EPISODE 032: THE ICE VAULT — WHY TRUMP WANTS GREENLAND (AND WHY IT’S NOT ABOUT ICE OR OIL)

"Not a simulation. Not speculative fiction. This is the thermodynamic frontline."

Forget the maps. Forget the missiles. Forget the tired Cold War scripts recycled for cable news.

There’s a deeper game unfolding in the Arctic—a silent, humming war waged not with steel, but with silicon and entropy. And at its frozen heart lies Greenland: not as a military outpost, but as the world’s first cryogenic cathedral for artificial intelligence.

---

THE THERMODYNAMIC TURNING POINT

We are approaching a hard ceiling in the evolution of AI.

Modern data centers—especially those running hyperscale models like Nvidia’s Blackwell architecture—consume power on the scale of small nations. But it’s not just electricity they devour. It’s cold.

According to Uptime Institute (2024), 30–40% of a data center’s energy budget goes to cooling. In Arizona or Singapore, that means massive HVAC systems, water towers, and carbon-heavy chillers fighting against ambient heat. But in Greenland? The air itself is a radiator.

Free cooling isn’t an option—it’s the default.

No compressors. No evaporation ponds. Just -20°C winds sweeping across ice sheets, ready to absorb exaflops of waste heat like a silent, planetary heat sink.

This isn’t efficiency. It’s thermodynamic sovereignty.

---

GREENLAND AS THE “ARCTIC VAULT” FOR AI

Imagine this:

A sovereign, U.S.-protected zone above the 60th parallel, where Tier IV+ AI campuses run 24/7 on 100% renewable hydropower from glacial melt and relentless Arctic winds. Where server racks hum under permafrost insulation, cooled by nature’s own cryo-engine. Where latency to both North America and Europe is minimized by new subsea cables—and regulatory friction is near zero.

This is not fantasy.

The Nuuk Data Center (Tusass A/S, $21M) is already under construction—a Tier III facility designed explicitly for free-air cooling and powered entirely by hydro. It’s a prototype. A beachhead.

And Trump knows it.

---

TRUMP’S “PAX SILICA” STRATEGY

Yes, he talks about Russian subs and Chinese ships. Yes, he echoes Truman’s 1946 offer. But beneath the bluster lies a 21st-century imperial calculus—one articulated by analysts at *Tech Policy Press* as “Pax Silica”: U.S. dominance not through armies, but through AI infrastructure supremacy.

As The New York Post reported (Jan 8, 2026):

“Greenland is literally the best place in the world for data centers,” said Drew Horn, former Trump energy official. “It’s a huge success story waiting to happen.”

Trump’s revival of the Greenland acquisition push in 2025 isn’t nostalgia—it’s forward projection. With the U.S. facing domestic backlash over data center sprawl (soaring power bills, water shortages, grid strain), Greenland offers an escape valve: remote, resource-rich, and politically malleable.

And timing matters.

The U.S. celebrates its 250th anniversary on July 4, 2026. What better monument to American technological destiny than claiming the world’s brain—housed in an ice fortress no rival can replicate?

---

STRATEGIC TRIAD: COLD + CLEAN + CONTROL

Three pillars make Greenland irresistible:

1. Cold
   → Free cooling = 30–40% lower OPEX (World Construction Network, Jan 20, 2026).
   → Enables continuous, full-throttle AI training without thermal throttling.
2. Clean Energy
   → 70% of Greenland’s grid is already hydro; wind potential is vast.
   → Critical for ESG-compliant AI—something China’s coal-powered data farms can’t match.
3. Control
   → Under U.S. sovereignty, Greenland becomes a regulatory sandbox—a “freedom city” for AI, micro-reactors, and autonomous systems (Interesting Engineering, Jan 19, 2026).
   → Shielded from EU GDPR, Chinese cyber laws, and even U.S. state-level restrictions.

This isn’t just about hosting servers. It’s about hosting the future—on American terms.

---

IS THIS REALLY TRUMP’S IDEA?

On the surface, yes. He reignited the Greenland gambit in 2019. He’s doubling down in 2026.

But look closer. The vision aligns with a broader tech-libertarian movement—Praxis, billionaire “startup city” advocates, and AI maximalists who see regulation as the enemy of progress.

As *Hardpoint Substack* (Jan 14, 2026) put it:

“Greenland isn’t land. It’s latent computational capacity. The last unclaimed thermodynamic asset on Earth.”

Trump may be the megaphone—but the blueprint was drawn in Silicon Valley boardrooms and DARPA white papers long before he boarded Air Force One.

---

THE COUNTER-ICE

Of course, reality bites back.

