Connect with us

Features

Crackdown on Hong Kong Exiles Escalates, and the Ideology of “Strain” is Frightening

Published

on

Recently, a piece of news in Hong Kong once again triggered a media debate: Anna Kwok Fung-yee, the executive director of the Hong Kong Democratic Foundation, who is wanted by the Hong Kong National Security Bureau for a reward of HK$1 million, has her father and her second elder brother arrested on charges of assisting in the handling of Anna;s funds. While her elder brother has been released on bail pending investigation, and the case is now adjourned until June 13 for further proceedings. This is the first time that the Hong Kong Police Force has invoked the offence of “handling funds belonging to an absconder” under the measures against absconders in the Maintenance of National Security Ordinance to arrest suspects for assisting in the handling of property in Hong Kong belonging to “specified absconders”. One cannot help but wonder, in the 21st century, whether the uncivilized way of governance of “connecting nine clans of the family” has resurfaced again.

The “guilt by association with nine clans” system is a representative system of guilt by association in Chinese history, which originated in the Qin Dynasty and reached its peak in the Ming and Qing Dynasties. The core idea is that if a person commits a crime, all his relatives and associates will be punished. During the Second Qin Dynasty, the prime minister Li Si was framed by Zhao Gao, and not only was he himself chopped into pieces, but his three clans were also executed. After the usurpation of Emperor Zhu Di of the Ming Dynasty, he ordered Fang Xiaoru to draft a document on his accession to the throne, but Fang refused, and as a result, he was punished with the execution of ten of his clans, including students and servants. During the Qing Dynasty, there were a number of cases in which relatives were implicated in the “delusion of the government”, such as the case of Cao Xueqin’s family, the author of The Dream of the Red Mansion, who were executed because of the “Case of Kangxi’s Guiqi”.

The detention of Ms. Kwok’s father pending trial reminds us of the modernization of Hong Kong today, which has not yet left the era of undeveloped people’s wisdom.

 

Who is Anna Kwok Fung-yee?

Kwok, 28, is an exiled lobbyist in Hong Kong and currently serves as the executive director of the Washington, D.C.-based Hong Kong Democratic Committee: in 2023, she called on the U.S. government to ban Hong Kong Chief Executive Eric Li Ka-chiu from traveling to the United States to attend the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit, and in July 2023 she was put on the Hong Kong National Security Agency’s Most Wanted List, which is a list of 19 overseas activists who are wanted by the police in Hong Kong. In December 2024, Kwok’s Hong Kong status was revoked and she became stateless after she requested the U.S. government to grant her asylum as soon as possible after the warrant was made public. Kwok was accused of violating Hong Kong’s national security law by colluding with foreign or overseas forces to jeopardize national security, and the police offered a HK$1 million reward for her arrest.

According to the information, the National Security Bureau took away Kwok’s parents and two elder brothers on August 8 and 22 of the previous year, respectively, to investigate whether they had any form of contact or financial dealings with Kwok. At the time, Kwok responded on Facebook that her family “has never helped, is not aware of, and does not even know what I do”. She also said that the Hong Kong government was trying to harass her family to silence her in the U.S., but that she would not give up her work to pave the way for Hong Kong’s freedom and self-determination. In recent years, the national security police have repeatedly taken away the family members of wanted Hong Kong residents to assist in investigations, and in the first four months of this year, a total of 14 people have been taken away on nine occasions to assist in investigations. This is the first time a family member has been charged.

The cause of this incident stems from a police investigation, which revealed that Kwok’s father and others had traveled overseas to meet with Anna Kwok , and were suspected of illegally assisting in the handling of Anna’s insurance policies in Hong Kong after returning to Hong Kong. There is also evidence that Kwok’s father attempted to help Kwok to withdraw nearly HK$100,000 in cash balance from the insurance policy, and submitted a number of documents purporting to contain the signatures of both parties to the insurance company early this year. It is worth noting that Kwok’s second brother works for the insurance company, and the police suspect that he used his position and knowledge of the industry to assist in the transfer of the property.

Whose property?

Kwok’s father, Kwok Yin Sang, is reportedly a businessman with three children. One of his children, Ms. Kwok, went to the International School and studied in Norway, and later studied journalism and philosophy at New York University. For someone who can provide such an expensive education for his children, Kwok is believed to be a successful businessman and is presumably well off. On the other hand, how did Anna Kwok have the financial means to support herself, accumulate assets and take out insurance when she never had a high-paying job after graduation? If the insurance policy purchased in her name is regarded as her property and the father is sued under the National Security Law for handling his daughter’s property, is it in line with the spirit of the law, which has raised a lot of questions?

