分类： politics

WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump’s unconventional approach to international relations reached new heights this week as his personal reactions to foreign leaders triggered dramatic policy shifts and diplomatic confrontations. The president’s mercurial temperament has become the central driver of U.S. foreign policy, fundamentally challenging the post-World War II international order.

In a series of consequential moves, Trump revoked Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s invitation to join his Board of Peace initiative following what he perceived as Canada’s increasingly assertive posture toward the United States. The organization, initially formed to maintain the Israel-Hamas ceasefire, has expanded into a potential rival to the United Nations, drawing skepticism from Western allies.

During his appearance at the World Economic Forum, Trump demonstrated his transactional approach by threatening tariffs against Switzerland after its leader allegedly “rubbed me the wrong way” during a phone conversation. Although he ultimately lowered the proposed tariffs, the incident highlighted how personal chemistry influences his economic decisions. Similarly, the president pressured Denmark to acquiesce to U.S. ambitions regarding Greenland with a stark ultimatum: “say yes and we will be very appreciative. Or you can say no and we will remember.”

This pattern of behavior reflects Trump’s deliberate effort to dismantle the rules-based international system that has governed Western diplomacy for decades. His supporters view this approach as a necessary correction to what they consider an inefficient system overly focused on compromise. However, critics argue that replacing established norms with a personality-driven framework creates dangerous instability.

Republican Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, returning from Davos, reported hearing concerns about a “new world order” among international leaders. She noted that traditional allies now question American reliability, with nations considering alternative partnerships due to uncertainty about U.S. intentions.

The administration’s maximalist strategy, described by former adviser Steve Bannon as continuing “until you meet resistance,” has encountered little opposition from the Republican-controlled Congress. However, foreign leaders are increasingly vocal in their pushback.

Prime Minister Carney has emerged as a leading voice for middle powers seeking to counter American unpredictability. Speaking before Trump in Davos, Carney advocated for collective action among secondary nations, stating, “If you are not at the table, you are on the menu.” He proposed creating a “third path” based on legitimacy, integrity, and rules—a vision that drew Trump’s ire and prompted threats against Canada.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer condemned Trump’s recent comments questioning NATO’s mutual defense commitments as “insulting and frankly appalling.” The criticism came despite NATO’s Article 5 being invoked only once—in defense of the United States following the 9/11 attacks.

Analysts worry that Trump’s tactics may cause lasting damage to American global standing while encouraging nations to strengthen ties with China. Former Biden national security adviser Jake Sullivan observed that Chinese leadership views Trump’s conflicts with allies as beneficial to Beijing’s interests.

Democratic Senator Chris Coons of Delaware, who participated in a bipartisan delegation to Denmark, noted that Trump appears to respect only those nations that demonstrate toughness and resilience, while treating accommodating partners with disregard.

The president’s personal diplomacy has created a fundamental shift in how the United States engages with the world, replacing established protocols with a system where flattery, personal animus, and immediate gratification drive international decision-making.

The United Arab Emirates is poised to facilitate a critical diplomatic initiative by hosting two-day multilateral peace negotiations among the United States, Russia, and Ukraine. Scheduled for late January 2026, this strategic dialogue represents a significant development in international conflict resolution efforts regarding the ongoing Eastern European tensions.

According to regional diplomatic sources, the UAE’s selection as neutral territory underscores its growing influence in global affairs and its capacity to mediate between conflicting international powers. The Gulf nation’s established relationships with all involved parties position it uniquely to foster constructive dialogue where previous venues have faced challenges.

This diplomatic undertaking follows multiple previous attempts to establish sustainable communication channels between the conflicting nations. The extended duration of the talks suggests participants are preparing for substantive discussions beyond preliminary positioning, potentially addressing core security concerns and humanitarian considerations that have previously hindered progress.

International observers note the timing coincides with increasing global pressure for conflict de-escalation amid evolving geopolitical dynamics. The participation of both US and Russian representatives at the negotiating table, alongside Ukrainian delegates, indicates potential openness to exploring alternative frameworks for stability in the region.

The international community continues monitoring developments closely, recognizing that successful mediation could establish new precedents for conflict resolution in complex geopolitical environments while potentially reshaping regional power dynamics.