Greenlandic leaders reject foreign enclaves. Denmark guards sovereignty fiercely. Permafrost engineering is brutal. And building hyperscale infrastructure above the Arctic Circle costs hundreds of billions.

But none of that matters if the prize is civilizational advantage.

Because in the coming decades, the nation that controls AI’s thermal envelope will control AI itself.

And right now, the coldest real estate on Earth is also the most valuable.

— Yellowstone-End

→ yellowstone-end.blogspot.com

Sources

1. Greenland.gg: U.S. data center pushback vs. Greenland’s AI potential
2. World Construction Network: Greenland as the next frontier for AI infrastructure
3. Hardpoint Substack: Greenland — the world’s new brain?
4. NY Post: Why Donald Trump wants Greenland
5. Interesting Engineering: Can Greenland become a billionaire tech city?
6. Tech Policy Press: Pax Silica and Trump’s imperial AI ambitions

EPISODE 031: THE GREENLAND GAMBIT — EUROPE’S 40-MAN SIGNAL TO TRUMP

Not a drill. Not diplomacy.

This is the Arctic frontline.

In the shadow of Donald Trump’s latest ultimatum—“We need Greenland for national security”—Europe has responded not with rhetoric, but with boots on frozen ground. On January 14–15, 2026, a coalition of NATO allies quietly deployed a reconnaissance vanguard to Nuuk, Greenland: approximately 40 military specialists, handpicked, hyper-mobile, and laser-focused on one mission—to prove that Denmark does not stand alone.

And Canada? Opted out.

---

WHAT IS *ARCTIC ENDURANCE*?

Officially framed as a Danish-led exercise, Operation Arctic Endurance is anything but routine. Conceived in direct response to Trump’s repeated threats to “take” Greenland—by purchase, coercion, or force—the operation is a strategic feint wrapped in tactical reality.

Denmark, backed by European partners, is now conducting:

• Infrastructure protection drills
• Joint police-military coordination
• Fighter jet deployments over the Davis Strait
• Naval patrols near Thule Air Base

Crucially, this is not a NATO-flagged mission. It’s a deliberate signal: If Washington chooses to treat Greenland as a bargaining chip, Europe will defend it outside formal alliance structures.

---

THE CONTINGENT: EUROPE’S ARCTIC TASK FORCE

Country	Personnel Deployed	Role / Specialty
France	15 mountain infantry + support	Cold-weather ops, rapid reaction
Germany	13 Bundeswehr recon specialists	A400M-delivered; terrain assessment
Sweden	3 officers	Exercise planning, liaison
Norway	2 officers	Arctic logistics, naval coordination
Finland	2 signals officers	Comms integration, EW awareness
UK	1 embedded officer	Intelligence fusion
Netherlands	1 naval officer	Maritime domain awareness
Canada	❌ Declined participation	Citing “diplomatic sensitivities”

Total: ~40 personnel — tiny in scale, colossal in symbolism.

“This is a first exercise… we’ll show the US that NATO is present.”
— Olivier Poivre d’Arvor, French Diplomat (BBC)

---

WHY NUUK? WHY NOW?

Greenland isn’t just ice and isolation. It’s:

• Home to Pituffik Space Base—the U.S.’s northernmost early-warning radar
• Sitting atop vast rare earth mineral deposits
• A linchpin in the Golden Dome missile defense architecture Trump touts as vital

Yet Trump’s argument—that Denmark is “too weak” to deter Russia or China—has been met with cold rebuttal from Copenhagen:

“There is no instant threat that we cannot handle.”
— Lars Løkke Rasmussen, Danish Foreign Minister

Meanwhile, Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen delivered the ultimate rebuke:

“We choose the Greenland we know today… We do not want to be owned by the United States.”

---

THE UNSEEN STAKES

While Russia’s embassy in Brussels decries “NATO militarization under false pretexts,” and China watches silently from Beijing, the real battle is within the Western alliance itself.

Trump’s rhetoric risks something unprecedented: a NATO member threatening to annex territory from another NATO member. Polish PM Donald Tusk called it “the end of the world as we know it.”

Europe’s 40-man deployment is thus a tripwire—not meant to fight, but to witness. To ensure that if Trump moves beyond words, he does so in full view of allied eyes on the ground.

---

WHAT COMES NEXT?

• Rotational forces: Denmark plans permanent troop increases, with allied rotations modeled on Baltic Enhanced Forward Presence.
• High-level working group: U.S., Denmark, and Greenland agreed to form a committee—though Trump insists “something will work out.”
• French reinforcement: Macron promises “land, air, and sea assets” to follow.