In traditional Chinese society, property is owned and developed by the family. After the death of the head of the family, the next generation will distribute the property among different members of the family according to the principles set by the family leader. In Western societies, individualism is emphasized, so property is distributed in the name of the individual, and Western law is based on this system of private ownership of property. Obviously, it is unlikely that Kwok Fung Yee’s property was accumulated from her income. Therefore, the government’s investigation into the handling of Kwok Fung Yee’s insurance policy, which involved only HK$100,000, is intended to send an important message that family members of fugitives will be prosecuted for any contact with the fugitives.

The Hong Kong Police Force’s action sends a clear message to the community that any attempt to challenge national security will be prosecuted, and those who assist the “specified absconders” will also be subject to legal sanctions, advising family members, friends or associates of absconders not to break the law, and that all absconders should turn back to Hong Kong as soon as possible and give themselves up. According to the existing laws of Hong Kong, handling of funds belonging to the absconders concerned is a serious crime, which is liable to a maximum penalty of seven years’ imprisonment upon conviction.

 

Crackdown continues to escalate

Since mid-2023, the National Security Bureau of the Hong Kong Police Force has placed 19 Hong Kong residents in exile overseas, including Kwok Fung-yee, on the wanted list. It is alleged that after she left Hong Kong, she attended overseas meetings and activities in her capacity as a key member of the Hong Kong Democratic Committee, and lobbied foreign countries to sanction, blockade and carry out other hostile actions against the governments of China and Hong Kong, suspected to have violated the “collusion with a foreign country or foreign forces to endanger national security” in the Hong Kong National Security Law, and last year, on Christmas Eve, she was even arrested under the commonly known as the “National Security Law” for “colluding with foreign or overseas forces to jeopardize national security”. On Christmas Eve last year, six measures were imposed on Kwok and seven others, including revocation of their HKSAR passports and prohibition of providing them with funds, under the “Article 23” of the “Maintenance of National Security Ordinance”, which is commonly known as “Article 23”.

Kwok’s father, 68-year-old Kwok Yin-sang, is currently being returned to prison so that the prosecution can seize his cell phone and computer. Defense counsel pointed out that the defense needs to confirm whether the assets of the policy belong to Kwok Fung Yee or Kwok’s father, but the prosecution has not been able to do so, so bail has not been granted for the time being. The National Security Law Judge, Chief Magistrate So Wai Tak, subsequently decided to adjourn the case until the middle of next month, during which time the defendant could write to the court if he wished to apply for bail. The Hong Kong Democratic Committee, to which Ms. Kwok belongs, describes this unprecedented action by the Hong Kong government as an escalation of attacks on human rights defenders in the U.S., and urges the U.K. and the U.S. to take appropriate countermeasures.

Undoubtedly, this action highlights the dangerous expansion of Beijing’s complicity, which has been extended to Hong Kong. Blatantly implicating relatives in Hong Kong as a means of suppressing the voices of Hong Kong’s overseas pro-democracy dissidents is in complete defiance of basic human rights and the rule of law. What is even more disturbing is that this case is likely to develop into an ongoing retaliatory campaign against the families of Hong Kong’s exiled pro-democracy activists, a new pattern of intimidation and persecution aimed at spreading fear and suppressing pro-democracy and pro-human rights activities both within Hong Kong and internationally.

At this point, the response and support of the international community is all the more important. If Western countries insist on universal values, they must put pressure on Beijing and the Hong Kong authorities to immediately stop all acts of harassment and intimidation against the families of overseas Hong Kong democrats in Hong Kong. The international community can protect exiled Hong Kong pro-democracy activists and other critics of the Beijing authorities from intimidation and persecution similar to that of the Long Arm if it is determined to take concrete action to hold accountable the officials responsible for the human rights abuses in question, and to put in place a strong legal framework. Otherwise, the escalation of such persecution will only get worse.

