Foreign Affairs Trump’s Huge Middle East Opportunity The president wants to transform the region for the better—even if that means defying Israel. Credit: image via Shutterstock Google “crisis” and you’ll get this definition: “a time of intense difficulty, trouble, or danger.” That’s not a bad description of the present moment in the Middle East. When President Donald Trump lands in Saudi Arabia on Tuesday for a four-day tour of the Gulf, he’ll encounter a region in turmoil and grave danger—a region in crisis. But let’s be honest: When in living memory has the Middle East not been? Still, the etymology of “crisis” points to an equally valid, and much more hopeful, view of the region. The word comes from the Greek krisis and has carried through history parts of its earlier meaning as a turning point, for better or worse, in the progression of a disease.  In politics, a crisis is a statesman’s best chance to seize the opportunity and achieve glory, as Machiavelli would put it. “Never let a good crisis go to waste,” Winston Churchill is purported to have said. Trump’s moves ahead of his big trip suggest he sees this Mideast moment more as a turning point—and an opportunity—than a time of extreme peril. If Trump accomplishes in the region what he seems intent on doing, then his actions might also be seen as an historic pivot in American politics. The president wants to avoid a war with Iran and end the one in Gaza. He wants to remove troops and sanctions from Syria. He wants to strike a trillion dollars’ worth of deals with Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. More generally, he wants to put a lid back on a region that exploded under Joe Biden. What’s notable about each of these goals is that Trump, in pursuing them, is acting over the heads—and against the wishes—of Israeli political leadership. In normal times, Israel holds veto rights over America’s Middle East policy, and some Israeli officials still believe that to be the case, but these are far from normal times, and Trump is far from being a normal U.S. president. Tensions are rising between America and Israel thanks to Trump’s newfound willingness to put some daylight between the two nations, which is why the Jewish state didn’t make the cut on this week’s presidential itinerary.  The latest major example of the growing U.S.-Israel divide: Trump’s team negotiated directly with Hamas, breaking from U.S. diplomatic custom, to get an American hostage released from Gaza. Before that, the White House reached a bilateral ceasefire agreement with the Yemeni Houthis—despite the group’s continued strikes targeting Israel. And Trump’s openness to letting Iran continue uranium enrichment under a nuclear deal has rankled Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Biden gave Bibi a warm embrace; Trump is giving him the cold shoulder.  And Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, is putting Bibi on notice. Recently, he told the families of Israeli hostages held by Hamas that their government’s refusal to end the war in Gaza was delaying the release of their loved ones. “Israel is prolonging the war, even though we do not see where further progress can be made,” Witkoff said. In Israel, Trump is more popular than Netanyahu, and getting a hostage deal is more popular than continuing the war. So Witkoff’s provocative intervention in Israeli domestic politics endangers the prime minister’s standing. Many analysts believe that Bibi sees Israel’s war in Gaza—and its antagonisms in Lebanon, Syria, and Iran—as key to political survival. If so, then Netanyahu’s extremist government is behaving like a glorified protection racket, provoking adversaries and escalating conflicts so that “Mr. Security,” as Bibi is known, can defend the nation from threats he’s helped inflame. The emerging possibility that Washington could reduce or cease support for Israel if Jerusalem refuses to halt the war in Gaza seems to be altering Bibi’s political calculus. That wasn’t immediately apparent. Over the weekend, rumors surfaced that Netanyahu told security officials, “I think we’ll have to detox from U.S. security assistance.” As I noted on X, the alleged comment suggested that Bibi, when given the choice between sustaining the war in Gaza and sustaining American support, had chosen the former—revealing how divorced the Israeli premier’s political interests had become from his country’s national interests. But on Monday, Axios reported that Netanyahu, after a meeting with Witkoff, had agreed to dispatch negotiators to Qatar to resume ceasefire talks. Reacting to the news, Trita Parsi of the Quincy Institute wrote on X that Trump, unlike Biden, “used American leverage and Netanyahu caved,” and that “Trump must now sustain that pressure.” Whether Trump will indeed sustain the pressure isn’t clear. In part that’s because U.S. politicians who take on Israel face pushback from the Israel lobby—a fact that MAGA conservatives are increasingly willing to point out. As Florida’s former Rep. Matt Gaetz noted during a recent podcast interview, “If you oppose the U.S.