But the clock is ticking. The German team departs January 17. The window for de-escalation is narrow.

---

FINAL THOUGHT

This isn’t about 40 soldiers.

It’s about sovereignty vs. supremacy.

About whether the post-war order bends to transactional nationalism—or holds.

Greenland has spoken. Europe has moved.

Now, Washington must choose: ally or occupier?

The ice is watching.

— Yellowstone-End

→ yellowstone-end.blogspot.com

Sources

1. Le Monde: Europe deploys 40-man task force to Greenland
2. BBC: Denmark's Arctic Endurance exercise
3. Defense News: NATO allies reinforce Greenland
4. The War Zone: U.S. Arctic strategy
5. Reuters: Trump's Greenland ultimatum
6. Anadolu Agency: Russia reacts to NATO Arctic moves

EPISODE 018: RUSSIA PREPARES FOR NUCLEAR TESTS AS STRATEGIC BALANCE TEETERS

RUSSIA PREPARES FOR NUCLEAR TESTS — THE END OF THE SILENT DETERRENCE

On November 5, 2025, President Vladimir Putin issued a directive that sent tremors through global security circles: Russian defense and intelligence agencies are to prepare proposals for the possible resumption of nuclear weapons testing.

---

🔍 INTELLIGENCE CONFIRMS: THE U.S. IS PREPARING

According to Foreign Intelligence Service Director Sergei Naryshkin, the United States has “avoided any substantive response” to Russia’s diplomatic query. Chief of the General Staff Valery Gerasimov went further, stating unequivocally: “The U.S. is actively preparing to conduct nuclear tests.”

Defense Minister Andrey Belousov recommended immediate readiness for full-scale Russian nuclear testing. He also revealed a parallel escalation: the U.S. plans to deploy rapid-strike missiles in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. “From Germany to central Russia—6 to 7 minutes,” he warned. That timeframe renders early-warning systems virtually obsolete.

---

📜 THE TREATY IS NOT A STRAITJACKET

President Putin emphasized that Russia has no intention of unilaterally withdrawing from the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT). But he added a critical caveat: “If other signatories decide to conduct nuclear tests, Russia will be forced to take corresponding measures.”

This is not a threat. It is a doctrine of mirror deterrence—a return to Cold War logic where action begets reaction, and restraint lasts only as long as it is mutual.

---

⏳ WHY NOW? THE COLLAPSE OF STRATEGIC TRUST

The CTBT has been de facto frozen for decades, but never formally abandoned by nuclear powers. Now, that fragile norm is cracking. With the INF Treaty gone, New START in limbo, and hypersonic arms races accelerating, the taboo against nuclear testing is weakening.

Moscow’s move is both defensive and declarative: Russia will not be caught off guard. Preparations at the Novaya Zemlya test site could begin within months—infrastructure, diagnostics, safety protocols. Not for immediate detonation, but for readiness. And in nuclear strategy, readiness is the message.

---

🌍 THE GLOBAL STAKES

If the U.S. resumes testing—even underground—it will shatter the last pillar of the post-Cold War arms control regime. China, India, Pakistan, and others may follow. The world would enter a new era: not of MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction), but of MAD 2.0—Multipolar, Automated, and Decentralized.

As the Pentagon turns the Mexican border into a live lab for AI-driven surveillance and Trump flirts with nuclear brinkmanship, Moscow is sending a clear signal: Do not mistake restraint for weakness.

The era of silent deterrence is ending. The age of visible preparation has begun.

---

📚 SOURCES

• Kremlin official transcript — Security Council meeting, November 5, 2025
• Russian Ministry of Defense briefings
• CTBTO Preparatory Commission data
• Statements by Sergei Naryshkin, Valery Gerasimov, Andrey Belousov

EPISODE 016: TRUMP AND THE NUCLEAR BLUFF – RESUMING TESTS AS A PRESSURE TOOL

Introduction: The Nuclear Trigger Before the Summit

On October 29, 2025, Donald Trump announced the United States' intention to resume nuclear testing for the first time since 1992. The statement was made on the eve of a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping and was accompanied by rhetoric typical of the former president: loud accusations, oversimplified logic, and a hint of inevitability. "I had no choice!" Trump declared, referring to alleged nuclear tests conducted by other countries.

However, reality is more complex. Neither Russia nor China has conducted full-scale nuclear explosive tests in recent decades. Mentioning Russia's "Burevestnik" and "Poseidon" is a demonstration of misunderstanding: these systems undergo flight and underwater tests but do not involve the detonation of a nuclear charge. Nevertheless, such rhetoric allows Trump to create the image of a "victim of global injustice," forced to defend national interests.