 

The Powerful Influence of Culture

Anyone who knows a little bit about China’s 5,000 years of history will know that while one man’s success is rewarded by the rise of all family members, similarly, one man’s offense will implicate all men. Even in modern times, similar cases of vendetta killings often occur, such as a village headman bullying villagers and the angry headman killing his entire family and even babies in their infancy. This kind of time is rare in Western societies because when modern civilization began, Chinese civilization took a very different path from that of the rest of the world: China continued the tradition of the clan bloodline, which formed the current Chinese civilization, and which is still the nucleus of its civilization even today. Ancient Greece, on the other hand, blew up the clan-blood relationship and established a contractual form of social organization, which is also the originator of modern Western civilization.

There is also the influence of Christian thought on society. The New Testament emphasizes that the sins committed by the father cannot be borne by the children, and that God will not punish the offender’s next generation for these sins. The Bible also emphasizes that each person should be judged by God for his own sins, which laid the foundation for the principle of “guilt by association” in Western law. Especially after the Magna Carta in England, the royal power and the nobility reached a contractual relationship, in which both parties were close to equality, and this relationship was extended to the relationship between the government and the citizens in recent times. This is incomprehensible to the Chinese people who have long been obsessed with imperial power. It is only that today, the Hong Kong government has ignored the application of British law in Hong Kong for over a hundred years, and is now applying in Hong Kong the same uncivilized practices that have existed in China for thousands of years.

In this case, the ownership of the assets handled by Kwok’s father is one of the main points of contention between the prosecution and the defense. The defense pointed out that there is no bail application at this stage, saying that the crux of the case is the father of Kwok allegedly handled the policy, in the end is Kwok Fung Yee or his own assets, it takes time to review the policy, but the prosecution has not been provided, hope that the case is adjourned for a week, and then decide to reply to the direction of the direction and whether or not to apply for bail. Even if the defense can produce relevant evidence, it is not difficult for those who are familiar with the process of interpretation of the law “with Chinese characteristics” to imagine that the prosecution will find a way to make the evidence satisfy the conditions for the establishment of the charges.

However, in contemporary China, the idea of “linking nine clans to one’s family” has long permeated many corners of the country, such as the “political examination” that must be passed in order to get into the civil service, and the idea that “one person committing a crime affects three generations”, although it has no legal basis, has a real impact on real-life considerations. It’s just that birth is not a choice, and the behavior of parents will have an impact on their children, but that’s fate and has nothing to do with the law. The law cannot reinforce parental benevolence, nor can it make children worse off as a result of their parents’ bad luck. However, it will take time for this modern idea of democracy and the rule of law to take root in Chinese society, which has long been steeped in feudalism.

A year ago, the bloodshed in a large shopping center in Bondi Beach, Sydney, shocked the whole of Australia. After the incident, the murderer’s parents spoke out, grieving for the lives lost and pointing out that having a mentally ill child was a nightmare for the parents; they also claimed that they did not resent the policewoman for killing their son, as she was just doing her job. If we think like Chinese people, these parents would not be able to hold their heads up for the rest of their lives, let alone speak out to the media. As a society progresses towards civilization and the rule of law, it is essential to respect the rights of the individual, and the idea of “lumping” a family together should have been swept into the dustbin of history long ago.

Article/Editorial Department, Sameway Magazine

Photo/Internet

Continue Reading

Features

Walking with the Solitary (1): The Lonely People

Published

on

Raymond Chow

My New Challenge

Over the past few decades, I’ve written numerous books and articles on a wide variety of topics. However, last October, I decided to write a book entirely different from anything I had done before, titled Solitary but Not Isolated. I chose to publish it through crowdfunding. Readers interested in supporting this book can visit the following webpage to learn more and help make it a reality.

I attended a rooftop school in Hong Kong for primary education (a unique feature of Hong Kong in the 1960s: temporary classrooms built on top of apartment blocks in resettlement areas to accommodate children who had moved into the district). Resources were extremely limited. In sixth grade, the school principal gave me and seven other students the opportunity to post our writings on the bulletin board every two weeks for the whole school to read. This was my first experience of writing for a public audience.

In secondary school at Queen’s College, the school published the annual magazine The Yellow Dragon, the earliest and longest-running secondary school annual in Hong Kong. My writings were never published there, though my photos occasionally appeared in reports of school activities. At university, I volunteered as editor for a scholarly publication by the Science Society called Exploration, but after two or three years it was discontinued as no one wished to continue it.