-Israel relationship, you face tremendous headwinds to get into government.”  You also face tremendous headwinds once in government. But there’s reason to think Trump can overcome this most formidable of political obstacles.  No U.S. president in modern times has personalized international relations to the extent Trump has. Trump’s personalistic approach to world affairs means he has a direct interest in preventing foreign leaders from getting an upper hand on him. While past presidents like Biden grumbled in private about Netanyahu’s intransigence even while publicly backing him, Trump is inclined to want his power over Netanyahu—and by extension, America’s power over Israel—to be on full display. Trump has a more standard political motivation to stop the Gaza war: If he succeeded, his popularity, not just in the United States but around the world, would rise. Americans have soured on Israel in recent years and increasingly don’t want their government to fund the horror show in Gaza. Incredibly, a majority of Americans now express an unfavorable opinion of the country, according to a Pew report published in April. Trump would be acting in line with the preferences of the nation he leads if he convinced Netanyahu to cease fire. He’d also be acting in line with the preferences of other nations, including Western ones with governments that back Israel. Germany, for example, has been a major funder of the Gaza war and has cracked down on speech criticizing the Jewish state—yet a new survey shows that only 36 percent of Germans have a positive view of Israel. If Trump can end the bloodshed in Gaza, he’ll not only improve America’s reputation in Muslim countries, but boost his own image in western Europe, where he is deeply unpopular. Back in America, liberal journalists and progressive politicos have noticed Trump’s tough treatment of Netanyahu. “It’s really something to watch Trump handle Netanyahu more effectively than alleged foreign policy expert Joe Biden did,” wrote Matt Duss, former advisor to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), on X. Tom Friedman of the New York Times, in a recent column, penned an open letter to Trump praising him for bucking Bibi. “Netanyahu is not our friend,” Friedman wrote. “He did think he could make you his chump, though.”  Of course, while Trump has set the stage for astonishing geopolitical success, he’s still got to follow through. The longtime golfer has also got to hit the ball right down the middle, lest the Middle East become a sand trap for his second administration. Moreover, he’s got to act fast. The Israeli government seeks ethnic cleansing in Gaza—Netanyahu all but admitted this weekend that any other professed war aim is a “bluff”—and it plans to conquer and flatten the strip after Trump wraps up his tour of the Gulf later this week. During his trip, Trump should make unambiguously clear that America will no longer write a blank check to Israel and that the Gaza war must be resolved in a stable and humane fashion. Rumor has it he may even declare U.S. recognition of the state of Palestine. But Israel would go to great lengths to prevent Palestinian self-determination. If Trump can at least get a ceasefire, he will have gone a long way toward breaking Israel’s hold on American politics, thereby freeing himself to rack up more diplomatic wins, including a landmark nuclear agreement with Tehran.  He will also have shown that the Middle East needn’t be a region in crisis—unless that word means an opportunity for U.S. diplomacy to build a more peaceful and prosperous world, and for a U.S. president to cover himself in glory. The post Trump’s Huge Middle East Opportunity appeared first on The American Conservative.

Up to 39 States Do or Will Have a Law Making it Illegal to Boycott or Criticize Israel - YOU KNOW WHO IS IN CONTROL, BY WHO YOU ARE NOT ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT ' GO AHEAD TRAITORS, TRY TO ENFORCE YOUR TREASON AND SEE HOW THE PEOPLE LIKE IT - THERE IS A LINE THAT WE WILL NOT ALLOW TO BE CROSSED - ONLY SO MUCH TYRANNY THE PEOPLE WILL ABIDE - THE FOOLS TRYING TO PREVENT ANTISEMITISM ARE CREATING IT THEMSELVES. BIG TIME *** 26 already do. The other 13 that are in process will pass it in accordance with the wishes of their Jewish masters. Israel is the capital of The United States!!! UTL COMMENT:- But I thought the US has the 1st and 2nd Amendments??? Soon they shall have 'anti-semitism' laws here in Australia.... :-(.....what a sad state of affairs!! - A country that is literally openly committing genocide we shall not be allowed to criticise??? - FAIR USE FOR EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES Mirrored From: https://www.youtube.com/@thesolarireport

"I don't know what it is."

