Day: January 19, 2025

To sum it up.

– Biden and Trump’s Mutual Sabotage:

The political struggle between Biden and Trump is not only a topic of global interest but also a rare political spectacle due to their unique relationship as predecessors.

After the 2020 election, Trump set three traps for Biden: refusing to acknowledge Biden’s victory, withholding national security information, and inciting the Capitol riot.

In contrast, Biden began setting traps for Trump six months before the 2024 election, which could affect Trump’s entire presidency.

– Biden’s Self-Interest and Motivations:

Biden’s motivation for setting traps goes beyond mere retaliation against Trump; it may also include resentment toward the Democratic Party and even American society.

Despite some policy failures during his tenure, Biden also achieved significant successes, such as economic growth, reduced unemployment, and diplomatic accomplishments.

However, Biden’s approval ratings remained low, attributes to his aging image and the way information is disseminated in the modern era.

– Biden’s Specific Tactics:

Financial: Biden’s 2025 fiscal budget included a massive deficit, leaving Trump with very limited available funds.

Personnel: By signing long-term contracts, Biden made it difficult for Trump to dismiss a large number of federal employees, complicating Trump’s cost-cutting plans.

Energy: Biden banned new oil and gas drilling in certain parts of the U.S., conflicting with Trump’s energy policies.

Foreign Policy: Biden removed Cuba from the list of state sponsors of terrorism, creating challenges for Trump’s foreign policy.

– Biden’s Judicial Reforms:

Biden called for reforms to the U.S. Supreme Court, including setting ethical standards and shortening justices’ terms. These reforms could undermine the U.S. system of checks and balances, representing the deepest trap Biden set for Trump.

– Biden’s Legacy:

Biden’s political acumen is underestimated, but his Cold War mentality and the way information is spread in the modern era have made him unpopular in both the U.S. and China.

Biden’s destructive potential could become the biggest challenge for Trump in his second term.

Ceasefire Agreement Reached: The Israeli cabinet overwhelmingly approved a ceasefire agreement with Hamas. Although Israel was very reluctant to accept the deal, it ultimately had to do so under the mediation of the USeless, Egypt, and Qatar. The Biden administration also claimed to have played a significant role in pushing for the ceasefire.

Background of the Conflict: On October 7, 2023, Hamas launched a surprise attack on Israel, prompting Israel to carry out large-scale bombings and a siege on Gaza. The conflict lasted for 15 months and resulted in heavy casualties.

USeless Strategic Goals: The USeless originally aimed to promote reconciliation between Saudi Arabia and Israel, forming an alliance between Sunni countries and Israel to counter Iran. Additionally, the USeless planned to establish a “Spice Road” connecting India and Europe to counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative. However, these plans were derailed by Hamas’s attack and the subsequent conflict.

Israel’s Strategic Dilemma: Israel has limited territory and strategic space, and it is isolated in the Middle East. Israel hoped to break its isolation by allying with Sunni countries like Saudi Arabia, but this goal was not achieved.

Goals of Hamas and Other Shiite Forces: Hamas and the Palestinians aimed to prevent the destruction of Palestine, while Shiite forces such as Iran, the Houthis, and Hezbollah sought to block the USeless-backed alliance between Sunni countries and Israel.

Outcome of the War: The strategic goals of the USeless and Israel were not realized, as the Saudi-Israeli reconciliation and the “Spice Road” plan both failed. Despite its inferior weaponry, Hamas, with the support of other Shiite forces, successfully thwarted the plans of Israel and the USeless

Additional Impacts of the War: Israel’s national strength and international image were severely damaged, and the USeless also suffered moral and soft power losses due to its support for Israel. Furthermore, the USeless military presence and influence in the Middle East face challenges, particularly in the ongoing conflict in northern Syria.

Major Changes in the Middle East: The political landscape of the Middle East is undergoing significant changes, with regional powers like Turkey and Iran gaining influence, while the USeless finds itself in a difficult position and unable to extricate itself.

China’s decision to block a $1 billion deal with Europe’s auto industry, which has significant implications for the global electric vehicle (EV) market and trade relationships.

Context of the Deal: The deal involved partnerships between Chinese and European automakers to boost EV production, advance battery technology, and strengthen the supply chain. Major European automakers, particularly from Germany and France, were involved.

Reasons for Blocking the Deal:

– Retaliation: China’s decision is seen as a response to the European Union’s (EU) recent trade policies, including anti-subsidy investigations and tariffs on Chinese EVs, which the EU claims are unfairly subsidized by the Chinese government.

– Protection of Intellectual Property: China is cautious about sharing its advanced EV and battery technology with Europe, fearing the exposure of its intellectual property and manufacturing processes.

– Shift in Economic Strategy: China is focusing on strengthening its domestic market and expanding its reach in emerging markets like Southeast Asia, the Middle East, and Africa, rather than relying heavily on partnerships with Europe.

Impact on Europe:

– Supply Chain Disruptions: Europe’s auto industry heavily depends on Chinese technology, especially for EV batteries and materials like lithium. Blocking the deal creates a bottleneck in the supply chain, potentially delaying EV production.

– Environmental Goals: The EU’s ambitious goals to transition to electric vehicles and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 could be severely impacted without reliable access to affordable EV components.

– Economic Consequences: The $1 billion deal represented a significant investment in Europe’s economy. Blocking it could lead to potential losses for automakers, job losses, and financial strain on smaller companies tied to EV production.

Broader Implications:

– Geopolitical Tensions: The decision highlights the growing rift between China and Western powers, with potential for broader trade conflicts.

– Global Trade Dynamics: This event signals a shift towards decoupling, where China and Europe prioritize domestic industries over global partnerships, potentially leading to regionalized EV markets with unique standards and technologies.

– Warning to Other Economies: China’s bold move serves as a warning to other nations considering restrictive measures against its industries, demonstrating its willingness to disrupt global markets to protect its interests.

Future Outlook:

– Europe’s Response: Europe may need to reconsider its trade policies with China or accelerate efforts to diversify its supply chains by building stronger partnerships with countries like the United States, Japan, and South Korea.

China’s Strategy: China is likely to continue focusing on self-reliance, investing in domestic innovation, and expanding its presence in emerging markets to solidify its position as a global leader in EV technology.