(Reuters) — NATO accused Moscow on Friday of reckless behavior and pledged to &#8220;defend every inch of Allied territory&#8221; after Romania said a Russian drone had crashed into a civilian apartment block in the alliance member state during an attack on neighboring Ukraine.
Romania&#8217;s defense ministry said a woman and a child suffered minor injuries in Galati near the border with Ukraine overnight after radar tracked a Russian drone entering Romanian airspace.
Photos from the scene showed charred and damaged brickwork on the roof of the 10-story apartment block which Romanian authorities said was hit by a drone that exploded on impact, tearing through a top-floor flat.
Russia&#8217;s TASS news agency cited Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, who said President Vladimir Putin had been informed about the incident.
<div id="attachment_1104439" style="width: 857px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1104439" class="size-large wp-image-1104439" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/2026-05-29T065911Z_1_LYNXMPEM4S0DZ_RTROPTP_4_UKRAINE-CRISIS-ROMANIA-DRONES-1-847x576.jpg" alt="" width="847" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/2026-05-29T065911Z_1_LYNXMPEM4S0DZ_RTROPTP_4_UKRAINE-CRISIS-ROMANIA-DRONES-1-847x576.jpg 847w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/2026-05-29T065911Z_1_LYNXMPEM4S0DZ_RTROPTP_4_UKRAINE-CRISIS-ROMANIA-DRONES-1-300x204.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/2026-05-29T065911Z_1_LYNXMPEM4S0DZ_RTROPTP_4_UKRAINE-CRISIS-ROMANIA-DRONES-1-768x522.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/2026-05-29T065911Z_1_LYNXMPEM4S0DZ_RTROPTP_4_UKRAINE-CRISIS-ROMANIA-DRONES-1.jpg 1200w" sizes=" (max-width: 847px) 100vw, 847px" />A Romanian law enforcement officer works on the site of an explosion at a residential block of flats following a drone hit close to the border with Ukraine, in Galati, Romania, May 29, 2026. Inquam Photos/George Calin via REUTERS</div>
Separately, Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chair of Russia&#8217;s powerful Security Council, warned European leaders that drones would continue to stray into their countries and prevent their populations from sleeping peacefully.
It was the first time a densely populated area in a NATO country had been hit causing injuries during Russia&#8217;s war in Ukraine, and the incident is likely to increase tensions on the alliance&#8217;s eastern flank as member states worry about the war spilling over their borders.
&#8220;Russia’s reckless behavior is a danger to us all,&#8221; NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said on X after speaking by phone to Romanian President Nicusor Dan, whose country is in both the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the European Union.
&#8220;I affirmed that NATO stands ready to defend every inch of Allied territory,&#8221; he said, without making any mention of triggering NATO&#8216;s mutual defense clause. &#8220;We will continue to enhance our readiness to deter and defend against any threat, including from drones.&#8221;
Dan said the Russian consulate in the southeastern city of Constanta would be closed and the consul expelled.
TASS quoted Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova as saying Moscow would respond swiftly to Bucharest&#8217;s decision to close the consulate.
Romania, which shares a 400-mile land border with Ukraine, said Russian drones had breached its airspace 28 times since Moscow began attacking Ukrainian ports across the Danube River following its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Stephen Evelyn, a 44-year-old American citizen who lives in Galati, called it &#8220;another provocation by the Russians&#8221;.
&#8220;I don&#8217;t believe this was an accident, this has happened too many times for the Russians to be doing this by accident,&#8221; he said. &#8220;Either that or they&#8217;re highly incompetent at waging war, but NATO needs to do something about this.&#8221;
There have been multiple airspace incursions into NATO airspace since Moscow invaded Ukraine, most notably when more than 20 Russian drones entered Poland&#8217;s airspace on the night of September 9-10.
In recent weeks Ukrainian drones have strayed into Baltic countries&#8217; airspace, sowing confusion and raising tensions with Russia.
Romania has asked NATO allies to deploy additional anti-drone capabilities to Romania, with official sources saying Bucharest needs low-altitude radars and interceptor drones. A NATO spokesperson said on Friday &#8220;potential additional defensive measures are considered.&#8221;
Local authorities in southern Ukraine said Izmail port in the Odesa region, across the border from Galati, had come under attack from drones early on Friday.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said Kyiv was ready to support Romania &#8220;in whatever way is necessary&#8221;.
<div id="attachment_1104441" style="width: 659px" class="wp-caption alignnone"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-1104441" class="size-large wp-image-1104441" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/2026-05-29T054159Z_1_LYNXMPEM4S0AI_RTROPTP_4_UKRAINE-CRISIS-ROMANIA-DRONES-649x576.jpg" alt="" width="649" height="576" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/2026-05-29T054159Z_1_LYNXMPEM4S0AI_RTROPTP_4_UKRAINE-CRISIS-ROMANIA-DRONES-649x576.jpg 649w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/2026-05-29T054159Z_1_LYNXMPEM4S0AI_RTROPTP_4_UKRAINE-CRISIS-ROMANIA-DRONES-300x266.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/2026-05-29T054159Z_1_LYNXMPEM4S0AI_RTROPTP_4_UKRAINE-CRISIS-ROMANIA-DRONES-768x682.jpg 768w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2026/05/2026-05-29T054159Z_1_LYNXMPEM4S0AI_RTROPTP_4_UKRAINE-CRISIS-ROMANIA-DRONES.jpg 1200w" sizes=" (max-width: 649px) 100vw, 649px" />A fire burns on the roof of a 10-story block of flats after a drone crashed into the building, causing an explosion and injuring two people, near the border with Ukraine, in Galati, Romania, in this handout image released on May 29, 2026. Romanian Department for Emergency Situations (DSU)/Handout via REUTERS</div>
The Romanian defense ministry said two F-16 fighter jets had been scrambled and a military helicopter was sent to monitor the attack, with the pilots authorized to shoot down any drones without endangering inhabited areas. The residents of border counties Braila, Galati and Tulcea were warned to take cover.
The drone was in Romania&#8217;s airspace for four minutes and flew at a low altitude for 6.2 miles, making it difficult for radar to detect, Romanian Brigadier General Gheorghe Maxim said.
He told a press conference that although the U.S. anti-drone system Merops is operational in Romania it is not yet fully integrated with national air defenses and it would have been too risky to use in a city.
In addition to the woman and her child who were taken to hospital with minor injuries, two people were treated on the scene for panic attacks and 70 were evacuated from the apartment block, local authorities said.
Deputy Interior Minister Raed Arafat, who is in charge of the emergency response agency, told private broadcaster Digi24 that the drone affected two building stairwells, an elevator shaft and damaged five cars.
A drone also damaged an electricity pole and a household annex in Galati in April.
In a separate incident, a drone without an explosive charge was found in northwestern Romania, state TVR broadcaster said late on Thursday, citing local authorities.
(Reporting by George Calin in Galati, Luiza Ilie in Bucharest, Jekaterina Golubkova in Tokyo, Alan Charlish, Pawel Florkiewicz and Anna Wlodarczak-Semczuk in Warsaw, Jason Hovet in Prague and Lily Bayer in Brussels; Editing by Jacqueline Wong, Kate Mayberry and Timothy Heritage)