During university, I studied mathematics, which required little essay writing—mostly problem-solving. After entering the field of education, I wrote numerous articles on Hong Kong education that were published in newspaper columns. Later, through curriculum development and teacher training in Hong Kong, I had the rare opportunity to write and publish mathematics textbooks spanning from Grade 1 to Form 7—something unprecedented in Hong Kong.

After moving to Australia, I served as editor of the Christian publication Living Monthly, and eventually founded Sameway magazine, which continues today. From the first issue, I wrote the opening column Words of Sameway, and over 21 years, I have written a total of 745 pieces—a record of my life.

Yet writing Solitary but Not Isolated is something I never anticipated doing since I first learned about autism decades ago. Publishing this book is closely connected to my work with Sameway. I can only say this is a new challenge given by God, a chance to take Sameway to a new stage.

Those Who Love Solitude

Solitary but Not Isolated tells the story of a person with autism. Based on her experiences, the Happy Hands Organization has developed a bilingual training program to help autistic individuals transition from school to the workplace. Launched this year, the program aims to support others in similar circumstances.

Most people with autism do not actively seek social interactions. When they do engage with strangers, they may appear difficult to connect with or communicate with, often leading to social neglect or isolation. For parents and family, this creates a lifelong burden. Even those who complete secondary or tertiary education, despite having professional knowledge, often cannot fully utilize their abilities at work because of incomplete social understanding and lack of basic communication skills. Consequently, they are frequently relegated to jobs that do not match their abilities or are assigned work requiring minimal interaction.

Western society’s understanding of autism began with the lifestyle demands of modern life, emphasizing early social engagement and learning in school. Families, having fewer children, often pay close attention to each child’s development and have higher expectations. Over the decades, understanding of autism has evolved—from viewing it as a mental illness to recognizing it as a deviation from typical personality development. Yet how society should assist their growth remains uncertain.

Decades ago, Western focus was on “treating” autism. Research into genetic, environmental, or physical causes has made limited progress. Interventions to change solitary behaviors are also limited—for example, providing speech therapy in childhood or occupational therapy for daily living skills offers only partial support. While societal acceptance and support for autistic individuals have greatly increased, parents feel that more is needed when their children enter adult life and the workforce.

In short, those inclined toward solitude still face a gap in having equal opportunities to thrive socially and professionally.

Understanding Society and the World

Many autistic individuals focus intensely on specific interests, with little experience in social relationships or current events. As adults, this often leads others to perceive them as unaware of society, or even “odd.” In workplaces, where collaboration is essential, they may face exclusion. Many end up in solitary work with minimal social interaction.

Among Chinese communities, first- or second-generation immigrants with autism often face compounded challenges due to limited knowledge of society. Parents, unfamiliar with Australian systems, cannot fully guide their children, and these high-ability individuals rarely integrate with society, limiting opportunities to demonstrate their potential.

In 2024, ABC launched The Assembly, a TV interview program where host Leigh Sales trained 15 autistic individuals to conduct interviews and produce the show. Participants significantly increased their understanding of society and the world, and their communication and social skills improved greatly.

Last year, Sameway had the opportunity to train a bilingual autistic new immigrant, successfully helping her become a magazine editor. Meanwhile, the Happy Hands Organization developed a workplace adaptation program for bilingual, high-functioning autistic individuals. Through four to six months of training, this program offers these often-overlooked individuals a chance to adapt and develop in Australia.

Thus, Sameway is not only an information platform supporting immigrant communities but also provides a development space and opportunities for those with special needs. Readers interested can contact our magazine or the Happy Hands Organization for details.

The Loneliness of Immigrants

Many immigrants arrive in Australia as adults. They often lack opportunities to understand society deeply and, due to work and life commitments, rarely have the time to engage fully with their new environment or develop close relationships with Australians. Consequently, most live within Chinese communities with similar backgrounds. Passive personalities or limited social skills often lead to intense feelings of loneliness.

Leaving their original home and social networks creates a sense of marginalization similar to that experienced by some autistic individuals. Many immigrants are willing to understand and engage with their new society but face personal limitations and a lack of proactive governmental support, leaving them unable to integrate fully into Australian life.

Chinese immigrants, in particular, may rely heavily on long-term Chinese social media and information platforms, further isolating them from the broader society. This social isolation significantly affects their participation and engagement in Australian life.

The goal of Sameway is to assist immigrants in integrating into Australia, fostering participation and engagement in society. We hope that with continued support, we can go further and achieve more.