"We were worried."

A blues classic.

Monday saw a seismic economic shift courtesy of an executive order by President Trump cramming down the prices Americans pay for prescription drugs. President Donald Trump declared Monday that the U.S. “will no longer tolerate profiteering and price gouging from Big Pharma” as he signed an executive order implementing what his administration is calling “most favored nations drug pricing.” “The principle is simple — whatever the lowest price paid for a drug in other developed countries, that is the price that Americans will pay,” Trump said at the White House. “Some prescription drug and pharmaceutical prices will be reduced almost immediately by 50 to 80 to 90 percent.” Trump said that “starting today, the United States will no longer subsidize the healthcare of foreign countries, which is what we were doing. We’re subsidizing others’ healthcare, the countries where they paid a small fraction of what for the same drug that what we pay many, many times more for and will no longer tolerate profiteering and price gouging from Big Pharma.” “Even though the United States is home to only 4 percent of the world’s population, pharmaceutical companies make more than two thirds of their profits in America. So think of that with 4 percent of the population, the pharmaceutical companies make most of their money. Most of their profits from America. That’s not a good thing,” Trump continued. In a press release, the administration put out a number of talking points about how this would work… The order directs the U.S. Trade Representative and Secretary of Commerce to take action to ensure foreign countries are not engaged in practices that purposefully and unfairly undercut market prices and drive price hikes in the United States. The order instructs the administration to communicate price targets to pharmaceutical manufacturers to establish that America, the largest purchaser and funder of prescription drugs in the world, gets the best deal. The Secretary of Health and Human Services will establish a mechanism through which American patients can buy their drugs directly from manufacturers who sell to Americans at a “Most-Favored-Nation” price, bypassing middlemen. If drug manufacturers fail to offer most-favored-nation pricing, the order directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to: (1) propose rules that impose most-favored-nation pricing; and (2) take other aggressive measures to significantly reduce the cost of prescription drugs to the American consumer and end anticompetitive practices. It remains to be seen how this would work in detail, but it’s not a surprise that Trump would push to cram down drug prices. This is likely going to be a very popular move with the folks, as drug prices have been a sore spot for as long as anyone can remember. It seems strange to see Bernie Sanders agreeing with the president, but that’s what happened after the executive order was announced. Naturally, though, Sanders found a way to make this about himself… If Trump is serious about making real change rather than just issuing a press release, he will support legislation I will introduce to ensure we pay no more for prescription drugs than people in other major countries. If we come together, we can get it passed in a few weeks. pic.twitter.com/GtJC2aWSby — Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) May 12, 2025 Will the executive order be thrown out in the courts? It’s quite possible — without dragging the reader through the legal weeds, the pharmaceutical industry has very good, very expensive lawyers and they’re more than capable of venue-shopping to find a federal judge who will buy their arguments against the federal government’s efforts at “price-fixing” through Medicare and Medicaid — which are right about half of all the money spent on prescription drugs in this country. And it’ll absolutely happen again. In a statement to Reuters, the pharmaceutical industry’s lobby group said as much following Trump’s press conference. “Government price setting in any form is bad for American patients,” Alex Schriver, a spokesperson for the top U.S. drug company lobbying group, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, said in a statement when asked about Trump’s planned executive order. Back in 2020, Trump tried something similar, and it was tied up in the courts. And naturally, once bought-and-paid-for Joe Biden took office in 2021, the federal government gave up on trying to cram down drug prices. That cost the U.S. taxpayer something like $85 billion over seven years, which was the first Trump administration’s projection attached to his first effort at “government price-setting.” But is price-setting what’s really happening? As Trump noted, practically every foreign country operates as a bulk buyer of pharmaceuticals, while the federal government in the U.S. does not. Neither Medicare nor Medicaid directly dictates drug prices for their enrollees in the way that foreign countries’ health bureaucracies do, and naturally, private health care plans don’t have the power to do anything of the sort. Meaning that there’s a lot of price-setting happening in the international pharmaceutical market. It