ROMANIA-NATO-DEFENCE-EXERCISE

NATO Sends Clear Message To Russia After Attack On Member Nation

Foreign Policy

NATO

Russia

Ukraine-Russia War

In a very literal sense, Taiwan is moving westward toward China, and there’s nothing that can be done about it. The tectonic plates that have shifted over millions of years, creating the island’s mountain terrain, are also driving it slowly and irrevocably toward the mainland. That notoriously craggy terrain is expected to act as a deterrent to any attack from the People’s Liberation Army from across the Taiwan Strait, a lane of the Pacific which runs as narrow as 100 miles and for the most part shallower than 100 meters. For the People’s Republic of China, Taiwan lies just out of reach. It is the military equivalent of skipping a smooth rock.
Taiwan’s position as a locus of China’s ambitions go beyond the temptation of seizing hold of the island’s burgeoning chip industry. It is the path to becoming a true ocean-ruling power, breaking out of the chain of Western-allied archipelagos that run along the Pacific Ring of Fire. To extend the PLA’s untested forces and grasp Taiwan isn’t just a matter of national pride to further the One China policy. It is a giant step toward the global dominance China’s leader, Xi Jinping, wants to transform into an inevitability — his lifetime’s legacy for the PRC.
For critics who have questioned the interests of the United States in its military support for Taiwan, the explosion of the semiconductor industry came at an unfortunate time. Beyond the obvious American interest in defending against the expansion of China’s brutal communist regime, Taiwan is now dominating the global foundry of chips — including more than 60 percent of the market overall, and 90 percent of the most advanced versions, central to the pursuit of artificial intelligence dominance. Taiwan&#8217;s innovations made their independence essential at exactly the same time protectionists and isolationists wanted to press the case the island is utterly dispensible.
How very inconvenient.
The question that confronts Donald Trump now as he wings his way to the long-anticipated meeting with Xi Jinping is how clearly he will make that importance known. There is no security, market, or historical incentive at this point to concede the long-held position of the United States toward Taiwan — bolstered most recently in a December package that included $11 billion in weapons for the island. But there is the question of how dedicated the Taiwanese are to their own defense, after the opposition to Taiwan’s president — who holds the largest portion of legislative seats — nixed a major package that would’ve significantly increased their defense spending, opting for a half measure that cut back on domestic drone production and their air defense systems. The opposition’s leader, Cheng Li-wun, has courted accusations that she’s working to diminish the island’s deterrence capability — a storyline that only grew after she chose to <a href="https://breakingdefense.com/2026/05/taiwans-parliament-passes-pared-back-supplementary-defense-budget/">meet</a> with Xi Jinping in person last month.
For the people of Taiwan, there is also the question of time. Opposition to the acceptance of China taking over their republic is largely the view of older members of society, and the youngest people on the island seem increasingly open to the idea. The constant influence of PRC-backed social media campaigns and outreach efforts to exert soft power over the minds of youths absolutely has something to do with this. For a population that is facing a gargantuan decline — their fertility rate fell to the lowest in the world last year at 0.7 — perhaps all China will have to do is wait them out.
The PRC has telegraphed its Taiwan-related intent for this meeting all along. It wants to tempt Donald Trump by appealing to his personal vision as a peacemaker — particularly in the context of the Iran conflict — by asking for an alteration to stated U.S. policy, or just to have the president declare publicly that he opposes Taiwan’s independence. The propaganda victory alone would send a shudder through the island’s political leadership and would be a coup for Xi Jinping, even if it may seem like a low-cost offering from President Trump for potential economic gain.
In this context, the meeting this week takes on a whole new importance when it comes to dictating the future — not just for AI in the West, but for Donald Trump’s legacy as a world leader. He has restored a hardened focus on America’s interests, particularly in the Western Hemisphere. As dedicated as he is to ending Iran’s chances at becoming a nuclear power, some of his advisors might use that effort’s uncertainty as a justification for sacrificing America’s interests in Taiwan.
If there’s one thing we know about this president, it’s that, as much as he listens to those around him, he keeps his own counsel on the right path forward. There is no wisdom in being remembered as the president who gave China what it craves most. And in a brutal sense, so long as the PRC’s energy is directed at this one infuriatingly productive mountainous island the size of West Virginia, it is spending less time on everything else it would like to do to become the global superpower of Xi Jinping’s dreams. Trump is a gambler, wagering the cost of breaking norms and diplomatic rituals on his, and America’s, strength. Today, that is a cost worth paying.