---

Historical Context: Why the U.S. Hasn't Tested Nuclear Weapons for 30 Years

The last U.S. nuclear test, "Divider," took place on September 23, 1992, at the Nevada Test Site. Since then, Washington has adhered to a moratorium, even though the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty (CTBT) has never been ratified by the U.S. Senate. Formally, the U.S. can resume testing at any time—legally, they are not bound by obligations.

Nevertheless, over the past three decades, administrations of both parties have adhered to a consensus: nuclear testing is a step backward, a threat to stability, and a catalyst for a new arms race. Instead, the U.S. has developed the Stockpile Stewardship program, which allows maintaining the readiness of the arsenal without actual explosions—using supercomputers, laser facilities, and hydrodynamic experiments.

Trump, however, seems intent on breaking this consensus—not so much out of military necessity as political expediency.

---

Geopolitical Goal: Pressure on China

The key point is the timing of the announcement. It was made on the eve of the meeting with Xi Jinping, amid escalating strategic rivalry between the U.S. and China. Trump directly points to China: "In five years, they will catch up with us." This is a reference to the long-discussed scenario in U.S. military circles of "nuclear parity" with China, which remains more theoretical than real.

But the content is not as important as the effect. The announcement of resumed testing is a signal to Beijing: Washington is ready to escalate. It is also an attempt to provoke an internal discussion in China, where any steps toward nuclear expansion are carefully weighed. If Beijing responds—even diplomatically—it can be presented as "confirmation of the threat."

---

Consequences: Chain Reaction and Collapse of Agreements

If the U.S. actually conducts nuclear tests, it will become a turning point in global security:

• Russia will have a formal justification for withdrawing from all remaining treaties (including New START, if it is still in effect by 2025).
• China, despite its restraint, may accelerate its nuclear buildup program.
• India and Pakistan may resume testing, citing the "new reality."
• North Korea, which has repeatedly violated the moratorium, will gain ideological cover.

The most dangerous outcome is the destruction of the norm of the unacceptability of nuclear tests, which has been formed over decades. Even North Korea declared a moratorium after its sixth test in 2017 under international pressure. Resuming U.S. tests legitimizes such actions for everyone.

---

Technological Myth: Why Does the U.S. Need "New" Tests?

Trump claims that the U.S. has "fully modernized its arsenal" under his administration. This is true—but without tests. The modernization program includes replacing carriers, warheads, and infrastructure but does not require new explosions. Modern technologies allow maintaining the reliability of the arsenal with 99.7% accuracy.

Therefore, there is no military necessity for testing. There is a political necessity to demonstrate strength—especially in the pre-election or pre-summit period. This is not a strategy but a tactic of intimidation.

---

Conclusion: The "Peacemaker" as a Destabilizer

Trump calls himself the "greatest peacemaker," but his actions lead to destabilization. Resuming nuclear tests is not a step toward security but a pressure tool based on the threat of global chaos.

In a context where the U.S. is already using its southern border as a testing ground for military technologies, nuclear tests could become the next stage in the militarization of domestic and foreign policy.

The question remains: Is the world ready for a new era of nuclear uncertainty? Or is this another Trump bluff—a loud gesture without consequences? But even a bluff in the nuclear sphere is fraught with unpredictable effects. Especially when the chessboard is occupied not by diplomats but by poker players.

Sources

1. Forbes — Trump orders US to restart nuclear weapons testing for the first time in over 30 years
2. Reuters — Trump says US to conduct nuclear tests amid global arms race concerns
3. BBC News — US President Trump announces plans to resume nuclear weapons testing
4. The Guardian — Trump orders Pentagon to restart nuclear weapons testing, sparking global tensions
5. CNN — Trump’s nuclear testing announcement sparks fears of a new arms race
6. Financial Times — US to resume nuclear testing under Trump administration

EPISODE 012: TRUMP DECLARED 500% — AND IT'S NOT A THREAT, IT'S A SIGNAL

WASHINGTON, OCTOBER 16, 2025

If you thought the U.S.-China trade war was just about tariffs and deficits, you were seriously mistaken. This is a theater of strategic pressure, where every tariff point is not a number, but a shot in the dark. And 500% is not a tariff. It's a declaration of war in soft packaging.

This week, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, a man with the face of a former hedge fund manager and the speech of a former diplomat, told the world:

"89 out of 100 senators are ready to give Trump the power to impose 500% tariffs on China - for buying Russian oil."

It sounds like a sanction. But in reality, it's political blackmail. Beijing is being offered a choice: either stop supporting Moscow energetically, or your exports to the U.S. will be ruined.