just happens everywhere else but here. What Trump is attempting to do is play the same game those countries play to cram down drug prices. That isn’t an assault on the free market. There is no free market in prescription drugs. Since World War II, it’s been a cartel market, and it’s simply been the American people getting hammered by it. And we see this argument from the status quo crowd again and again — Trump, or MAGA, or the NatCons, or whoever — are attacking the free market. We get this on trade again and again. (RELATED: American Prosperity Depends on Free Trade) Imposing tariffs on China or some other country in order that a trade relationship that saps away at American producers and destroys manufacturing jobs is an assault on free trade, don’t you know. (RELATED: The ‘Most Bad’ Option: Trump’s Tariff Uncertainties) As if free trade exists with China. When you’re trading with a communist dictatorship that systematically steals your intellectual property, freezes your producers out of their markets, and undercuts you on cost by using labor practices no civilized country would, you aren’t going to be able to characterize that trade as “free.” It takes two to dance that tango. (RELATED: China’s ‘Low Human Rights’ Advantage) And Trump’s tariffs are almost certainly going to produce the effect of opening markets and creating freer trade than what existed before. (RELATED: The Tariff Reckoning: America’s Economic Resolve in Trump’s Second Act) Assuming that this time Trump will be able to continue the fight on drug prices, similarly, the effect is almost certainly going to be freer — or at least, less manipulative — trade in pharmaceuticals across the globe. There’s that old saying about how if you’re trading with a country with an industrial policy and you have no industrial policy, then their industrial policy will shortly be yours. Somehow, this is mistaken for the presence of a free market by people who claim to be intelligent. I’ve always wondered about that, and I’ve become jaded enough to simply assume those geniuses are corrupt. We should all want to see free markets. Free markets are a great thing. But with respect to pharmaceuticals, Americans have been forced to subsidize drugs for the rest of the world for decades and it’s been left to the Bernie Sanderses of the world — whose solution, if he could get away with it, would be to nationalize the whole industry — to complain about it while the rest of us are supposed to grin and bear it while Germans and Canadians get the same pills for a tiny fraction of what Ohioans and Arizonans pay. The same pills from the same factories, most of which are owned by American companies. And they call that a free market. A few years ago, there was a big hue and cry over the idea of reimportation — meaning, buying up the foreign supply of prescription drugs in bulk at the rates the pharmaceutical companies were selling to foreign markets, and then flooding the U.S. market with that surplus in order to push the prices down. Florida has a program, officially approved last year, which does this in Canada, and estimates of that state’s savings range from $150 million to $180 million yearly. But otherwise, reimportation is generally still illegal. For the life of me, I can’t understand why, other than that Big Pharma owns Congress. And guess who they own more than anybody else? Well… YIKES!!! No wonder all the Democrats are panicking over Trump’s drug pricing Executive Order. pic.twitter.com/zlHCUyQYxR — George (@BehizyTweets) May 12, 2025 Yes, you read that correctly. That was TWENTY-THREE MILLION DOLLARS that Big Pharma has greased Bernie Sanders to the tune of. Do you trust Bernie to codify Trump’s executive order in federal statute? Yeah, me neither. Nobody is saying Trump’s EO is a perfect solution. There is no perfect solution to this problem when most of the money spent on prescription drugs, or healthcare generally, across the globe is spent by the public sector. But the prescription drug market in the United States is $400 billion per year, and we are being grossly overcharged compared to the rest of the world. Cramming down those prices and resetting the global pharmaceutical market, while at the same time instituting some real reforms which de-cartelize that market, is an idea whose time should have come a long time ago. At some point, we could use a conversation about how big the drug market ought to be in the first place, because this is the most medicated society in the history of the world, and we can’t claim to be healthier for it. But that’s another column. Trump shouldn’t be castigated for “price-setting,” by Big Pharma or anyone else. That ship sailed in the years following World War II. Trump simply noted how far from land we are. READ MORE from Scott McKay: Five Quick Things: Habemas Trumpam? These Are Morons If This Story Is True Carbon Capture: The Scam Agreed Upon The post Trump’s Drug-Price EO Should Have Happened Decades Ago appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

