For years, much of the American media has operated under a peculiar assumption: that the best way to confront adversaries such as China and Iran is to accommodate them. If the United States applies pressure, the narrative quickly becomes that America is overextended, losing leverage, or somehow empowering its enemies. That narrative has resurfaced during President Donald Trump’s confrontation with Tehran and Beijing. According to outlets such as The New York Times and The Washington Post, both Iran and China are supposedly emerging stronger from the current conflict. It is a difficult claim to square with reality. Iran’s senior military leadership has been decimated. Its regional proxy network has been weakened. Its economy remains in severe distress, and its military capabilities have been heavily degraded. Yet much of the media coverage treats Iran’s mere survival as evidence that it is somehow winning. The New York Times recently argued that Iran had “succeeded in confounding U.S. and Israeli expectations for a speedy victory,” suggesting that Tehran had created a kind of stalemate. But modern wars rarely end with formal surrender ceremonies or total collapse. By the standards of contemporary warfare, weakening an enemy’s military leadership, degrading its economy, and limiting its regional influence would traditionally be viewed as significant strategic gains. Instead, media coverage often defines victory so narrowly that any continued resistance by Iran becomes proof of American failure. The Times also suggested that Iran had “maintained control” over the Strait of Hormuz. But if Iran truly controlled the strait in any meaningful sense, it would be freely exporting its own oil and profiting from commercial traffic through the region. It is doing neither. Iran’s threats against shipping lanes reflect desperation and leverage-seeking behavior, not dominance. In fact, instability in the strait creates problems not only for the U.S. and its allies but also for China, which depends heavily on imported oil flowing through the Gulf. That reality complicates the simplistic narrative that Beijing somehow benefits automatically from chaos in the Middle East. To be sure, the Trump administration has exercised restraint in certain areas, particularly regarding direct attacks on Iranian energy infrastructure. But that restraint reflects strategic calculation, not weakness. Completely destroying Iran’s energy sector could devastate the Iranian population and eliminate the economic foundation for any future moderate government. The same pattern appears in coverage of China. The Post recently highlighted a reported intelligence assessment claiming that Beijing is exploiting the Iran conflict to maximize its advantage over the U.S. The report pointed to Chinese weapons sales, diplomatic messaging, and China’s ability to study American military operations. None of that is surprising. Great powers routinely study conflicts and attempt to exploit geopolitical openings. That does not mean they are winning. China still faces the same structural problems it faced before the conflict began: slowing economic growth, demographic decline, mounting debt, and heavy dependence on imported energy. Prolonged instability in the Middle East threatens Beijing’s economy as much as Washington’s. The Post also emphasized concerns that the conflict is depleting American munitions stockpiles that could be needed in a future Taiwan contingency. That concern is legitimate. But it reflects years of inadequate defense production and military downsizing under previous administrations, not some strategic triumph by Beijing. Critics of American foreign policy often argue that China can portray the U.S. as an aggressive power in decline. But China’s own behavior makes that argument difficult to sustain. Beijing continues threatening Taiwan, tightening control over Hong Kong, expanding military influence across the Pacific, and pressuring neighboring countries throughout Asia. The idea that China is positioned to win a global moral argument against the U.S. requires overlooking much of Beijing’s conduct. Ultimately, the broader media narrative reflects a longstanding tendency in parts of the American press to interpret nearly every assertion of U.S. power as evidence of American weakness. Military action becomes proof of overreach. Economic pressure becomes recklessness. Adversaries surviving become adversaries winning. But survival is not victory, and disruption is not dominance. Whatever criticisms one may have of Trump’s foreign policy, the central premise of his approach remains straightforward: American strength deters adversaries more effectively than accommodation does. History suggests that argument deserves more serious consideration than much of the current media coverage is willing to give it. COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