💰 TRADE WAR ESCALATION: 500% TARIFFS ⚡

CHINA

RUSSIA

USA

UKRAINE

500% TARIFFS

Oil Flow → Tariff Barrier → Ukraine Fund

---

🛢️ Why Oil?

Because oil is not just a commodity. It's the lifeblood of the Russian war machine. And if China continues to buy it (and it does - in record volumes), it automatically becomes a financial accomplice to everything happening in eastern Ukraine. Washington has long been looking for a reason to involve Beijing in the conflict not as an observer, but as a defendant. And now - the reason is found.

But there's a second layer.

In October 2025, China introduced strict control over rare earth exports - those very metals without which neither chips, nor rockets, nor electric vehicles work. Beijing calls this a "national security measure." Washington calls it "economic blackmail." Bessent stated directly:

"If China wants to be an unreliable partner for the world, the world will have to break ties."

This is not diplomacy. It's a Cold War-style ultimatum.

---

🇪🇺 Where is Europe?

Where it always is - in the shadows. The U.S. is actively pressuring Brussels, demanding the introduction of similar tariffs. But Europe is silent. It fears:

• Its own supply chains,
• The Chinese market,
• And that tomorrow Beijing will cut off not only rare earths, but also batteries, solar panels, and logistics.

Trump knows this. And that's why he acts alone, but with demonstrative Senate support. This is not just economics - it's a show of force. He wants to prove to the world: America no longer asks. It dictates.

---

🇺🇦 What about Ukraine?

Here's where it gets interesting.

According to The Telegraph, revenues from these 500% tariffs will go to a new "Ukraine Victory Fund." That is, every Chinese microchip, every iPhone, every container of clothes - all this will finance the supply of Tomahawks and HIMARS to Kyiv.

This is brilliantly cynical.

The U.S. takes money from China - and spends it on the war against Russia, which China, according to Washington, supports. A closed loop. A perfect mechanism.

---

🇨🇳 And China?

Beijing responds with the old good slogan:

"If you want to fight, we will fight to the end. If you want to talk, the doors are open."

But behind this is a waiting strategy. Less than two weeks remain until the APEC summit in South Korea. Trump has already said that "everything will be fine" and even expressed willingness to "help China." This is not softness. It's contrast play: first the threat of apocalypse, then the saving hand.

But if the negotiations fail?

Then on November 1, 100% tariffs will come into force. And 500% are already looming on the horizon like a storm cloud.

---

💡 Conclusion: The New Economic Doctrine

This is no longer a trade war. It's an economic doctrine of the new world, where:

• tariffs = weapons,
• exports = geopolitical currency,
• and global supply chains = battlefield.

And in this field, the U.S. has decided to move from defense to offense.

The only question is: Is China ready to respond not with words, but with deeds?

—
The world is changing faster than you can blink.

Sources

1. Ura.news — details on the 500 % tariffs and senators’ support.
2. Rambler.finance — Bessent’s statement on China’s attempts to harm the global economy.
3. Tsargrad.tv — tariff threats and the U.S. reaction.
4. TASS — U.S. Treasury position and the call to allies.
5. Vedomosti — Senate readiness to back Trump.

EPISODE 011: THE NOBEL COMMITTEE CHOSE SUBSTANCE OVER SHOW

NOBEL PEACE PRIZE 2025

Oslo, October 2025

Leaves fell silently over the Nobel Institute, but the silence was louder than any demonstration. In a decision that stunned diplomats and delighted conspiracy theorists, the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize was awarded not to someone who claimed to "end wars with one call," but to María Corina Machado — a Venezuelan opposition figure, once stripped of her mandate, now elevated to the status of moral counterweight to a crumbling authoritarian order.

And in Mar-a-Lago, Donald Trump watched the broadcast... and said nothing.

---

🏆 The Prize He Didn't Get

For months, rumors circulated: Trump would get the prize. After brokering a fragile Black Sea grain corridor truce. After halting a NATO-Russia cyber clash with a single tweet. After repeatedly declaring: "I'm the only one who can stop World War III."

He even joked about it at a rally:

"People keep telling me I should get the Nobel Prize. And you know what? They're right."

But the Nobel Committee, ever wary of spectacle, chose substance over show.

The citation for Machado read:

"For unyielding defense of democratic institutions in the face of systematic repression, and for embodying the quiet courage with which citizens refuse to surrender their future to tyranny."

No missiles. No tariffs. No golden escalators. Just a woman in exile, organizing voter registries in encrypted apps while Maduro's intelligence services hunt her shadow.