TOPSHOT-TAIWAN-SKOREA-US-CHINA-DIPLOMACY

Trump Holds The Future Of Taiwan In His Hands

China

DW Opinion

Taiwan

China is not just America&#8217;s geopolitical opponent; they are our geopolitical enemy. They have been our geopolitical enemies since the establishment of the Chinese Communist regime in 1949.
We may have spent decades pretending that this isn&#8217;t true; Richard Nixon famously moved to open China as a way of separating China from the Soviet Union, and some neoliberals may have opened our markets to Chinese goods, hoping that free markets would lead to political moderation, but all that time, China was still our enemy.
The People&#8217;s Republic of China is a historically mass-murdering, currently terrorist-supporting, surveillance state of unprecedented proportions directed at destroying America&#8217;s global hegemony.
And they&#8217;re taking the long view. They can wait us out. They are taking advantage of our openness in order to defeat us. Whether it&#8217;s stealing literally tens of billions of dollars in intellectual property, stacking American universities with Chinese operatives, or infiltrating our political system, China is our geopolitical enemy.
This came to the fore in 2020, when China unleashed the Wuhan virus on the rest of humanity by lying and pretending that it was not transmissible from human to human, and by lying to the W.H.O., which was basically a Chinese front organization at that point.
Many folks have pointed out that we have supply chains that lead back to China, and we need to find ways to actually decouple from China.
So what should we be doing?
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ben-shapiro-ep-2424?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-981859" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner.avif" alt="" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner.avif 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner-768x128.jpg 768w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
We need to use both the carrot and the stick. That means we need to cut good trade deals with countries such as Canada. We need to cut better trade deals with all of the people who might move toward China but might move toward us.
We need to isolate China by flexing our economic power. The way you flex your economic power isn&#8217;t just about telling people they can&#8217;t access our markets unless we get better access to theirs. The way that you flex your economic power is by cutting deals that isolate China.
You tell countries: Pick between us. You can either have access to American markets or to Chinese manufacturing. Those are your choices.
If we utilized our power in this way, we could isolate China.
We can also cut off their sources of revenue and power. President Donald Trump has been doing this with alacrity. If you look at Trump&#8217;s foreign policy and what he has been doing, much of it is directed at minimizing Chinese power and influence. The operation against Nicolas Maduro in Venezuela was designed to cut off a chief source of oil revenue for China.
Much of what is directed against Iran is actually directed against China. China receives 10-15% of its oil imports from Iran.
Isolating Iran cuts off a source of power and revenue for China. Helping Ukraine to defeat Russia in Ukraine is a way of cutting off a support base for China, because Russia is basically a giant gas station for China at this point.
What else can we do? Strengthen our own economy.
One of the big problems we have is the massive dependency in the United States on China buying our debt. China owns trillions of dollars in American debt. They buy American bonds. The tacit threat in doing so is that, at a certain strategic point, they could flood the market with those American bonds.
They could take a loss. They could cram that down on their own citizens, just make their own citizens poorer. They don&#8217;t really care about their citizens.
This is a stark reminder that if you wish to be a world power, you cannot be a bloated welfare state.
I know that there&#8217;s a third rail of American politics, and that third rail of American politics is all of the entitlement programs. President Trump and his administration have taken the position that the entitlement programs in the United States require no systemic changes.
The problem with that perspective is that when you bloat your own economy, when you create enormous anchors on the American ship of state, it is very difficult to move in the ways you need to move.
Our debt is a huge problem. What we should be doing is getting lean and mean in terms of how we actually run our ship of state. We should make our economy more innovative, lower taxes, and cut down the bloated welfare state.
Finally, we badly need to cut off China&#8217;s avenues for stealing our IP and destroying our institutions. One easy way to do that: Zero Chinese foreign exchange students. Zero.
I understand that there is a strong incentive for our university systems to bring in Chinese foreign exchange students, since foreign students pay full freight while American students pay a discounted rate.
We should not be importing students from places that hate the United States in order to study at our universities. Period. End of story. I do not care whether those are students from Iran, and I do not care whether those are students from sub-Saharan Africa. I don&#8217;t care whether they are students from China; it doesn&#8217;t matter.
Bringing people to the United States to access our systems and then going back to their home countries is a gigantic mistake. There is no upside for us. It is all downside.
To pretend that some geopolitical enemies do not take advantage of our openness here in the United States to harm us is nonsense. They absolutely do.
All of these things are possible — and necessary.

How America Became Blind To China’s Long Game

The Enemy America Helped Build Into A Global Superpower

Ben Shapiro

Communist China

Opinion

President Donald Trump is headed to China this week, and according to the legacy media, he is in a weak position. He has no cards to play. The Chinese have the upper hand.
This is total crap. President Trump has spent a decade totally reshaping the global power map. China is in trouble, and Trump is heading into the summit in a power position on every front.
Go back 10 years. Everyone said that China would be dominant 10 years ago.
Wrong.
Today, the Left and the woke Right — which is basically the New Left —  say that America should cede global power to “multi-polarity,” which means China and Russia.
That&#8217;s not just stupid. It makes them useful idiots for the world&#8217;s worst regimes.
According to some sources, China is overconfident. They believe that they have the upper hand. The Chinese government is allowing people in China to see what&#8217;s happening in America, and because that coverage is often negative about America, it&#8217;s reinforcing the Chinese government&#8217;s perception of its own strength.
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ben-shapiro-ep-2423?elementPosition=1&amp;row=0&amp;rowHeadline=Recent+Episodes&amp;rowType=Horizontal+Show+Episodes+Carousel"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-981859" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner.avif" alt="" width="1024" height="171" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner.avif 1024w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner-300x50.jpg 300w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2025/10/ben-banner-768x128.jpg 768w" sizes=" (max-width: 1024px) 100vw, 1024px" /></a>
Now, Trump is headed to China, and our beloved legacy media is chanting that multi-polarity is happening.
Wrong.
China is in its weakest global position in at least a couple of decades.
China is an awful, terrible, autocratic, economically fascist, one-party state. They&#8217;ve had serious systemic problems for years, decades, even up to today. Those problems have been masked over the last three decades or so by China&#8217;s shift from a completely closed economy in the 1970s to one that engages with world markets, moving from communism at home to a form of mercantilism under the predecessors of Xi Jinping.
There are always moronic economists here in the West who are in love with the idea of a mercantilist, centralized state, meaning a state in which the government directs where private money should be spent and determines which trade deals can be made. Everything is government-sponsored. Everything is government-subsidized. Everything is government-regulated.
A lot of economists love this stuff because it gives them the illusion of control.
But China is not the economic powerhouse they&#8217;re making it out to be.
China can direct its economy in a few different directions with serious power, and it can take whatever it has of its economy, cobble that together, and then can punch in one direction.
For example, if they want to generate extraordinary levels of power, they can build many nuclear plants or dig for coal, and they don&#8217;t care about the environmental effects.
Thus, they can really out-produce us in terms of energy. And they can build some new cars that are pretty competitive by stealing and adapting Western technology, which they do.
But let us be real. The Chinese economy is not truly competitive with the American economy in any serious sense. Their products are not better than ours. Their services are not better than ours. Their economy is not better than ours. Not even close.
They lack innovation. So they can build these gigantic labs, and they can force a bunch of people into those labs, but when you don&#8217;t have free markets, you have a problem. The system of free markets allows for better products and services because of competition.
You want to know why every major AI company is located in the United States? Because they&#8217;re all competing with each other. In fact, many of them are located a few blocks from one another in Silicon Valley. That is not atypical in a free market economy.
China has a serious debt problem. They hide their debt problem by stealing money from their citizens.
We&#8217;re always hearing about the Chinese military; they have a gigantic nuclear arsenal. But technologically speaking, they are far behind the United States now. Maybe they can pick it up, but not if they&#8217;re also lagging in AI, which is why we need to win the AI race.
The only thing that can solve China&#8217;s demographic, productivity, and military problems is winning the AI race.
This is why it&#8217;s so stupid when you see people from the Left to the woke Right making the case for AI in the United States to be set back.
It&#8217;s nuts. That would hand global power to the Chinese.
You&#8217;re constantly hearing about China&#8217;s gigantic army. It’s huge, but manpower isn&#8217;t everything, as we saw in the Ukraine war.
Similar to Russia’s, the Chinese military isn&#8217;t up to snuff. China relies on older, less sophisticated chips. What&#8217;s more, China doesn&#8217;t yet have the capacity to project deepwater power. They have many boats in their navy, which is effective in coastal zones, but they have no capacity to project power beyond those zones.
China&#8217;s entire governmental system is built around a lack of competition. The problem with Chinese centralized control is that it cannot produce innovation or building or thriving.
President Trump knows all of this, and he has been spending the last 10 years putting the screws to China. It is the through line of his foreign policy.
People look at Trump&#8217;s foreign policy and ask, &#8220;What&#8217;s he doing in Iran? I don&#8217;t understand what he’s doing in Venezuela. I don&#8217;t understand what he’s doing with Japan.&#8221;
All of it is oriented to China. All of it.
President Trump is opportunistic in foreign policy terms. He waits for an opportunity to arise, and then he takes advantage of it.
A dozen years ago, people were talking about China’s Belt and Road Initiative, or what they called the Silk Road Initiative. It was designed to basically create massive debt traps for countries. China would give them free money, but it wasn&#8217;t free; it would come with constraints. Those countries that were poor would take the loans, and then Beijing would basically foreclose on the loans and take control of property in strategic areas.
Countries were joining because they saw free money.
But it turns out the countries have been withdrawing from the Belt and Road Initiative, and even Chinese investment in the Belt and Road has been dropping precipitously.
The reality is that when it comes to the economic battle between China and the United States, we have the upper hand.