As adversaries such as China expand their advanced military capabilities, U.S. leaders are increasingly calling for America to strengthen its own domestically produced defense arsenal. “It’s foolish to rely on a country that hates us for national security, which is why I’ve repeatedly called for a complete decoupling of Chinese-made chips and semiconductors from the American arsenal,” Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, told the Daily Signal. “We should not be relying on Communist China for anything—full stop. For years, the [Chinese Communist Party] has been trying to destroy America. They spy on us, send fentanyl to kill our kids, and conspire with our enemies. President Trump built the toughest military in modern history by prioritizing American dominance, which must be fueled with weapons and systems made in the USA,” he added. Driven by that push to rely on homegrown capabilities, the U.S. Department of War has spent at least $55 billion over the past decade on domestic artificial intelligence production. That investment has helped spur a new wave of American innovation in defense-related technologies. One example of American innovation taking opportunity of Congress’ emphasis on American-made defense is Headwall, a U.S.-based startup specializing in AI-powered products for crisis command centers—systems that play a critical role in emergency response, rescue missions, and high-profile security operations. The Maryland-based company develops AI-driven virtual command centers that rely on advanced software to be used by the military, law enforcement, hospitals, and rescue crews. Company leaders agree with Scott’s assessment that importing foreign defense technology poses a potentially deadly security risk. “It’s important we have technology we can trust that we control—technology that is in our data centers in our country, on our soil, where we’re in control of what’s going on,” Headwall co-founder Geoff Bundt told the Daily Signal. He added that the technology “can also be run in a completely off-network environment,” underscoring its “huge importance” for national security. Adam Weiner, Headwall’s co-founder, said he and his partner launched the company because of a shared belief in the importance of American innovation for national defense. “We strongly believe that lifesaving, reliable, and homegrown innovation, for the sake of our national security, matters and is needed,” Weiner said. “Somebody has to do this here in the U.S.,” he added. “As a result, not only are we providing the market with more trustworthy and lifesaving products, but we are adding jobs right here in Prince George’s County.” Technologies such as live threat identification, data collection, ground layout planning, and real-time situational awareness—capabilities offered by Headwall—are currently among those the U.S. military indirectly sources from China and other adversaries. One of the company’s primary products is a software application for mixed-reality headsets that consolidates the previously mentioned capabilities into a single system, a development which the company’s leaders believe could reduce U.S. reliance on foreign-sourced technologies. According to the American Security Project, the Department of War has relied heavily on Chinese-manufactured off-the-shelf subcomponents and semiconductors in its military systems, a dependence Scott has warned poses a major national security risk. The Center for Strategic and International Studies has similarly noted that the United States continues to purchase raw materials, critical minerals, and components from China for AI and military products, despite ongoing efforts to reduce reliance on foreign supply chains—highlighting the importance of expanding American-made alternatives. In April, the House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party released a report urging the federal government—regardless of which party is in power—to shift away from foreign-origin AI and invest more heavily in domestically developed AI chips and technologies. “Artificial intelligence sits at the center of U.S.-China competition, and both governments treat leadership in AI as a national security priority,” the report noted. “Beijing wants control of the full AI stack, not just competitive applications,” it continued. “Beijing is pursuing that autonomy to strengthen its military, harden itself against foreign pressure, and keep the technologies underpinning future economic and military power under Party-state control.”

