Features

A New Chapter for the Liberal Party: Challenges and Opportunities Under Sussan Ley’s Leadership

Published

7 months ago

July 2, 2025

In the Australian federal election on May 3, 2025, the Liberal Party suffered a crushing defeat, marking its worst election loss in 70 years. This party, which had long dominated Australian politics, was defeated at the polls, leaving party morale at an all-time low and the future direction uncertain.

Amid this low point, Sussan Ley was elected as the new party leader, becoming the first woman to lead the Liberal Party in its history. Her appointment not only symbolizes a breakthrough in terms of generation and gender but is also seen as an opportunity to rebuild the party’s image and political positioning. Whether she can regain voter trust and lead the Liberal Party to a fresh start has become a focal point of public attention.

Last Wednesday, she delivered her first major speech since taking office at the National Press Club. From her words, demeanor, and policies, it is becoming clear that she aims to shape the Liberal Party into a more open, more willing to listen, and more representative of diverse voices.

From grassroots to politics

Sussan Ley was born in 1961 and spent her childhood in Nigeria, the Middle East, and the UK before immigrating to Australia with her parents during her teenage years. Her professional background is diverse, having worked as a pilot, air traffic controller, farm cook, and tax officer. These experiences have given her a deep understanding of grassroots life and policy operations. As a result, she is not as distant as traditional political elites but is closer to ordinary people. She is not a typical politician but has entered the political arena through her own efforts and learning.

In the early stages of her career, she worked while pursuing further education, obtaining qualifications in accounting and taxation. She then joined the Australian Taxation Office, gradually gaining an understanding of policy and public sector operations. These early experiences have enabled her to better understand the realities of ordinary Australians’ lives compared to most politicians who come from party systems, and to establish a practical and people-friendly image.

She also pursued a master’s degree at Charles Sturt University and briefly worked in academia and the field of agricultural policy. This diverse background enables her to excel in parliamentary discussions on rural and regional policies and to build long-term trust with her constituents.

After being elected to the House of Representatives in 2001, she held key positions in the health, education, and environment sectors and served as deputy party leader in 2022. Following her election as party leader after the 2025 federal election, her ascension signifies that the Liberal Party is contemplating how to redefine its values to align with the times. Ley did not rise to power through party factional maneuvering but rather through stable public support and a cross-factional image that earned her the trust of party members, making her a choice to stabilize morale in times of crisis.

It is worth noting that in 2016, she sparked controversy by purchasing a property during a business trip and claiming reimbursement of travelling expenses. Although she did not break the law, she resigned from ministerial position in 2017. The incident shook her reputation for integrity and became a challenge in her political career. However, she retained her parliamentary seat and returned to the policy core, gradually rebuilding her political influence and laying the groundwork for her eventual leadership role.

A leadership style and philosophy distinct from Dutton’s

Although Sussan Ley has only been in office for a very short time, the leadership style she has displayed so far is markedly different from that of her predecessor, Peter Dutton. During his tenure, Dutton was known for his hardline conservative stance, advocating for cracking down on immigration, reducing the size of the federal civil service, and proposing controversial policies such as expanding nuclear energy investment and significantly downsizing the public sector. He also faced criticism for his frequent public gaffes and inconsistent policy positions, further damaging the Liberal Party’s image.

In contrast to Dutton’s authoritarian style and tendency to exclude internal party discussions, Sussan Ley has adopted a markedly different leadership approach. Since taking office, she has emphasized collective participation and party consensus, striving to return the Liberal Party to its traditional “team decision-making” approach. For example, on the highly controversial energy and climate policy, Ley led the establishment of a task force, inviting several shadow cabinet members and backbench MPs from different factions to participate, coordinating the Liberal and National Parties’ positions on “net-zero emissions.” The task force, led by opposition energy spokesperson Dan Tehan, included members such as the shadow treasurer and the head of resources and environmental affairs, reporting directly to Ley and National Party leader David Littleproud, and jointly developing a new direction that balances stable, affordable energy supply with carbon reduction responsibilities. Such a collaborative mechanism not only helps mend internal rifts within the coalition but also demonstrates her willingness to return policy discussions to institutional procedures and collective participation, rather than a one-person dictatorial style.