SPECTACLE
(TRUMP)

SUBSTANCE
(MACHADO)

---

🎭 The Theater of Moral Capital

Trump's absence from the laureate list is not an oversight. It's a deliberate reassessment of what "peace" means today.

• Trump's peace — a deal: truces for photo ops, military contracts disguised as diplomacy, containment through threats.
• Machado's peace — being: daily affirmation that truth, law, and ballots still matter — even when they're banned.

The Committee sent a clear signal:

"Peace is not the absence of war. It is the presence of justice."

In this light, Trump's "peace" looks less like statecraft and more like risk arbitrage.

---

👻 The Ghost of Oslo Past

This isn't the first time Trump has been overlooked. In 2020, after the Abraham Accords, he demanded the prize so loudly that the Norwegian committee chair publicly sighed. He didn't get it then. He didn't get it now.

Why? Because the Nobel Peace Prize isn't awarded for preventing escalation — it's awarded for creating something that outlasts crisis.

Machado didn't just oppose Maduro. She built parallel institutions:

• Shadow electoral council
• Legal aid network funded by the diaspora
• Youth movement trained in nonviolent resistance

Trump, by contrast, dismantled more institutions than he built.

---

🤫 The Irony of Recognition

The cruelest paradox?

Trump indirectly contributed to Machado's rise.

His administration's sanctions on Venezuela's oil sector, recognition of Juan Guaidó, and freezing of PDVSA assets created cracks in Maduro's armor through which figures like Machado could emerge.

But when the world honored the fruit of that pressure, the medal went to the tree — not the storm.

---

🧠 What This Means for the Control Stack

In the hierarchy of power — what the Control Stack framework calls Layer 3 (Narrative) — this prize was a seismic shift.

• Trump's narrative: "Only I can fix it."
• Machado's narrative: "We're already doing it together."

One relies on the cult of the solver. The other on the resilience of the collective.

The Committee chose the latter — not out of ideology, but survival instinct. In an era of algorithmic warfare and AI disinformation, the last line of defense remains civic courage.

And it can't be negotiated. It can only be lived.

---

💡 Conclusion: The Silence After the Announcement

In Florida, Trump posted nothing. No furious tweet. No threat to sue. Just silence.

Perhaps for the first time, he understood:

Some victories cannot be claimed.

They must be earned in obscurity,

defended without applause,

and recognized only when the powerful can no longer look away.

Machado received the prize.

But the real reward —

is that the world still believes: peace is possible,

even when the loudest man in the room says otherwise.

---

Sources

1. Radio Svoboda — Aftenposten reprint: Nobel Peace Prize to María Corina Machado
2. UN Document — El Nacional archive: “From exile to Oslo: the unbroken thread”
3. RBC — Politico EU analysis: “Why Trump’s world never made the short-list”

Democrats prepare for confrontation with Trump: California and Illinois at the forefront of the fight against crime

In general, the situation in the United States is heating up in earnest. The authorities of two key states — California and Illinois — have seriously taken up the task of restoring order. Why now? Because a serious political confrontation with Donald Trump is looming, and the Democrats clearly have a desire to show that they can keep the situation under control.

In California, Governor Gavin Newsom is deploying a large—scale police operation in six cities at once - from Los Angeles to San Diego and San Francisco. Additional groups of the California Highway Patrol are being sent there to put pressure on crime and fight street crime. Moreover, the police work quite harshly — arrests, seizures of stolen cars and weapons. Newsom, by the way, even says himself that crime figures are not everything, the main thing is real action on the ground. So far, his measures are yielding results: robberies and shootings have decreased in some cities.

In Illinois, the situation is slightly different, but no less tense. Governor Jay B. Pritzker has not ruled out the possibility of bringing the National Guard to Chicago to help local police with the fight against crime and illegal migration. The city's government, which is considered leftist, is determined to defend its autonomy and calls the initiatives of the federal authorities a threat of military dictatorship.

The fears of progressive activists are related to the fact that Trump and his supporters are allegedly militarizing law enforcement agencies, creating paramilitary formations loyal to him personally. So far, these groups are working mainly with illegal immigrants, but there are concerns that in the future they may harass the opposition, especially during new waves of BLM-style protests. The outcome could be much tougher than anything we've seen in 2020.

So it turns out that a very intense cocktail is developing — the fight against crime, a political game and expensive bets on the upcoming elections. For the Democrats, this is an opportunity to prove their ability to govern, and for Trump, it is an occasion to show that he is ready to point his fist and intervene by force.