Continue Reading

Features

Walk With the Needy

Published

on

During the Christmas and New Year period, “Sameway” relocated though only to a spot less than 100 meters across from their original office. It was a tiring task, but we have finally settled in, allowing us to take a longer break during the holiday.

However, the world still undergoes significant changes. The President of Venezuela has been forcibly taken to New York for trial, while the new leader of Venezuela is willing to govern in line with U.S. interests. The longstanding alliance between Europe and the U.S. has become history in light of the U.S. attempt to purchase Greenland. The “Board of Peace” established by Trump requests that nations place the keeping of global peace in his personal hands, but attendees at the invitation include authoritarian dictators who have initiated wars multiple times. The generation that has grown up advocating for global integration, respect for human rights, and peaceful coexistence is now at a lost and confused. Will the world revert to a chaotic state governed by the law of the jungle, where strong countries dominate weaker ones, or can humanity choose to move forward in civilization by learning mistakes from history? We truly have no sure answer.

However, it is a time where the rise of Trump and the increasing power of global far-right political forces, coupled with the internet and social media replacing traditional media as the main source of information for many people. This has led to a society overwhelmed with information and challenges in distinguishing truth from falsehood, which is equally as frightening as an era where information is blocked, preventing access to necessary knowledge.

In Australia, as a multicultural country, immigrants face significant difficulties in obtaining lifestyle information through mainstream media. I believe that to build Australia as a harmonious and cohesive society, the government must invest substantial resources to assist immigrant communities to establish high-quality and credible multicultural media, and to accelerate the integration of first-generation immigrants into society, allowing them to become a driving force in social development.

In the past year, we have strengthened the current affairs information provided on our website. In the coming year, we will focus on enhancing our information services for the Chinese community through our broadcasts and magazine publications. I hope you can support us in achieving the goal of promoting the development of the Chinese immigrant community.

Starting this year, in line with the REJOICE’s initiative for bilingual new immigrants with autism, I will be writing a brand-new column to explore this topic with the community as they navigate With the NDIS program. I hope this innovative program by the REJOICE will receive your support for promotion and development within the community.

Additionally, after three years of training aimed at encouraging seniors to use social platforms to expand their community engagement, we will take a further step this year by launching training courses to assist seniors in using artificial intelligence. Our goal is to help Chinese seniors in Australia stay up-to-date and enjoy a higher quality of life brought about by AI.

In the new year, let us work together to build a stronger local Chinese community.

Continue Reading

Features

Entering Trump 2.0’s New World

Published

on

Since January 20, 2025, when Trump assumed the U.S. presidency once again, domestic issues in America have been frequent and complex, but the world cannot deny that his foreign policy has reshaped the global political landscape, ushering in a new era.

Over the past year, Trump has been extremely proactive in foreign affairs—from Greenland to Venezuela—demonstrating relentless ambition to expand U.S. influence abroad, even amid controversy and the risk of destabilizing other nations.

Prelude to 2025

Let’s briefly review Trump’s major foreign policy actions in 2025.

First, his involvement in the Gaza Strip cannot be overlooked. In February 2025, he publicly stated that the U.S. would play a more active, even leading, role in the region, supporting Israel’s security needs, including strengthening border defense and intelligence sharing. He also attempted to broker ceasefire talks in the U.S.’s name, coordinating Egypt, Qatar, and other countries as intermediaries. By October, Trump personally attended a multilateral meeting in Sharm El-Sheikh, pushing for a ceasefire agreement and reconstruction framework between Israel and Hamas.

While opinions on his approach were divided, with some critics arguing that direct intervention could heighten regional tensions, Trump nonetheless reaffirmed America’s influence and presence in Middle Eastern affairs.

Early in 2025, the Trump administration reviewed all foreign aid and temporarily halted military assistance to Ukraine, using it as leverage to push forward negotiations. By mid-March, following U.S.–Ukraine consultations, military and security support resumed, including air defense systems, drone technology, and financial assistance. The U.S. also advocated international sanctions against Russia, such as high-tech export restrictions and asset freezes. These actions demonstrated Trump’s support for strategic allies and further solidified U.S. influence in Europe.

While these events may seem unrelated, they set the stage for early 2026’s diplomatic developments.

The Venezuela Raid

Trump’s most notable action in January 2026 was the sudden capture (or abduction) of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife.