Borders are not abstractions. They are security infrastructure. They are economic lifelines. And when left unguarded, they become the entry points for chaos. While America’s political establishment clings to the southern border narrative, a quieter, more calculated breach is advancing from the north. The U.S.–Canada line — long mythologized as polite and uneventful — is now a preferred corridor for the same criminal cartels that have turned Mexico into a narco-state. We now know this isn’t speculation. It’s happening. A Sinaloa Cartel smuggler recently revealed how traffickers are systematically exploiting the northern frontier — using vast forests, understaffed checkpoints, and sleepy trucking routes to push people and narcotics into the United States. In April, U.S. Customs and Border Protection seized over 530 pounds of cocaine near Detroit. In that same quarter, Canadian authorities intercepted more than 4,500 kilograms of cocaine and dismantled a fentanyl superlab capable of producing 90 million doses. These aren’t red flags — they’re klaxons. February brought further proof. Canadian police raided a heavily fortified compound in Surrey, British Columbia — complete with encrypted comms, high-powered weapons, and industrial-grade fentanyl. This wasn’t local crime. This was a forward operating base. Trump previously stated that higher tariffs on Canada were partly intended to motivate better border security and immigration measures. Canada’s response, however, has been muted, publicly dismissing the tariffs as economic posturing without significantly enhancing border enforcement. (RELATED: Use Timber Tariffs to Leverage Policy Changes) Trump has not elaborated further, leaving uncertainty about whether economic pressure alone can yield meaningful cooperation from Ottawa on border security. In my view, unless accompanied by clear diplomatic initiatives, such economic tactics are unlikely to significantly alter Canada’s border enforcement policies. (RELATED: Canada’s Reckless Immigration Policies) And yet, where is the outrage? Where is the action? The headlines keep going south — but the cartels have already moved north. And with Mark Carney now elected as Canada’s new leader, a critical question emerges: Can the United States trust his initiative, willingness, and strategic interest in addressing this expanding threat — or will Ottawa continue to treat this as someone else’s problem? (RELATED: The Future Is Dim for US–Canada Relations) The political class has reduced immigration policy to slogans and stagecraft, offering little in the way of operational answers. While cable news loops images of the southern border wall, the actual operational surge is unfolding 2,000 miles away. The media’s fixation on the southern front has become a distraction — one that cartels are exploiting with chilling efficiency. Democrats cling to moral platitudes. Republicans chase media-friendly skirmishes in the desert. Meanwhile, cartels are building infrastructure in America’s backyard with little resistance. In FY2024 alone, 23,721 migrants were apprehended at the northern border — a staggering 960 percent increase since 2022. This isn’t immigration — it’s infiltration. It’s the weaponization of asylum systems, logistics routes, and legal grey zones. And if American leadership — especially those who profess to champion border security — is serious, then it must accept that the next front in this fight isn’t theoretical. It’s already operational. And it’s in the north. Cartels are not static. They generated over $13 billion in smuggling revenue in 2024 alone — more than the GDP of some small countries. They reroute swiftly when detection increases, exploiting everything from remote forest trails to inland ports. With just 2,000 agents covering a 5,500-mile frontier, the northern border remains the most understaffed and under-monitored sector in U.S. homeland security. That is not a vulnerability — it’s an invitation. And there is still no coordinated strategy. No operational deterrent. No national urgency. We don’t need posturing. We need policy. Joint U.S.-Canada interdiction units. Bilateral financial task forces to disrupt cartel capital flows. A dedicated northern border command under DHS. Physical barriers in strategic corridors — not for show, but for enforcement. And most critically, leadership in Washington and Ottawa that treats this challenge with the gravity it deserves. It cannot allow 5,500 miles of northern exposure to become its next blind spot. The border doesn’t stop mattering because it runs through forest instead of desert. We’ve already seen what happens when political inertia is mistaken for strategy. The southern breakdown wasn’t inevitable — it was permitted. The question now is simple: having watched it happen once, will we allow the same forces to break through from the north, while pretending it’s not our fight? READ MORE from Kevin Cohen: Sanctuary Cities: The Dangerous Illusion of Virtue The TikTok Border: How Smugglers Turned Migration Into a Game How Student Visas Became the New Trojan Horse for Immigration Fraud The post Media Focused on South While Cartels Move to the Northern Border appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

“Gang Tattoos,” editorial cartoon by Yogi Love for The American Spectator on May 12, 2025. The post Gang Tattoos appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.