Trump_Xi

Trump’s Biggest Advantage Over China Is Obvious

While there won’t be bombs dropping, President Donald Trump’s upcoming visit to China will be no walk in the park. While trade remains a thorn in U.S.-Chinese relations, there is more underneath the surface. If Trump wants to advance America’s interests in Beijing, there are topics he needs to address.
Human rights is one of those issues. Millions of people are suffering under the oppression of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Christians in particular are subject to arrests, torture, and indefinite detention without a trial or access to a lawyer.
The case of Pastor Ezra Jin typifies the anti-Christian discrimination of the CCP. <a href="https://www.npr.org/2025/10/12/nx-s1-5571936/zion-church-ezra-jin-arrest-china-christian">Arrested</a> in October, along with dozens of church members, Pastor Jin has been imprisoned without charges since then. In addition, the CCP is <a href="https://www.wsj.com/world/china/china-targets-lawyers-defending-jailed-christian-leaders-6d0d72c8">harassing</a> his lawyer, eliminating whatever chance Jin has of getting a fair trial. Thankfully, the public pressure campaign led by Jin’s daughter, Senate staffer Grace Jin Drexel, has brought Jin’s case to President Trump’s attention. Trump <a href="https://x.com/juliamanch/status/2052547613816213512?s=46">promised</a> that he would bring up Pastor Jin’s case in his meeting with Xi Jinping.
Another prominent case Trump will ask Xi about is Hong Kong businessman Jimmy Lai. Lai, a British passport holder, was <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8d5pl34vv0o">sentenced</a> to 20 years in prison for his pro-democracy activism. A virtual death sentence for the nearly eighty-year-old Lai. Hong Kongers were promised a high degree of autonomy after the city&#8217;s handover to China.
The central government in Beijing has spent the time since the handover gradually erasing freedom in Hong Kong. Instead of taking his British passport and fleeing the city, Lai stayed and fought for Hong Kong, leading to his arrest in 2020. Like with Pastor Jin, Trump said on multiple occasions that he would try to secure Lai’s freedom. Should he succeed, this would not only be a moral victory, but it would also establish the United States’ status as the defender of global liberty.
It may feel like ancient history at this point, but we are just over a year into Trump’s Liberation Day trade war — the next topic sure to be discussed. China was targeted more than any other nation, with tariff rates <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/china/us-president-trumps-renewed-trade-war-with-china-2026-05-06/">exceeding</a> 100% at one point. Despite the tariffs, China remains one of the U.S.’s largest trading partners. With the economy straining due to the war in Iran, Trump is feeling pressure to score an economic victory.
Despite this, Trump should not sign a trade deal with China that does not benefit the U.S. For one thing, China has a history of failing to honor international agreements. Aside from the aforementioned Joint Declaration, China <a href="https://www.piie.com/blogs/realtime-economics/2022/china-bought-none-extra-200-billion-us-exports-trumps-trade-deal">failed</a> to fulfill commitments it made under the trade deal signed during the first Trump administration. With that in mind, Trump would be wise to take any promises from Beijing with a grain of salt.
Trump needs to remember on his trip that China isn’t a prospective partner; they are a geopolitical threat. For starters, China continues threatening the source of <a href="https://www.npr.org/2025/12/01/nx-s1-5620992/tsmc-chipmaker-expands-beyond-taiwan">90% of the world’s advanced computer chips</a>: Taiwan. If China conquers Taiwan, they gain a stranglehold on critical tech and leverage over a global economy dependent on advanced chips.
China’s saber-rattling isn’t limited to Taiwan; they are also threatening neighbors like Japan and the Philippines. China illegitimately asserts sovereignty over territory that is well within the exclusive economic zones of its neighbors. To get around this, China is building islands to claim territory in the South China Sea as its own. Xi wants Trump to abandon America’s allies in Tokyo and Manila. Trump can’t let them.
The danger from China isn’t limited to what goes on outside the U.S.; the threat is already within our borders. Counterintelligence operations focus heavily on Chinese operatives, with dozens of arrests being made against Chinese nationals for spying. Moreover, China is one of the largest purveyors of <a href="https://www.wsj.com/opinion/china-is-attacking-citizens-on-american-soil-84cd6ee0">transnational repression</a> (TNP), whereby China harasses or suppresses dissidents living abroad. To protect the freedom of its citizens, Trump made clear to Xi that this is unacceptable.
These are weighty issues the Trump administration has to address. Any of these issues may be enough for China to balk at any trade negotiations. The president should not let this risk intimidate him. For one thing, they are too important to sacrifice for the sake of a trade deal. Second, the U.S. doesn’t need to sacrifice its values to appease China. Despite China’s growth, the United States remains the world’s largest economy and doesn’t need to sacrifice core interests to appease China.
President Trump has a full plate with the war in Iran causing economic and political pain. His trip to Beijing may be a tempting opportunity to score a win on the foreign policy front. If the president wants his trip to be successful, he needs to keep human rights and national security in mind.
***
<a href="https://www.joinyv.org/talent/matthew-cookson">Matt Cookson</a> is an alumnus of the Young Voices Contributor Program and was a Middle East History and Policy Fellow with Young Voices. He also works in the supply chain for a U.S. Defense Contractor. His commentary has appeared in the Mises Institute, Real Clear Politics, the National Interest, Providence Magazine, China Source, and the Idaho Freedom Foundation. You can follow him on X @<a href="https://x.com/MattCookson95">MattCookson95</a> and Substack @<a href="https://substack.com/@thewaythecookiecrumbles?utm_source=user-menu">thewaythecookiecrumbles</a>.

