe, for now, is relegated to the role of a progressively anxious bystander.

In recent weeks, much speculation has surrounded the background and consequences of the U.S. intervention in Venezuela on January 3. On the surface, political commentators and mainstream media focus largely on Venezuelan heavy oil’s role and future. And they are right: if the U.S. manages to revive the mostly idle capacities via its domestic production industry—especially through firms like Chevron, ConocoPhillips, and Exxon—a significant geopolitical lever emerges.

This lever primarily reshapes the negotiation matrix and dynamics between Washington and Beijing. China requires this oil for its maritime expansion; the U.S., in turn, for refining capacity in the southern states, particularly Texas. Controlling exports to China could strengthen America’s negotiating position on rare earths—a pressure point China has repeatedly wielded, even against European companies. Potentially, the U.S. could also pressure Beijing and curb the subsidized Chinese export machine. These are substantial arguments on the path to U.S. reindustrialization.

Simultaneously, discussions suggest the U.S. government’s core aim is to push back Chinese influence in South American key resource markets—echoing the Monroe Doctrine. China’s response to Nicolás Maduro’s detention was surprisingly restrained. Beyond the expected diplomatic protest, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s visit to Beijing drew attention. Canada, as a resource giant, increasingly plays the counterweight to Donald Trump’s administration.

Alberta, Greenland, and the Subtle Shifts

Carney spoke over the weekend of discussions with China’s leadership on a new world order—a multipolar global order no longer centered on the United States. For China, the point was clear: Canada is effectively being pushed out of the U.S. refining business due to the planned reopening of Venezuelan oil fields. Canadian heavy oil is of high interest to China, which must now find alternative markets to counter growing U.S. pressure.

A minor footnote deserves attention: alongside the media frenzy over Greenland—a debate in Europe elevated to a NATO survival question due to the island’s resource wealth and strategic waterways—another discussion is emerging in the U.S. and Canada: the future of Alberta. President Trump has repeatedly referenced this, opening the door to secession speculation. Could a referendum—still speculative—result in Canada losing access to a significant portion of its resources if Albertans vote for independence? This debate merits close monitoring, as it could offer deep insights into future resource markets and geopolitical control.

Strategic Metal: Silver

Maduro’s detention opens the U.S. potential insight into South American trade relations with China, particularly in resources. Key questions remain: which quantities were transferred outside official trade balances, which resources specifically, and to what extent were U.S. sanctions circumvented? These factors will likely play a decisive role in the coming years as the global economy decouples.

If it turns out that Venezuela exported strategically important resources like silver to China in significant amounts, the U.S. could now fundamentally alter the dynamics of the global resource order. The core question arises: was the American intervention really only about Venezuelan heavy oil?

Last summer, the U.S. officially declared silver a strategic metal. Since then, silver prices have surged, confirming suspicions that both China and the U.S. are stockpiling heavily. Silver is indispensable for building AI data center infrastructure and electric motors.

There is also a monetary dimension: growing U.S. and Chinese concentration of strategic metals increases pressure on Europe’s currency system. The world increasingly moves toward metal-backed monetary systems, with central banks hoarding for balance-sheet stability. Metals are gaining global weight as a stabilizing economic and financial foundation.

China now enforces a comparatively strict silver export regime. Industrial demand is expected to rise sharply in coming years, making questions about Venezuela’s actual resource flows crucial—far beyond oil.

Control of key sea routes, systematic displacement of Chinese presence in the Panama Canal and U.S. West Coast ports, and securing access to strategic resources—including Greenland—regardless of Europe’s stance, are elements of a broader strategy. The U.S. is forcing a bifurcation: a geopolitical division into two spheres of influence—U.S. and Chinese.

This split has been decades in the making, accelerated by China’s rise. Historically, it is hard to halt without risking major military conflict. Coordination between the U.S. and China in this economic decoupling is key to minimizing conflict.

Bifurcation of World Order

The U.S. is determined to consolidate its role in the Western Hemisphere and—likely in coordination with Beijing and Moscow—gradually retreat into its self-defined power zone. This is not weakness but strategic calculation in a fragmented world order.

Regarding the so-called Greenland crisis: the EU plays no real role in the global resource scramble. European states import roughly 60% of their energy. The failed attempt to secure resources from Russia via regime change and a defeat in Ukraine highlights the EU’s geopolitical impotence.

Deploying a small European force to Greenland to limit U.S. influence underscores Europe-U.S. tensions. Trump responded by raising tariffs by 10%, threatening 25% if Europe’s stance did not change—revealing the stark asymmetry of power. Brussels appears as a paper giant.

Given this imbalance, Europe’s failure to forge a political alliance to adopt a cooperative U.S. approach is puzzling. Brussels and London opt for confrontation, a path likely leading to further economic losses. Europe’s strength lies in aligning with U.S. market regimes, abandoning hidden climate protectionism, and activating its robust domestic market. Geopolitically, the fight is lost, only recoverable via sensible economic policy.

Attempts via Mercosur to secure trade leeway in South America have been underwhelming. The agreement largely enforces Brussels’ climate regulations, already straining European business, leaving true free trade as distant as ever.