In his first term, President Trump accomplished what once seemed impossible by forging new agreements with Israel and neighboring Arab states. Key to the success of the Abraham Accords was that they formed significant political, economic, security, and cultural ties between Israel and Arab states without being constrained by the political impasse of a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Now that Israel has dismantled and degraded Hamas, and the president is visiting the Gulf this week, the Trump administration is in an optimal position to expand the Abraham Accords. To that end, U.S. special envoy to the Middle East, Steve Witkoff, predicted that on the expansion of the Abraham Accords, “we [the administration] think will have some or a lot of announcements very, very shortly.” (RELATED: Trump and the Gaza Ceasefire: Implications for the Future of the Abraham Accords) First, the administration should push Saudi Arabia to join the Accords. Riyadh has participated in quiet engagement with Israel, including in Intelligence cooperation, business discussions, and overflight permissions for years. Saudi Arabia’s concern over Iran’s influence, the Kingdom’s growing economic diversification under Vision 2030, and its deepening ties with the U.S. and Israel are pushing it closer to the brink of a formal deal. (RELATED: The Abraham Accords Are the Way Toward Peace) Formal normalization would be a seismic shift — not just diplomatically, but symbolically. As the guardian of Islam’s holiest sites, Saudi Arabia’s inclusion would give political and religious cover to other reluctant Muslim-majority countries to join the Accords. In fact, its key role in brokering the UAE–Israel and Bahrain–Israel normalization agreements makes it an optimal candidate for such a role. If Saudi Arabia signs on, the Abraham Accords would serve as the foundation of a new Middle East order, as such a deal would project significant power against Iran and its proxies, and the Muslim Brotherhood. (RELATED: Jordan Takes a Bold Step. Trump Should Follow Up.) And Saudi Arabia could pressure the UAE and Bahrain to strengthen their relationships with Israel, and even get other Gulf States like Oman to join as well. Greater Gulf participation in the Abraham Accords could yield a more amazing victory — normalization between Israel and Pakistan. Pakistan’s participation is within the realm of possibility. Pakistan and Israel’s foreign ministers held talks back in 2005, and Pakistan has shared intelligence with Israel on occasions. The Gulf states are one of Pakistan’s closest economic partners, and Saudi Arabia influences Pakistan not just politically but religiously as well. So, as the Gulf strengthens its ties with Israel, Pakistan could follow. The challenge, of course, is domestic politics in Pakistan, but the Gulf countries could influence Pakistan to change course, and in turn improve relations with the West generally. Such an agreement could also weaken China and Russia’s influence in the region. Pakistan, in turn, would stand to gain enormously from Israeli technology in water management, agriculture, and cybersecurity. More importantly, Pakistan as a nuclear Muslim nation would find stronger allies in countering extremism and jihadi ideology. An expansion of the Abraham Accords to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan would be a victory in defeating fundamentalism in the Middle East and South Asia. It is time for the Trump administration to reinvigorate the diplomatic breakthroughs on the Abraham Accords. Wajid Ali Syed is a multimedia journalist who has focused on U.S. foreign policy towards the Middle East and South Asia for over 20 years. Wajid has also worked for international media organizations, including the BBC and Voice of America. He’s an award-winning independent filmmaker, and recently finished a short documentary on Christian persecution in Pakistan titled: Faith Under Fire. READ MORE: The Abraham Accords Are the Way Toward Peace Jordan Takes a Bold Step. Trump Should Follow Up. Another Plan for the Future of Gaza The Art of a Second Iran Deal The post Trump Should Expand the Abraham Accords to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan appeared first on The American Spectator | USA News and Politics.