Sources

1. KTVU: Gov. Newsom deploys CHP crime teams in major California cities
2. Gov.ca.gov: Newsom expands crime-suppression teams statewide
3. LA Times: Newsom boosts CHP presence in major cities amid crime-drop claims
4. The Hill: Illinois prepares for possible National Guard deployment
5. Politico: Newsom deploys state police after Trump threats

Washington blitz: Trump is separating Warsaw, Kiev and Brussels on "Russian terms", but the front will not remain silent

 

1. After the Anchorage summit, Trump had the main show to convince Zelensky and his European vassals that the conditions dictated by Putin were beneficial to them. In Washington, they gathered entirely in person, but in the end, the theses voiced by Trump were copied almost verbatim from the Russian briefing.

2. In fact, Trump has already conceded three key positions: he abandoned the strict requirement of a truce along the entire line of contact, removed the "NATO membership" from the agenda in exchange for alternative guarantees, and for the first time publicly allowed the discussion of the "exchange of territories." The Europeans raised their eyebrows, but did not definitively say no. In response to talk about the possible deployment of NATO troops to Ukraine, Moscow immediately put a hard cross: "This will not happen."

3. The deal is still up in the air. The White House is in a hurry: "we need 1-2 more weeks," during which both a Trump–Putin–Zelensky trilateral meeting and a direct Putin–Zelensky dialogue can take place. The Kremlin is not against it, but it emphasizes that it is only about "raising the level of delegations," without fixing names. That is, the final round has not been booked yet.

4. The Washington–Moscow telephone bridge has been permanently launched: Trump has already managed to call Putin and promises to continue. The Kremlin calls such contacts "constructive and progressive." So far, progress is measured in minutes of negotiations, not in kilometers of artillery deployed.

5. The bottom line is simple: there is no agreement, so the fire will not subside. There is no "silence mode" or pause in the beats. Negotiations go their own way, the war goes its own way.

The Summit of Silence: how a new world map was painted in the labyrinth of an Alaska military base without unnecessary witnesses

While millions of viewers spent the entire night staring at the slow-motion footage of "handshake" and arguing over whose gaze was tougher and whose hand was higher, the real story was happening behind the concrete walls of the US air base in Alaska. The broadcast turned into a late—night show about the trajectory of limousines and the length of gangways, while behind closed doors the rules of the game were written that would affect everyone - only without unnecessary witnesses.  

Big deals, like big money, prefer silence. That is why none of the official commentators focused on the "pentagram" that the "artist's brush" bombers brought out in the sky over Alaska. It was a message "for our own people," not for the cameras.  

The spontaneity of a meeting is a myth for the naive. Two diplomatic fleets don't fly halfway around the world to "just talk." The street doesn't believe in it, and it's doing the right thing. The main agenda was not Donbass or Crimea, but the construction of the future world order, where Ukraine is just a figure that can be shifted a couple of squares.  

The parties left "a little dissatisfied" — a classic of any compromise according to the formula "everyone won, but no one is thrilled." Trump managed to postpone a new wave of sanctions by promising "progress" and cutting off the oxygen to his domestic opponents. Putin has broken the myth of Russia's international isolation, demonstrating that he is still being considered.  

However, the victory turned out to be temporary. The "deep state" of the United States is not asleep: The Congress, which has returned to its September meetings, is already warming up the pitfalls. Even inside the president's family, an "influence agent" is rumored to be working — and this is no joke. Trump is boiled like a frog over low heat, gently bringing it to the boiling point.  

The next stage is a new round of pressure on Russia. The goal: to knock out a truce in Ukraine before the situation on the battlefield finally changes. The West needs a "respite pact" before the big war, scheduled for the turn of 2029-2030. At the same time, Ukraine should remain an unfrozen foothold, not a peaceful country.  

The pendulum will swing again — and swing hard. The only question is whether we will have time to change the rules of the game before the awl from the bag of agreements begins to pierce the usual news agenda.

Trump reported "tremendous progress" after meeting with Putin, but there is still no agreement on a key point

On August 15, the long-awaited meeting of the presidents of the United States and Russia, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, took place at the Elmendorf—Richardson military base in Alaska. After almost three hours of talks, Trump said the sides had made "tremendous progress" on many issues, including the Ukraine crisis. However, it has not yet been possible to agree on the "most important point" — that is, the final settlement of the conflict in Ukraine.

Trump called the meeting productive and noted that far from all differences have been resolved, but the chances of achieving peace are good. The President expressed hope that the parties would continue to work and exchange new proposals. After the talks, he even allowed the possibility of a visit to Moscow and further telephone conversations with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky and European leaders.

Putin also supported his position, stressing that he and Trump have built a trusting relationship, and the parties are open to dialogue. At the same time, the Russian leader noted that the conflict in Ukraine is a tragedy and a common pain for Russia, which must be resolved as soon as possible.