Sussan Ley and Dutton also hold markedly different positions on the “land acknowledgment” ritual. Dutton has criticized the ritual for being abused and avoided it multiple times during the election campaign; in contrast, Ley proactively performed the acknowledgment in her first major speech after taking office, emphasizing that it holds significant meaning at appropriate times and should not be reduced to a mere formality or completely excluded, demonstrating a more pragmatic and respectful attitude toward multiculturalism.

Sussan Ley has also demonstrated a more open and inclusive leadership style since taking office. In her speech, she emphasized that the Liberal Party must respect and reflect the diversity and vitality of modern Australian society. “This society is composed of people from all over the world, including families raising children in the suburbs, young people striving to develop their careers, renting while pursuing homeownership, and elderly individuals with rich experience who care about the nation’s future.” She also mentioned that professionals, small businesses, volunteers, entrepreneurs, and the working class should all be valued and recognized. Her attitude shows that she values and is willing to listen to the ideas of different groups, respecting the contributions of every Australian.

Sussan Ley has also actively engaged in dialogue with various sectors of society, particularly focusing on reconnecting with young voters who were lost in the previous election. She was interviewed by The Daily Aus on June 15. *The Daily Aus* is one of Australia’s most influential online media outlets, targeting young readers with over 620,000 Instagram followers, and Dutton had previously refused to be interviewed by the media outlet. During the interview, Ley discussed student loan policies (HECS), how young mothers balance family and work, and climate change—issues of concern to young voters. She acknowledged that these are important and urgent challenges, not only critical for young people but also closely tied to the broader Australian society. She emphasized that all political parties should take young people’s voices seriously.

Additionally, she pointed out that for Australians today, the cost of living and rental pressures are the most pressing livelihood issues. Through these concrete actions, Sussan Ley is attempting to convey to the public that the Liberal Party is striving to be more in tune with the general public and to make up for past mistakes in failing to truly understand and represent young people and grassroots voters during elections.

Key policy issues: women, children, and defense

Sussan Ley also clearly articulated the policy issues she prioritizes in this public speech.

Her policy proposals are closely tied to the current international landscape. In the face of escalating conflicts and geopolitical instability, she emphasized that Australia must confront reality and address security challenges head-on. She criticized the Labor government for being insufficiently proactive in defense preparedness, urging Australia to increase its defense budget to 3% of GDP, accelerate the development of military capabilities such as drones, missiles, and space technology, and address the shortage of personnel in the Australian Defense Force. At the same time, she also addressed Australia’s stance toward China, stating that bilateral respect and good relations should be maintained, but that provocative actions such as Chinese military ships patrolling around Australia must be met with a firm response. She emphasized that Australia must confront the competitive and threatening world it now faces and deepen cooperation with its allies.

As a female leader, she also turned her attention to long-neglected social issues. She emphasized that domestic violence and gender-based violence are a national disgrace. Drawing on her personal experiences, she spoke out on behalf of women, expressing understanding for the fear, control, and self-blame they feel, and promising to incorporate this empathy into future decision-making. She also called for the government to allocate more resources and encourage male groups to participate in reforms, arguing that men’s health policies are also part of women’s safety.

Additionally, she has highlighted the challenges children face in the digital age, criticizing tech giants for profiting from addictive designs. She has urged the government to stand with parents to prevent harm from internet addiction, misinformation, and AI abuse. She has specifically pointed out the growing harm deepfakes pose to women.

Internal Reform Challenges

However, Sussan Ley’s reform efforts will face challenges. The Liberal Party remains deeply influenced by the conservative values of the “Robert Menzies era,” with many senior party members holding conservative views on gender equality, climate change, and immigration policies, creating a significant gap with modern voters. The party’s culture has long favored maintaining the existing power structure and traditional values, lacking proactive willingness for institutional reform and ignoring the current trend where voters prioritize social justice, the environment, and inclusivity. This misjudgment has made the Liberal Party’s policies appear outdated, leading to a significant loss of votes from young people and minority groups.