TOPSHOT-SKOREA-US-CHINA-DIPLOMACY

Trump’s Non-Negotiables For ‘Art Of The Deal’ China Trip

Xi Jinping

Iran keeps finding out the hard way that President Donald Trump’s foreign policy playbook does not leave a lot of room for stalling, bluffing, or endless empty negotiations.
As the regime weighs whether to respond to Trump’s latest nuclear proposal, officials and defense experts are openly warning what comes next if Tehran tries to drag this out too long: more crushing economic pressure, expanded military strikes, and a systematic dismantling of Iran’s ability to threaten the region.
Speaking Saturday morning to reporters, our commander-in-chief said he expects to hear from Iran “very soon” regarding the latest United States peace proposal and suggested Tehran still “very much” wants to reach a lasting agreement.
The president sounded cautiously optimistic but also made clear he is watching closely to see whether Iran is serious or simply trying to buy time, a tactic the regime has used throughout Operation Epic Fury.
“We&#8217;re getting a letter [from Iran] supposedly tonight, so we&#8217;ll see how that goes,” Trump told reporters Friday evening from his golf club in Virginia.
When asked whether Iran could be intentionally dragging out negotiations, Trump responded bluntly: “I don&#8217;t know. We&#8217;ll find out soon enough.”
That uncertainty is exactly why the situation still feels like it could explode at any moment.
Behind the scenes, negotiators are reportedly trying to piece together a preliminary framework tied to Iran’s nuclear program and possible sanctions relief. But former military officials say neither side actually trusts the other.
Meanwhile, the pressure campaign on Tehran has not exactly disappeared.
Just days after Iran launched missiles toward the UAE’s Fujairah Port, United States forces struck Iran’s Qeshm port and Bandar Abbas near the Strait of Hormuz.
Officials insist the operation did not officially restart the war or end the ceasefire, but it sent a very clear message that America is still holding the bigger stick.
And according to defense experts, Trump is intentionally keeping Iran guessing about how far he is willing to go.
If negotiations collapse, experts say the U.S. would likely begin by targeting the systems Iran relies on to intimidate the Middle East and threaten global shipping lanes.
That includes ballistic missiles, Revolutionary Guard infrastructure, command centers, naval attack boats, and air defense systems.
One major target would almost certainly be Iran’s fast attack boat fleet in the Strait of Hormuz, which Tehran has long used to harass oil tankers and pressure the global economy.
At the same time, Trump appears to be tightening the economic screws even further.
Some experts say a maritime blockade alone could slowly suffocate Iran’s oil exports and leave the regime economically cornered within months.
Others warn that if Iran refuses to deal, the next phase could become much more painful.
Trump has already warned Iran that America could target key energy infrastructure and export hubs if Tehran continues pushing toward a nuclear weapon.
The contrast with previous administrations is hard to miss.
Instead of pallets of cash, endless appeasement, and weak red lines, Trump is signaling that Iran has two choices: negotiate seriously or watch America squeeze the regime even harder from every direction possible.

Trump_Pigeon

The Iran Letter Trump Is Waiting For Could Decide What Happens Next

Iran

Operation Epic Fury

President Trump

The Biden blob is apparently trying to make a comeback and even Democrats sound exhausted by it.
A growing fight is breaking out inside Democratic foreign policy circles as some of the same officials tied to President Joe Biden’s most controversial global decisions quietly begin regrouping for 2028. And according to a lengthy new report from Puck News, plenty of Democrats are openly asking the same question: seriously, these guys again?
At the center of the drama is former Biden National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan and the network of Obama-Biden foreign policy operatives often referred to inside Washington as the “Biden bros.”
That circle includes familiar names like Antony Blinken, Jon Finer, Brett McGurk, and others who helped shape Biden-era policy on Afghanistan, Ukraine, Gaza, and Iran.
Now many of them are reemerging through a revived Democratic foreign policy group called National Security Action, which reportedly gathered party insiders in Manhattan recently to begin plotting what Democratic foreign policy could look like in 2028.
The reaction inside parts of the Democratic Party has not exactly been enthusiastic.
“This is the Jake and Jon Show: Redux, and nobody I know is happy about it,” one former senior State Department official told Puck.
That pretty much sums up the vibe.
The frustration appears to go far beyond Republicans criticizing Biden’s foreign policy record.
According to the report, Democrats themselves are increasingly furious over everything from the Afghanistan withdrawal to the administration’s handling of Gaza, while others remain angry over what they describe as efforts to cover up Biden’s decline while still clinging to power politically.
One Democrat quoted in the piece bluntly said the old Biden foreign policy crowd is “canceled and they don’t realize it.”
Ouch.
The article paints a picture of a Democratic Party quietly tearing itself apart behind closed doors over whether the same establishment figures who dominated the Obama and Biden years should continue controlling foreign policy heading into the next presidential cycle.
And the backlash is not just ideological. Some Democrats reportedly view the group as arrogant, insulated, and unwilling to let a younger generation take over. 
 The timing also matters.
President Donald Trump is back in office, global tensions continue escalating, and Democrats are now trying to figure out what exactly their foreign policy identity even is after years of internal fighting over Israel, Ukraine, interventionism, and progressive activism.
That is where the anxiety around Sullivan seems to hit hardest.
For progressives, Sullivan became closely tied to Biden’s support for Israel during the Gaza war.
For hawks, critics say the administration looked weak and indecisive abroad.
For others, the issue is simpler: they believe the same people who helped run the last administration are already trying to reclaim influence before voters have even fully processed what happened.
Still, the old guard does not appear interested in quietly disappearing.
The revived organization recently brought in Maher Bitar, a Palestinian-American foreign policy official tied to Adam Schiff and Biden’s National Security Council, as part of an effort to present a newer face for the group.
But even that move reportedly sparked skepticism from Democrats who saw it as little more than a rebrand of the same old network.
For now, one thing seems clear.
The Biden era may technically be over, but the people behind it are not ready to let go of power just yet.