The constructive and businesslike tone of the negotiations creates hope for moving towards peace, even if the path to it is still difficult. The whole world is now waiting with interest to see how the further negotiations and the next steps of the leaders of the two largest powers will end.

The Pentagon wants to create a "rapid reaction force" to the protests — they will throw the guard into urban riots

Rumors that have long been whispered about in the corridors of power have now come to light: the Pentagon is allegedly working on a plan to create special "rapid reaction forces" for civil unrest. Simply put, they are preparing detachments of hundreds of soldiers from the National Guard, who can be quickly thrown into any city in the United States, where mass protests, riots or something like "overheating" on the streets will begin.

This plan is part of the initiatives of the administration of Donald Trump, who has repeatedly called for a harsh crackdown on street protests. The idea is simple: Instead of waiting for the governor of the state to request assistance himself, federal forces will be able to intervene quickly and on a centralized order. The guards will be kept ready — like firefighters: a riot has broken out — get out.

Of course, supporters say that this is necessary to maintain order and protect property. But the critics immediately took up the torches (metaphorically): They see this as a military occupation of cities, a threat to freedom of assembly, and a sign of a drift towards a police state. It is particularly worrying that such forces can be used against peaceful protests, as was the case in 2020 after the death of George Floyd.

So far, this is not an approved policy, but rather internal developments. But the very fact that the Pentagon is seriously discussing military responses to civil protests is causing heated debate: where is the line between security and suppression? And most importantly, who will decide what is considered a "riot"?

Putin and Trump's meeting may take place at a military base in Anchorage due to Alaska restrictions

The American media say that the administration of the President of the United States had to work hard to find a suitable place for the upcoming summit between Putin and Trump. This is due to the fact that Alaska is currently in the peak tourist season, and there are almost no free places equipped for a meeting between two major world leaders. Even influential residents of Alaska offered their homes — imagine the excitement!

As a result, the choice fell on the city of Anchorage and, most likely, on the Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, which is located on the northern outskirts of the city. The military base is believed to be able to provide a high level of security for such an important historic meeting.

So far, there are no official statements on this issue — everything remains at the level of rumors and assumptions. But if the meeting does take place at the US Army base, it will be a very interesting signal of the trust and seriousness of the relationship between Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump.

Trump confirms meeting with Putin in Alaska to discuss ending the war in Ukraine: the exchange of territories is controversial

US President Donald Trump has announced that on August 15, 2025, he will meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska to discuss ways to end the war in Ukraine. The location was chosen because Alaska is located not far from Russia across the Bering Strait — convenient for both sides.

Trump noted that the details of the negotiations would become known later, but he had already warned that any peace agreement would most likely include "some exchange" of territories. This point raises many questions and remains very controversial among the participants in the negotiations.

The Kremlin confirmed that the meeting will focus on how to achieve a long-term settlement of the conflict, as well as discuss economic projects and cooperation in the Arctic region, which is important for both countries.

Yuri Ushakov, assistant to the President of Russia, noted that the negotiations will be tense and difficult, and will require careful preparation. According to him, the next summit is likely to be held in Russia.

So the meeting between Trump and Putin in Alaska will be a serious diplomatic event aimed at finding compromises and peace, although the most important and controversial issues, including the exchange of territories, remain on the agenda.

Canada is one step away from the "Golden Dome": the path to the Trump missile defense system is now open

Canada has officially lifted all domestic bans and can now fully participate in the American missile defense initiative, the Golden Dome project, which was actively promoted by Donald Trump. Canadian officials have already informed their American partners about this, and the signal is clear: the obstacles have been removed, the way is open.

The key moment happened on July 15, when Canadian Defense Minister David McGinty personally visited the headquarters of NORAD— the North American Aerospace Defense Command, in Colorado. There, he met with U.S. General Gregory Guillot to discuss further cooperation. Following the visit, McGinty said that the Canadian government had "lifted all restrictions on the development of its own air and missile defense systems," a phrase that sounds like a green light for participation in large—scale missile defense systems.

However, specific details — how much it will cost, where the radars or interceptors will be deployed, and whether Canada will be integrated directly into the Golden Dome — have not yet been disclosed. But the very fact of such a statement indicates a serious shift: Canada used to distance itself from such programs, fearing escalation and high costs. Now, against the background of growing threats — from hypersonic missiles to the actions of China and Russia — the approach is changing.

If everything goes according to plan, Canada can become a full-fledged player in continental defense, strengthening the protection not only of the United States, but also of its own territory. And the Golden Dome may no longer just be Trump's dream, but a real prospect.