Category: Geopolitics

  • The New Cold War is Fought in Code: A “Digital Iron Curtain” is the Next Phase of US-China Policy

    The era of arguing about tariffs on steel and soybeans is over. The real battleground for global dominance is digital.

    The United States must move beyond traditional economic statecraft and implement a comprehensive “Digital Iron Curtain” strategy to counter China’s technological ambitions and safeguard its own national security, even if it means fundamentally altering the concept of a global, open internet.

    Explain what the core components of AI dominance are: advanced semiconductors, massive datasets, and cloud computing infrastructure.

    Discuss current U.S. export controls on chips (Nvidia, AMD) and the Commerce Department’s efforts.

    These controls have a loophole—Chinese firms can rent U.S. cloud infrastructure. Propose new regulations (like the one just announced) requiring cloud providers to act as gatekeepers, effectively denying adversaries access to America’s core computational power.

    Discuss the TikTok threat not just as propaganda, but as a massive data-harvesting operation.

    All data generated by U.S. citizens and businesses (from healthcare records to social media activity) should be treated as a strategic national asset.

    Propose legislation that prevents U.S. data from being stored or processed by companies with ties to adversarial nations, citing the risk of it being used to train their AI models.

    Connect the lessons of the COVID-19 pandemic (e.g., reliance on China for PPE, pharmaceuticals) to the technology sector.

    The U.S. cannot afford a similar vulnerability in its tech supply chain (e.g., circuit boards, drone components, network hardware).

    Analyze the role of tax credits and government spending (like the CHIPS Act) as a starting point, but argue for a more aggressive industrial policy to rebuild domestic manufacturing in critical tech sectors.

    Acknowledge the counterarguments: A bifurcated internet could stifle innovation, hurt U.S. tech companies, and run counter to First Amendment principles of openness.

    Rebuttal: The alternative is ceding the technological high ground to a strategic adversary, which poses a far greater long-term risk to economic prosperity and national sovereignty.

    Call to Action: Urge lawmakers to move with urgency to debate and enact a coherent, bipartisan strategy that treats digital infrastructure and data with the same seriousness as physical borders and military hardware.

  • MSM & Wikipedia Lies: SA Farmer Killings & Missile Proliferation

    I believe that President Trump’s assertions regarding the systemic killing of white farmers and the seizure of their land in South Africa are not only accurate but are being actively suppressed. I believe US intelligence agencies and mainstream media outlets possess far more information than they are publicly disclosing.

    I further believe that online encyclopedic resources like Wikipedia are subject to censorship, pointing to a suspicious “statistical anomaly” where pages are conspicuously devoid of any “happenings,” indicating a deliberate omission of violent events. President Trump is, I believe, acutely aware of the alleged dishonesty permeating from various sources, including the media, the South African government, and these online platforms.

    (more…)
  • America’s Solar Achilles’ Heel: BRICS’ Dominance and the Path to Energy Insecurity

    America’s Solar Achilles’ Heel: BRICS’ Dominance and the Path to Energy Insecurity

    Here are key problems with relying heavily on solar energy, particularly when facing a dominant manufacturing bloc like BRICS:

    1. The BRICS’ Leverage (Supply Chain Manipulation): With BRICS, and overwhelmingly China, controlling over 80% of all solar panel manufacturing stages (and nearing 95% for crucial upstream components like polysilicon and wafers), they hold immense leverage. They can strategically restrict the export of panels, components, or raw materials, effectively throttling another nation’s ability to build, maintain, or repair its solar infrastructure. This creates a powerful tool for geopolitical pressure.
    2. Cost Competitiveness (Exploitable Dependency): China is the most cost-competitive location for manufacturing all solar PV components due to massive state investment and economies of scale. This makes it difficult for other nations to establish their own fully competitive domestic supply chains. BRICS could exploit this by manipulating prices—either by gouging during periods of high demand or undercutting nascent industries in other countries to maintain their dominance, making a dependent nation’s solar ambitions economically unviable or perpetually reliant.
    3. Quality Control Weaponization (Undermining Reliability): Given their control over manufacturing, BRICS nations could, in a conflict scenario, subtly degrade the quality or introduce hidden flaws (hardware or software backdoors) into solar components destined for adversaries. This could lead to premature failures, reduced efficiency, increased maintenance burdens, and a general loss of faith in the reliability of solar infrastructure, all while being difficult to detect upfront.
    4. Trade Vulnerability (Economic Weak Point): Heavy reliance on imported solar panels and components makes a nation’s currency and economy susceptible. Any devaluation of the importing nation’s currency would drastically increase the cost of these essential goods. Furthermore, the dominant bloc could impose targeted tariffs or engage in other trade actions that specifically penalize the solar sector of a rival, exploiting this dependency. The US, for instance, imported eight times the solar modules it manufactured in 2023, showcasing this vulnerability.
    5. Investment Chill (Perceived Risk): The clear and present risk of supply chain disruption, price manipulation, or sabotage by a dominant, potentially adversarial, manufacturing bloc would create significant uncertainty. This “investment chill” would deter both domestic and foreign investment in the solar sector of the vulnerable nation. Investors would be wary of committing capital to projects that could be easily undermined by geopolitical factors beyond their control, thus slowing down the transition to solar energy and reinforcing reliance on the dominant bloc or other energy sources.