Coincident with the celebration of the 250th anniversary of the signing of the American Declaration of Independence is the 250th anniversary of the publication of “The Wealth of Nations.” The full title of Scotsman Adam Smith’s book, published in 1776, is “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations.” One might say that in that one year 250 years ago, the American Declaration of Independence provided the road map for political freedom and Smith’s book provided the road map for economic freedom. The result was a great new achievement in the history of human potential called the United States of America. Smith was first to systematically articulate that free markets, individuals left free to pursue their interests, with law protecting life and property, produce the most prosperous society for all. Rather than the government deciding who should do what, an “invisible hand” guiding markets maximizes the opportunity for each to do what best suits them and thereby provides most efficiently for the needs of their fellow citizens. Today, 250 years after publication of Smith’s famous book, its truth still brightly shines. According to the Fraser Institute’s annual Economic Freedom of the World report, average income of the top 25% of countries in economic freedom is more than six times greater than the average income of the bottom 25%. So, is “The Wealth of Nations” a book about an economic jungle, with everyone mercilessly out for themselves? For sure not. Smith is author of another book called “The Theory of Moral Sentiments.” Here he adds the moral perspective of the importance of self-knowledge, empathy to others, and meaning. In other words, the “secret sauce,” so to speak, is allowing individuals the freedom to take responsibility for their lives and to bring their own unique talents and perspective to the marketplace, serving others through empathy and knowledge and moral responsibility. What about technology? Technology is the great disrupter. New discoveries and inventions bring to the marketplace new and better ways to do things, upsetting the whole existing apple cart of the way things have been. There are always going to be those afraid of change, wanting to keep things as they are. Or wanting government to step in and abridge our freedom and our ability to take full advantage of and to use properly new technologies. The fear of change is not without legitimacy. Technology is a tool in the hands of men. How that technology is used depends on how human beings choose to use it: for good, or for bad. The steam engine, the automobile, the computer, nuclear energy, laptops, the iPhone. All great disrupters. Nuclear power has great power to destroy or to produce clean, cheap electricity. The iPhone provides unprecedented communication freedom and mobility. But it can also cause addiction. Social media provides new dimensions for communication and social cohesion. Or it can also provide a platform for horrible distortions and social destruction. The technology grabbing headlines now is artificial intelligence. Like other technological breakthroughs, it can do great things or horrible things. Which it will be is not a function of the technology but a function of the human beings using it. To go back to “The Wealth of Nations,” the great bounty is produced when people are given freedom and when those same people take responsibility for knowing what is good and knowing what is evil and acting accordingly. Freedom means creativity. The U.S. constitutes less the 5% of the world’s total population. Yet, Americans account for some 50% of all Nobel prizes since the prizes began in 1901. As we celebrate this year, let’s embrace our freedom, and let’s push back on those so ready to concede it. But let’s remember at every moment we are a free nation under God, which is the answer to using our freedom correctly. COPYRIGHT 2026 CREATORS.COM We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of the Daily Signal.

SINGAPORE—Secretary of War Pete Hegseth said the United States wants to maintain the “status quo that has enabled extraordinary growth and opportunity” in Asia.  “What we seek, and what the president has constantly articulated, is a genuinely stable equilibrium that works for Americans as well as our allies,” Hegseth said. “A favorable but durable balance of power, in which no state, including China, can impose its hegemony and hold the security or prosperity of our nation and our allies in question.”  Hegseth spoke Saturday morning at the Shangri-La Dialogue conference in Singapore, where Indo-Pacific leaders gather to discuss issues facing the region. For the second year in a row, no high-ranking officials from China attended.  “When we look across the region today, there is frightful alarm regarding China’s historic military buildup and the expansion of its military activities in the region and beyond,” Hegseth said.  He said the U.S. and Asia agree that “a Pacific dominated by any hegemon that would unwrap the regional balance of power and undermine people that we all seek to preserve. “The Department of War is working with the utmost focus to prevent any such unraveling,” Hegseth said.  Yet Hegseth said U.S. relations with China have never been stronger after President Donald Trump’s recent state visit to Beijing. “Relations between the United States and China are better than they’ve been in many years,” Hegseth said. “President Trump and this administration seek a stable peace, fair trade, and respectful relations with China. It’s not a coincidence that this has happened.” Trump’s conversations with President Xi Jinping reinforced these goals, said Hegseth, who joined Trump on the trip and listened to “hours of candid conversations” between the two.  “They agreed that the United States and China should build a constructive relationship of strategic stability based on fairness and reciprocity,” he said, “reaffirming that while our nations will vigorously protect our respective interests, we can secure practical, mutually beneficial agreements where our interests align.” NEW: @SecWar clarified Hung Cao’s statement the US is pausing arms to Taiwan to make sure we have the munitions needed for Iran“Our ability to recommence, if necessary, is we are more than capable. Our stockpiles are more than suited for that, both there and around the globe,… pic.twitter.com/heogJccNSq— Elizabeth Troutman Mitchell (@TheElizMitchell) May 30, 2026 But the dialogue between Xi and Trump is not “capitulation,” according to Hegseth.  Rather, it’s a “practical guardrail, ensuring the relationship our leaders seek at the top is preserved at every level,” he said.  Hegseth said the U.S. will not pursue “needless confrontation,” but instead approaches the Indo-Pacific with “deliberate strength.” “Our allies across Asia do not seek constant escalation, rhetorical theatrics, or a region defined by public confrontation,” he said. “What they want, and what the United States delivers, is strength that is disciplined, resolve that is steady, and leadership that is confident enough to speak and walk softly while carrying a big stick.” While the U.S. has significant interests in the Indo-Pacific, it respects sovereignty in the region, Hegseth said.  The war secretary said Western Europe should learn from the United States’ relationship with Asia.  “We need partners, not protectorates,” he said. “We seek alliances built on shared responsibility, not dependency. This is the maturation of our alliances in a new era.”