Joe Biden Campaigns In Western Pennsylvania One Day Before Election

The Biden Blob Is Back And Nobody Wants This

Biden

Biden Admin

Jake Sullivan

When historians look back on this period of war in Ukraine and Iran, they will be deeply puzzled by a simple question: why can’t the leaders of the Western Democracies hear our enemies?
There were two examples last week, one from Russia and one from Iran, in which our enemies were extraordinarily clear about their view of things.
In both cases, our enemies’ comments were dramatically different from what we have been telling ourselves.
We keep hoping for reasonableness, for negotiating to a peaceful conclusion, for finding some common ground to build a better future.
Our enemies share none of those goals, and they are very clear about their goals and how different they are from the West’s self-delusion.
Consider first the Russian position.
While Putin was having a very nice chat with President Donald Trump for over an hour, his senior national security spokesperson was preparing a radically different message.
Dmitry Medvedev has been president, prime minister, and now deputy chairman of the Security Council of Russia. He would never make an aggressive, hostile speech without Putin’s approval.
Yet the day after Putin’s call with President Trump, Medvedev gave a speech in which he declared that the United States is Russia’s geopolitical rival and that the conflict with the West is “a question of existence” that will last longer than this generation. He rejected any American mediation between Russia and Ukraine and asserted that victory over Ukraine would solve a lot of Russia’s problems.
Medvedev’s speech was a pretty clear statement of long-term conflict. Remember that Putin, in his April 2005 State of the Nation address, said he believed the collapse of the Soviet Union was “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century.”
Why would we expect a former KGB Colonel who is a fervent Russian nationalist and who wants to reassemble a very strong Russian state to settle for the survival of a Ukraine he is determined to conquer?
While the Russians were telling us we were in a very long conflict that would last over a generation, the Iranians were sending us a clear, unambiguous statement about their intentions.
As the Institute for the Study of War reported:
<blockquote>
Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei declared on April 30 that Iran will retain control over shipping through the Strait of Hormuz and maintain its nuclear and missile capabilities, which supports ISW-CTP’s assessment that the Iranian regime is unlikely to make meaningful concessions in its next proposal to the United States … Mojtaba also underscored that Iran will defend its nuclear, missile, and advanced technological capabilities as resolutely as it defends its territorial borders. A senior Iranian official speaking to the Washington Post on April 30 similarly asserted that Iran’s security establishment rejects compromise on key matters, such as Iran’s ability to enrich uranium.
</blockquote>
It seems clear that Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Commander Major General Ahmad Vahidi now dominates the Iranian dictatorship and represents the hardline position that Iran can withstand American and Israeli attacks and ultimately win the war simply by not giving in.
Western analysts, including those who dominate Washington, D.C., simply cannot break out of their rational, Enlightenment model of reasonableness to understand how unreasonable alternative systems can be, and yet, within their own values and their own experiences, they are following a logic train that is easily understandable.
This was the key problem Winston Churchill faced after reading “Mein Kampf” in the early 1930s and understanding the logic of Hitler’s insanity. He simply could not get the British establishment to listen to Hitler and rearm accordingly.
Consider first the belief system and history that shape General Vahidi. He is part of a religious dictatorship that has been chanting “Death to America” for 47 years. General Vahidi was born in 1958 and joined the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in 1979 at the age of 21. He is sanctioned by the United States, Canada, and the European Union for terrorism and nuclear activities.
When we think about the pain our bombing campaign is causing the Iranian government, we have to put it in the context of their experience of the war with Iraq from September 1980 to August 1988. This was a brutal meat grinder in which the Iraqis used chemical weapons. The best estimate is that Iranian casualties were over 1,000,000, with the Iranian death toll somewhere between 200,000 and 500,000.
If you consider that General Vahidi’s experience from the age of 22 to 30 was this brutal war, and since then he has waged terrorist campaigns against the West while focusing on building nuclear weapons and missiles that can reach Europe and the United States, you get a different sense of what we are up against.
If the religiously inspired (and this is the vital fact which the rational West refuses to consider) dictatorship, when it was barely established, could endure an eight-year war with a million casualties, what is the historic yardstick by which we should expect them to accept terms they would regard as a betrayal of the revolution?
This question of pain levels also applies to Putin and the Russian dictatorship. The Soviet Union lost over 20 million dead in World War II. At Stalingrad alone, they lost 40,000 civilians and had about 1,100,000 soldiers killed or wounded.
From a Ukrainian perspective, the horror of the Stalin-enforced famine of 1932 and 1933, which killed 3,900,000 (about 13% of the population) through starvation, is a horrifying reminder of why they fight against Moscow so intensely and at such costs. The Ukrainian word for the famine is Holodomor, which combines the Ukrainian words for starvation and to inflict death. It is reasonable to suggest that the Ukrainians will fight to the end rather than accept subjugation to a city that deliberately starved millions of them to death.
Our enemies are trying to tell us who they really are. Future historians will puzzle at our inability to hear them.
The Chinese and North Korean dictatorships are watching carefully our inability to confront and respond to reality. They will develop their own strategies accordingly, and both will help Russia and Iran survive the inadequate efforts of the United States and its allies.
Literally, the future of the world will be decided by the American ability or inability to learn and change when faced with aggressive evil.
If we do not change and recognize that our enemies are enemies who think differently from us, we will lose. It is that simple.
***
Newt Gingrich was the Republican Speaker of the United States House of Representatives from 1995 to 1999. Follow him on X @NewtGingrich. Join his newsletter at <a href="https://www.gingrich360.net/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.gingrich360.net/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1778011290065000&amp;usg=AOvVaw1zn9zi0baZTNq2_7KeHn-r">Gingrich360.net</a>.

IRAN-POLITICS-US-HOSTAGE-ANNIVERSARY

Newt Gingrich: Why Can’t We Hear Our Enemies?