In fact, as early as December 1, 2025, Trump had called Maduro, demanding he step down. When Maduro refused, Trump publicly ramped up pressure in mid-to-late December, applying economic and military pressure—including blockades, intercepting suspicious ships, and bolstering military deployments—to isolate the Maduro government. He even hinted that further U.S. action might follow if Maduro continued to resist, signaling a preemptive warning.

The result: U.S. forces launched a large-scale operation codenamed “Absolute Determination”, storming Caracas, capturing Maduro and his wife, and transporting them to New York for trial. The justification cited Maduro and his inner circle’s involvement in drug trafficking and terrorism, including conspiracies to smuggle cocaine into the U.S. At the same time, Maduro’s government had close ties with China and Russia, who provided military and economic support, posing a threat to U.S. influence in the Western Hemisphere.

The operation was also seen as a move to block rival powers from gaining leverage in Venezuela. More importantly, given Venezuela’s vast oil reserves, Trump clearly aimed to reassert U.S. dominance in the hemisphere and secure economic benefits. For many Americans, the raid showcased U.S. military might, boosting Trump’s prestige and approval. True to form, Trump paid little attention to criticism, focusing instead on praise, and was visibly self-satisfied.

International reactions were strong. China and Russia immediately condemned the U.S. action, calling it a severe violation of Venezuelan sovereignty and international law. Iran and other nations with tense U.S. relations also criticized the operation as unilateralism under the guise of anti-drug and anti-terrorism efforts, destabilizing the region.

European responses were mixed. Some EU countries long critical of Maduro still expressed reservations about the U.S. bypassing international authorization for direct military action, emphasizing that even dealing with authoritarian regimes should follow international mechanisms. This tension revealed the strain Trump’s style places on traditional allies.

In Latin America, reactions were split: anti-Maduro governments and Venezuelan opposition privately supported the move as a chance to break political deadlock, while others feared overt U.S. military intervention might revive Cold War-era “Monroe Doctrine” fears, worsening regional security.

Currently, former Vice President Rodríguez serves as interim president of Venezuela, cooperating with the U.S. while maintaining loyalty to the domestic ruling class, keeping the country relatively stable. For Trump, the goal of preventing other powers from gaining influence in the Americas and securing economic gains was achieved. Many Americans saw the raid as a demonstration of military strength, reinforcing Trump’s image as a decisive leader.

Trump’s Greenland Gambit

Since 2025, Trump has repeatedly brought Greenland into the spotlight, making it one of the most challenging and controversial topics of his second term.

Greenland, the world’s largest island, is under Danish sovereignty but enjoys local autonomy. Its location between North America and Europe along the Arctic shipping route has made it strategically valuable. Previously overlooked due to extreme cold, climate change and melting ice have expanded Arctic navigation, increasing Greenland’s military and technological importance. The island also contains vast deposits of rare earth and critical minerals, essential for modern technology and defense systems.

Trump’s assertive approach clearly aimed to maximize U.S. influence over Greenland. In 2025, he publicly expressed interest in buying Greenland and urged negotiations to secure it, even hinting at military options. This escalated tensions with Denmark and Europe.

European reactions were unanimous: Greenlandic leaders stated the island is “not for sale”, and massive protests erupted in Greenland and Denmark. The UK prime minister warned Trump that high tariffs or aggression would be a grave mistake, while EU countries—including Denmark, France, Germany, and the UK—supported Danish sovereignty. Even European far-right parties, traditionally aligned with Trump, criticized his Greenland strategy as overt aggression, causing internal rifts.

At the 2026 Davos World Economic Forum, Trump and NATO Secretary-General Rutte reached a “preliminary framework” focusing on Arctic security cooperation rather than territorial control. Trump framed it as safeguarding U.S. military bases and economic interests, while Denmark retained final authority. However, Greenland’s government stressed it was not fully involved in negotiations, highlighting an ongoing tension. Analysts debate whether this is a tactical retreat or pragmatic compromise.

Even with the temporary easing of tensions, U.S.–Europe trust has been strained, showing how far-reaching Trump’s assertive diplomacy has become.