The Liberal Party’s recent election defeats have been particularly severe in some areas, especially in suburban regions that were once long-standing strongholds for the party but are now experiencing voter defections. This indicates a growing disconnect between the party and local grassroots communities. If Leah wants to reverse this trend, she must rebuild substantive relationships with local communities. Sussan Ley has indicated that she will reallocate resources to regional branches to enhance their autonomy and training capabilities, but this will require significant long-term investment.

Moreover, an increasing number of Australian voters, particularly those from multicultural communities and immigrant backgrounds, no longer identify with the “white middle-class” as the mainstream culture. Instead, they expect policies that reflect their diverse identities and experiences. In this context, the Liberal Party’s long-standing political image is gradually losing its influence. The core values of “hard work, family, and entrepreneurial spirit” that were once emphasized must be reinterpreted in today’s diverse immigrant society; otherwise, they will become hollow rhetoric disconnected from the lives of most voters. If Sussan Ley is to successfully lead the Liberal Party through this transformative period, she must actively integrate diverse ethnicities, genders, faiths, and social experiences into mainstream values to create a more inclusive political image.

In recent federal elections, the Liberal Party has clearly lost the support of the majority of multicultural immigrants. To regain their support, the party cannot simply focus on policies to manage immigration numbers but must instead develop concrete plans to assist immigrants in effectively participating in and contributing to multicultural Australia within a short timeframe. In this regard, both the Liberal Party and the Labor Party have yet to propose any concrete solutions. The previous government proposed the Multicultural Framework Review, but no concrete implementation plans have been put forward. If Sussan Ley’s Liberal Party can take the lead in proposing specific policy implementations within this framework, it may have the opportunity to rebuild the Liberal Party’s recognition within the immigrant community.

However, Sussan Ley also faces pressure from hawkish factions within her party, who emphasize “free markets,” “spending cuts,” and “national defense and security first.” This makes any open stance toward immigration risk being viewed as compromise or even betrayal within the party. Ley needs time and strategy to persuade these conservative voices to understand that if the party does not adjust its mindset, it will be left behind by the times.

Additionally, the Liberal Party has long faced criticism over Indigenous affairs, particularly for its conservative stance during the “Indigenous Voice” referendum, which has left the party lacking an effective platform for dialogue with Indigenous communities. While Sussan Ley has not publicly supported this reform, she has stated that the party should establish more substantive partnerships with communities. How she handles this issue in the future will also serve as a key indicator of her leadership’s inclusivity.

Opportunity in Crisis

Sussan Ley adopts a calm and rational communication style, avoiding inflammatory language and shunning media sensationalism. She advocates that the Liberal Party must become more inclusive, truly reflecting the voices of Australia’s diverse modern society. She emphasizes teamwork, thoughtful policy-making, and gradual reform.

In the current context of a diversifying electorate and shifting values, the Liberal Party will struggle to rebuild social trust if it cannot fully shed its past ideological and cultural baggage. As the first female party leader, Sussan Ley’s emergence undoubtedly symbolizes a new beginning for the Liberal Party, but to truly turn the tide, institutional outcomes and policy actions are needed. Whether she can transform her personal experiences into organizational reform momentum will determine the trajectory of her political career and the future of the Liberal Party.

She must actively promote cultural transformation within the party, combining incentive mechanisms with policy support to create space for diverse political participants to thrive. Additionally, addressing global climate issues, digital economic transformation, social inequality, and Indigenous justice requires the Liberal Party to propose more forward-thinking and inclusive policy solutions.

This challenge is not only a test of Sussan Lee’s personal leadership but also a rigorous test of whether the Liberal Party can transform itself into a modern political party.

Article/Editorial Department, Sameway Magazine

Photo/Internet

Post Views: 805

Features

Walking with the Solitary (1): The Lonely People

Published

6 days ago

January 29, 2026

Blessing CALD Editorial

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.

Post Views: 21

Features

Walk With the Needy

Published

6 days ago

January 28, 2026

Blessing CALD Editorial

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.

Post Views: 30

Features

Entering Trump 2.0’s New World

Published

6 days ago

January 28, 2026

Blessing CALD Editorial

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.