American History

Iran war

If one were to believe that the survival of the West is at a crucial inflection point, it makes sense that America — the lone superpower, as an enfeebled Britain limps along self-righteously — would shore up allies in the Old Country. One way to do that is to send the most powerful man in the world’s Number Two to both extend the hand of goodwill and rapport, and to absorb the inevitable criticisms that have been hurled by the Continental class regarding the potential partnership.
It tracks then that the Wall Street Journal Editorial Board <a href="https://archive.ph/5aOuP%23selection-569.0-572.0">cannot seem</a> to comprehend why Vice President JD Vance is currently touring Budapest. “The Orbán affinity seems to be a combination of Mr. Vance’s ideological conviction and domestic coalition maintenance,” the paper writes, adding that, “Mr. Vance is convinced Mr. Orbán is on the front line of the West’s culture wars.” Orbán is. And Vance’s Budapest visit is possibly one of his career&#8217;s most important tests.
Consider the VP’s own words. “Foreign influence is when other governments threaten, cajole, and try to use economic influence to tell you how to vote &#8230; That is fundamentally an assault on your sovereignty,” the VP said <a href="https://x.com/RapidResponse47/status/2041875731559440607">in an interview</a>. Furthermore, he added, in a speech, “We were birthed from this continent,” reinforcing the civilizational ties. The WSJ is baffled at that. “Mr. Vance trotted out the word ‘sovereignty’ repeatedly during Tuesday’s appearance in Budapest to inveigh against putative EU meddling in Hungarian affairs.”
The Hungarian election this year is important for two different reasons. The fact that the VP is flying to Budapest for a high-profile visit and speeches in Europe, as well as to Islamabad, for the peace negotiations with Iran, demonstrates which side won the ideological debate within the White House and to which direction the grand strategy of this country might lead. But there is another important factor.
Beyond rhetorical symbolism about “civilizational ties,” the question is strategic. Within the European Union, Hungary remains one of the rare few states still considered neutral by both the U.S. and Russia, thereby positioning itself as a neutral ground for diplomacy.
Furthermore, Budapest has prioritized de-escalation in Ukraine since 2022 and continues to simultaneously condemn the Russian invasion while arguing for negotiation, a traditional detached realist outlook shaped by Hungarian geography: Hungary borders Ukraine, and is concerned about ethnic Hungarians in the Transcarpathia region, and has taken in over a million Ukrainian refugees.
Budapest is also a pivot point for U.S. trade rivalry with the EU. The <a href="https://www.theamericanconservative.com/hungarys-foreign-minister-trump-is-ukraines-only-hope-for-peace/">Hungarian leadership consistently argued</a> that EU sanctions on Russia have had unintended consequences, including energy shortages, inflation, and industrial strain in Europe, while Russia has continued to benefit from high global energy prices. Orbán has likewise warned against accelerating Ukraine’s membership in NATO, a position that has gained some reflection in recent U.S. strategic thinking.
The <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/2025-National-Security-Strategy.pdf">2025 U.S. National Security Strategy</a> clearly states that there must be a pause in NATO enlargement, there should be total “burden shifting” of conventional security to NATO, and that the EU shouldn’t fine American companies and trade through cynical legislation that also curtails free speech, such as the European <a href="https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/digital-services-act">Digital Services Act</a>. There is only one country that is aligned with the U.S. on all those interests.
Hungary faces its own challenges and contradictions. Eventually, it will have to either acquiesce to broader European oversight or follow Britain out of the EU. Orbán has sought to reform the EU from within rather than leave it, but that play won’t succeed without the U.S. decisively winning the trade and free-speech wars with the EU. His government faces ongoing pressure from Brussels through legal challenges and financial penalties, but being within the EU gives it veto power over European decisions that might harm U.S. financial interests.
Hungary is also a testing ground and a source of inspiration for similar socio-political tendencies in countries like the United States and the United Kingdom, particularly in natalist policies, even if its model is difficult to replicate in larger and more diverse societies.
This is rooted in Hungary’s historical experience with external domination, against the Nazis and Soviets, which reinforces elite skepticism toward ceding total authority to Brussels. Continued electoral success for Orbán would sustain this fragile model but likely also intensify EU pressure and raise the risk of political and economic friction. A defeat, however, would probably lead to rapid alignment with mainstream EU trade and social policies, and would be detrimental to U.S. interests.
It cannot be expected of the WSJ Editorial Board to be historically minded, but during the presidency of Millard Fillmore, the Hungarian nationalist Lajos (Louis) Kossuth visited and gave a<a href="https://millercenter.org/president/fillmore/foreign-affairs"> joint address at the U.S. Congress</a>, the second such foreigner after Lafayette. He then proceeded to visit Ohio, then the largest Hungarian diaspora in the country, and gave a speech stating that the <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20190414134246/https://ohiohistoryhost.org/ohiomemory/archives/3834">spirit of our age is democracy</a> opposed to imperialism. Whether he can pull the current Hungarian administration over the electoral line is a different question, but it is only fitting that a former senator of Ohio and the current vice president be visiting Europe and remind Europeans of that same sentiment, that sovereignty, free speech, and democracy are far more important than transnational imperialism.
***
Dr. Sumantra Maitra is a historian based in Virginia.

VP JD Vance And PM Viktor Orban Hold A Joint Rally In Budapest, 5 Days Before The Hungarian Election.

The WSJ Is Baffled By JD Vance’s U.S. Diplomacy In Hungary

European Union

Hungary

JD Vance

Victor Orban

The ceasefire being trumpeted across the world today looks less like a two-week agreement toward the end of the current U.S.-Israel war on Iran’s regime and more like a break so President Donald Trump can watch Master’s golf undisturbed.
The reported details laid out in Iran’s ten point response to negotiation talks represent, on multiple points, a risky series of steps that are either impossible to maintain or aren’t even being reported the same to both sides – with a depiction in Farsi of agreed allowance for the continued enrichment of uranium.
That should be a non-negotiable point for a president who has derided Barack Obama’s Iran deal ad nauseam, regardless of his reluctance to extend the current conflict into the summer.
Here’s the reality of the proposed deal if accepted on its face:
<ul class="ul1">
<li class="li1">Iran still has its nuclear materials, and without immediate extraction, will now sprint to enrich the uranium in its possession and construct a nuclear weapon.</li>
<li class="li1">Iran’s regime has now, despite the loss of dozens of leaders and the utter destruction of missile and other capabilities, survived both internal rebellion and external attack.</li>
<li class="li1">Iran has shown that it can and will control the Strait of Hormuz, and therefore the world economy, at will – without even inspiring Europe to clear the mines, one of the last things its military is good at.</li>
<li class="li1">If not defeat, Iran has shown it can at minimum deter the United States Navy at the strategic level.</li>
<li class="li1">Iran has shown that no wartime coalition will coalesce against it, even when it directly attacks over a dozen neighboring countries, and even when it demonstrates the ability to lob missiles into central Europe.</li>
</ul>
None of this is good.
The more fundamental problem for the United States, beyond President Trump’s tenure, is that America will have shown an inability to plan and win at the strategic level, and furthermore has shown itself to be without effective wartime allies beyond Israel.
The markets are speaking, and their shaky nature means they’re optimistic about this deal. But it’s a bad one, short- and long-term, for an America First policy perspective. It’s certainly satisfying to swipe the chessboard clear of a bunch of bad guys. It’s another to expend significant resources to create a scenario in which the takeaways all speak to Iran’s ability to stand up to the Great Satan and survive, and to the advantages going forward for China that are impossible to fully estimate at this point.
The Trump approach to foreign policy and national security has, time and again, proven his critics wrong. He has ridden a hot hand repeatedly, to the great benefit of the American people. But he’s often done so by gambling and winning, often facing long odds. Eventually those odds may prove too long. Eventually the table goes cold. Or sometimes, you just need a break to go off tilt.
We’ll see which situation this is for the president in short order.