Iran Unrest and U.S. Pressure

From late December 2025, Iran experienced nationwide protests, initially triggered by economic collapse, currency devaluation, and skyrocketing living costs, evolving into broad dissatisfaction with the regime. The government’s harsh crackdown led to casualties and arrests on a scale unseen since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The U.S., which maintains heavy sanctions against Iran citing terrorism sponsorship and nuclear/military threats, seized this moment to intervene. Trump publicly announced deploying a fleet—including aircraft carriers and missile destroyers—to the Persian Gulf to deter further escalation. He emphasized a preference for avoiding force but warned of potential military action if the regime continued violent repression.

Trump also communicated with Iranian protesters via public statements and social media, encouraging demonstrations and denouncing government violence. He canceled all official diplomatic talks until Tehran ceased the crackdown. While some protesters hoped for U.S. support, the absence of direct action led to frustration and feelings of abandonment.

Iranian Revolutionary Guard leaders warned that any U.S. strike would be considered a full-scale war. Protests and anti-U.S. imagery reflected strong resistance. Intelligence reports indicating a temporary halt in state violence led Trump to consider pausing military actions while closely monitoring the situation, balancing threats with cautious observation.

Trump’s strategy combined military presence and public warnings to pressure Tehran, deter large-scale killings, and strengthen U.S. influence in the Middle East. Yet this high-risk approach also raised the possibility of miscalculations, where tensions could escalate unintentionally, making the U.S. a target for criticism and resistance.

The “Board of Peace”

Traditionally, the U.S. has been seen as the global big brother. But with China’s growing influence and global economic support programs, U.S. presidents often feel impatient with Beijing’s increasing UN sway. Trump, ambitious and assertive, sought to take matters further.

At the 2026 Davos Forum, he launched the “Board of Peace”, initially proposed to address Gaza peace but now expanded to serve as a broader global conflict mediation mechanism. The initiative leverages U.S. influence to create an alternative diplomatic platform and invites multiple countries to participate.

However, critics question whether it is more for show than genuine peacekeeping. The EU’s concern lies less with the stated goals and more with the lack of clarity: the legal status, decision-making process, funding, and international law accountability remain unspecified. Unlike multilateral bodies like the UN or OSCE, this U.S.-backed, president-driven mechanism risks becoming a coercive tool rather than a genuine mediator.

The EU fears it could undermine Europe’s long-standing role in Middle East diplomacy, forcing it from rule-maker to follower. China was excluded, reflecting Trump’s view of Beijing as a competitor, not a partner. The Board aims to present participation as a political statement, effectively creating a U.S.-led bloc in global conflict mediation.

For Australia, the Board is a hot potato. Prime Minister Albanese received an invitation but has not confirmed participation. Several NATO and EU countries have declined, while Canada was disinvited over disagreements on China policy. Thirty-plus leaders who accepted include war actors like Putin and Israel’s Netanyahu. How they could effectively promote peace remains questionable, and handling the invitation diplomatically will test Albanese’s political skill.

Trump’s Diplomatic Logic

Across Gaza, Ukraine, Venezuela, Greenland, Iran, and the Board of Peace, Trump’s strategy is consistent: proactive engagement, pressure, disruption of norms, and forcing allies and adversaries to recalculate. He eschews slow multilateral negotiations in favor of military, economic, and media leverage, coupled with highly personalized decision-making, shifting power quickly at the negotiating table.

To Trump, diplomacy is a continuous game of strategy, not merely maintaining order. He pushes situations to the edge, then retreats strategically to gain advantage. While controversial and eroding trust among allies, it successfully recenters U.S. influence.

Crucially, Trump applies pressure not only to adversaries but to allies, forcing them to demonstrate loyalty or strategic value. This increases U.S. bargaining leverage but consumes trust capital, making international relations more transactional and short-term, and setting the stage for future friction.

Costs and Risks of Assertive Diplomacy

Reliance on pressure and uncertainty may yield short-term results but risks long-term instability. Highly personalized, low-institutional approaches erode trust in rules, procedures, and multilateral cooperation. Misjudgments are more likely in opaque, high-stakes situations. Allies and adversaries may misread threats, escalating conflict even without provocation.

Trump is reshaping U.S. diplomacy from guardian of order to rewriter of order, providing tactical flexibility but weakening institutional credibility. Whether the U.S. can balance assertive pressure with sustained trust will determine its long-term global leadership.

Ultimately, Trump’s strategy may open new strategic space for the U.S. or provoke deeper backlash and confrontation. One thing is certain: the international stage in 2026 is no longer the old world, and Trump is the key variable driving this structural transformation.

Continue Reading

Trending