A convicted murderer and alleged gang member was being paid by Los Angeles taxpayers to patrol neighborhoods as a “peace ambassador” until federal authorities arrested him Friday morning. Now, city leaders are facing questions about how he got the job in the first place. Michael Angel Alvarez, 41, aka “Diablo,” was arrested on Friday during a traffic stop for possession of body armor by a violent felon, a crime punishable by up to five years in prison.  Alvarez was being paid by Los Angeles city tax dollars to patrol as a “peace ambassador,” according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Central District of California. A program launched by LA Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez, peace ambassadors were meant to be a way “to support Angelenos in moments of crisis” by providing people who are not law enforcement to aid in non-emergency situations, according to Hernandez’s website.  “Each team consists of two unarmed workers who have lived experience in the justice or gang systems and are trained in violence prevention and trauma-informed care,” the website states. According to U.S. Attorney Bill Essayli, Alvarez earned approximately $58,000 through the program last year. Essayli alleged that Alvarez maintained ties to the 18th Street gang while employed by the city. “There is no indication Alvarez has ever stopped associating with the 18th Street gang. In fact, in jailhouse telephone call recordings of Alvarez since his release from state prison, he discussed assaulting individuals for breaking gang rules,” Essayli said in a post on X. In 2002, Alvarez was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to 50 years to life in state prison. He was released after serving 24 years. In April 2025, he received a felony conviction for being a prisoner in possession of a weapon. According to a campaign website, Hernandez states she is focused on “investing in community care, workforce development, social services, and harm-reduction programs that help make our neighborhoods safer and healthier places for all Angelenos.” The peace ambassador program is contracted out by two organizations, Homies Unidos, led by Executive Director Alex Sanchez, and Healing Urban Barrios, led by Executive Director Christina Navarro. Healing Urban Barrios paid Alvarez $58,156 in 2025. Neither organization responded to the Daily Signal’s request for information on Alvarez’s arrest. In response to the arrest, Essayli shared his disappointment in the misuse of taxpayer dollars. “The hardworking taxpayers of Los Angeles deserve better than to see their money shelled out to a convicted gang murderer,” he said. Los Angeles mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt also criticized city leadership following the arrest, writing on X that “[Mayor] Karen Bass has turned Los Angeles into a criminal cartel.” Essayli noted this “is not the first instance of an active criminal being funded by Los Angeles taxpayers.” In a post on X, he shared another case in which a felon used his anti-gang charity, Delivering Options, as a front for “fraudulent activities.” This is not the fist instance of an active criminal being funded by Los Angeles tax payers.Eugene Henley, Jr., aka “Big U,” was charged by our Office in March 2025 for dozens of felonies, including fraud, robbery, extortion, tax evasion, embezzlement of donations to his charity…— F.A. United States Attorney Bill Essayli (@USAttyEssayli) May 29, 2026 Bass has not made a public statement on the issue. As of the time of publication, Hernandez has not responded to the Daily Signal’s request for comment or made a public statement about the arrest.