Trump visit to Scotland

Trump Takes A Break From Bombing Iran For The Master’s

America First

Donald Trump

As the US bombing campaign in Iran extends into its fifth week and Tehran maintains its chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz and the global economy, what is Trump’s next move? Will Trump escalate by sending in ground forces, or will he look for an off-ramp?
Trump has several military options to try to coerce Iran to open the Strait, but his best move may be to declare victory and go home.
Contrary to most of the mainstream media coverage, the United States has achieved its objectives in the war. Iran will be much weaker after this war than it was one month ago. Intelligence analysts assess threats based on capability and intent. While Tehran’s intent might remain hostile to the United States, its capability is greatly diminished.
The only real remaining, serious challenge is Iran’s continued threats to the Strait of Hormuz and the broader global economy. Ideally, the United States would open the Strait before ending the war, but that is easier said than done. There is no purely military option to force the Strait open. As long as Iran possesses some drones and threatens to fire them, many commercial shippers will assess the risk of transiting the Strait as too high. Even a naval escort cannot guarantee protection against stray Iranian drones and missiles.
In short, reopening the Strait requires Iran’s consent.
There are three possible pathways to change Iran’s mind. The first pathway is regime change. A new government in Tehran may be more pliable. But whether the Iranian people rise up and seize power is ultimately beyond the control of the American military. While this would be a desirable outcome, the Trump administration has been clear that this is not a must-have objective of its military campaign.
The second pathway is through coercion, convincing Iran’s leaders that the United States will escalate the war until they open the Strait. This is where the deployment of U.S. ground forces comes into play. Trump could order the U.S. military to seize Kharg Island, a small island near Iran’s coast through which 90% of Iranian oil exports pass. By controlling Iran’s energy exports, Trump would essentially be threatening that if the rest of the world cannot freely trade energy through the Strait, then neither can Tehran.
Seizing the island would be straightforward, but holding it would be challenging. The island lies near Iran’s coast, well within range of Iranian missiles and drones. U.S. forces on the island would be vulnerable to Iranian attacks in the coming days, weeks, and maybe months. The introduction of ground forces could begin to look like a quagmire. We know from Trump’s “peace through strength” doctrine that he is willing to use military force in short, sharp, decisive ways, but he is wary of long, drawn-out ground operations without a clear end in sight. He will be reluctant to introduce ground forces.
Some have also argued that Trump will send in ground forces to seize stockpiles of Iran’s enriched nuclear fuel, but this is unnecessary. Iran cannot enrich this fuel to weapons-grade without enrichment facilities, and Iran’s major nuclear facilities were indeed “obliterated” last summer. If Iran attempts to rebuild the facilities, Washington can simply bomb them again.
Another military option, as Trump has repeatedly threatened, would be to strike Iran’s energy infrastructure. The purpose of this course of action would also be coercion. To prevent the destruction of its economic lifeline, Tehran may decide to reopen the Strait instead.
But Trump’s repeated threats have yet to yield the desired effect, and actually following through on the threat would be counterproductive. It would reduce Iran’s incentive to open the Strait for others. It would also further reduce the world’s supply of energy, sending prices ever higher, and causing further damage to the global economy.
This leaves the final option, declaring victory and going home. As noted above, the Trump administration has succeeded in greatly weakening Iran and can credibly declare victory at any time.
In this scenario, the strategy for opening the Strait is unclear, but it may ultimately rest on Iran pursuing its own self-interest. If Washington and Israel stop shooting tomorrow, will Tehran keep the Strait closed forever? It will likely threaten the Strait for at least a couple of additional weeks to exact a price and deter future attacks, but what about beyond that?
If Washington and Jerusalem have ceased hostilities for weeks, but Tehran continues to shoot at commercial shipping in the Strait, it will unite most of the rest of the world against it.
Moreover, the biggest challenge facing Iran’s new leaders will be consolidating power at home. Continuing a one-sided war against the global economy would be counterproductive to that objective. At some point, Tehran itself may see that it benefits from a return to business as usual.
In short, there is reason for cautious optimism. The most desirable and plausible scenario at this point may be an end to the war in the coming weeks that sees America victorious, Iran weakened, and the global economy reopened.
***
Matthew Kroenig is vice president for Geostrategy and Fellows and senior director of the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security.

US-POLITICS-TRUMP

Trump Faces Iran Decision As One Option Gains Ground

Strait of Hormuz

Trump Administration

World

President Donald Trump said Monday that he could do “anything” he wants with Cuba, suggesting the United States could potentially take over the island nation and topple its communist government. 
When asked about his plans, Trump said he believed he would “have the honor of taking Cuba” in “some form.” After capturing Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and launching a military operation against Iran, Trump has said that Cuba could be the next focus of his administration. 
“I mean whether I free it, take it, I could do anything I want with it,” Trump said during an event at the White House. “They are a very weakened nation right now.  They were for a long time, very violent, very violent leaders. Castro was a very violent leader. His brother is a very violent leader. Extremely violent. That&#8217;s how they governed. They governed with violence, but a lot of people would like to go back.”
Trump, who has restricted oil shipments to Cuba through sanctions, said Cuban leaders are now in talks with U.S. officials.
“They&#8217;re talking to us. It&#8217;s a failed nation. They have no money, they have no oil, they have no nothing,” Trump said. 
The New York Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/16/world/americas/trump-cuba-president-diaz-canel.html">reported</a> Monday that American negotiators are pushing for Cuban President and Communist Party leader Miguel Díaz-Canel to be removed from power.
Earlier this month, Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-predicts-another-dictatorship-could-fall-soon-suggests-sending-marco-rubio?author=Zach+Jewell&amp;category=News&amp;elementPosition=undefined&amp;row=0&amp;rowType=Vertical+List&amp;title=Trump+Predicts+Another+Dictatorship+Could+Fall+Soon+—+Suggests+Sending+Marco+Rubio">told</a> CNN that Cuba was “going to fall pretty soon” and suggested sending Secretary of State Marco Rubio there. 
In January 2026, Trump signed an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/01/addressing-threats-to-the-united-states-by-the-government-of-cuba/">executive order</a> declaring a national emergency related to Cuba and imposing tariffs on countries that trade or do business with the island. 
“I find that the policies, practices, and actions of the Government of Cuba directly threaten the safety, national security, and foreign policy of the United States,” Trump wrote in the executive order. “The policies, practices, and actions of the Government of Cuba are designed to harm the United States and support hostile countries, transnational terrorist groups, and malign actors that seek to destroy the United States.”

Trump Says He Can ‘Take’ Cuba: ‘I Could Do Anything I Want With It’

Cuba

Menu