While Morocco captivated global attention hosting the African Cup of Nations tournament, a potent protest movement dubbed GenZ 212 highlighted the nation’s stark domestic tensions. The demonstrations, which swept across dozens of cities between September and December 2025, were initially sparked by public outrage over the deaths of eight women from botched caesarean sections at a public hospital in Agadir. This tragedy galvanized a youth-led movement demanding urgent reforms to Morocco’s chronically underfunded healthcare and education systems, alongside calls to address systemic corruption and enhance political rights.

The government response was severe. Security forces shot and killed at least three protesters, while over 2,400 individuals were arrested during the unrest. Hundreds remain in custody, with many reporting brutal beatings and dire detention conditions. Omar, a relative of one detainee who spoke under pseudonym for security reasons, described overcrowded cells designed for ten people holding forty, where diseases spread rapidly.

The timing of the protests created a striking contrast with Morocco’s ambitious sporting ambitions. As the government prepared to co-host the 2030 World Cup, investing $1.4 billion in new stadiums including plans for the world’s largest arena in Casablanca, protesters adopted a powerful chant: “The stadiums are here, but where are the hospitals?” This slogan encapsulated their critique of the state’s misplaced priorities.

During the Afcon tournament, authorities implemented overwhelming security measures. Public spaces felt heavily monitored, gatherings were deemed suspicious by default, and political expression became significantly riskier. International attendees encountered stringent checks, including biometric passport registration on an app developed by a relative of the king’s closest aide.

According to Jonathan Hill, director of the Institute of Middle Eastern Studies at King’s College London, hosting such mega-events forms part of Morocco’s strategy to gain international recognition and demonstrate economic strength. However, GenZ 212 members describe this as more than mere ‘sportswashing’—characterizing it as comprehensive propaganda masking systemic failures.

Beneath the spectacle of sporting achievement lies a nation of profound inequality. The World Inequality Database indicates Morocco’s top 1 percent earn a similar proportion of national income as the bottom 50 percent. With hundreds still detained and sentences of up to 15 years being handed down for protest-related charges, analysts predict further social unrest is inevitable given the structural limits of Moroccan democracy.

The movement maintains significant organizational capacity, with over 180,000 users on its Discord server continuing discussions. As one activist noted, the current calm represents not acceptance but ‘enforced calm through violence’—a temporary condition that cannot permanently suppress an educated, connected generation aware of the system’s repressive nature.

In a significant diplomatic development, Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has formally declined an invitation for his country to participate in former U.S. President Donald Trump’s proposed ‘Board of Peace’ initiative. The decision, announced during a speech at EU headquarters in Brussels, reflects growing international concern about the board’s structure and objectives.

Prime Minister Sánchez emphasized that Palestinian representation remains fundamental to any legitimate peace process, stating unequivocally that ‘The future of Palestine as a whole should be settled by Palestinians.’ This position aligns Spain with several key U.S. allies including the United Kingdom and France, all of which have expressed reservations about joining the controversial board in its current form.

The initiative faced additional turbulence as Trump unexpectedly rescinded Canada’s invitation through a Truth Social post directed at Prime Minister Mark Carney. The public disinvitation came shortly after Carney delivered critical remarks about U.S. policy and hegemony at the World Economic Forum in Davos, though the Trump administration provided no explicit justification for the reversal.

Conceived as an international organization aiming to ‘promote stability, restore dependable and lawful governance, and secure enduring peace in conflict-affected regions,’ the Board of Peace has drawn scrutiny for its vague mandate and potential to undermine existing international institutions. Critics argue the board’s composition—which includes Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, and U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio—lacks appropriate Palestinian representation despite its stated focus on Gaza reconstruction.

Notably, while the board proposes appointing a 15-member Palestinian technocratic committee to oversee Gaza’s transition, no Palestinians currently sit on its executive board. This omission has raised questions about the initiative’s commitment to genuine Palestinian self-determination.

Despite European hesitancy, several Middle Eastern nations including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Egypt, Turkey, and Jordan have reportedly agreed to participate alongside Israel. The development unfolds against the tragic backdrop of more than 71,500 Palestinian casualties in Gaza since October 2023, highlighting the urgent need for credible peace mechanisms that command broad international legitimacy.