Author Archives: Ket Garden

by | January 18, 2026 · 6:50 pm

World Economic Forum 2026 Kicks Off in Davos — and Donald Trump Leads Record U.S. Delegation

Davos, Switzerland — January 19, 2026
The annual World Economic Forum (WEF) gathering in the Swiss Alps begins this Monday under the theme “A Spirit of Dialogue.” Leaders from governments, business, civil society and science will convene through January 23 to confront what organizers call the most pressing global challenges of our time: geopolitical instability, economic fragmentation, technological disruption and climate change.

This year’s meeting is poised to be one of the most unpredictable yet — largely because U.S. President Donald Trump is attending in person and will lead the largest-ever American delegation to Davos.

Trump Returns to Davos with a Big Team

Trump’s presence is notable not only for its scale but also for its political symbolism. His administration will be accompanied by several Cabinet members and senior officials — including the Secretary of State, Treasury Secretary, Commerce Secretary, trade representatives, and top White House aides — marking a record-size U.S. contingent.

Last time Trump engaged with the forum, his participation was virtual and aired amid controversy. This year’s in-person return is expected to attract rock-star style attention and intense scrutiny from global leaders, the media and activists.

A “Spirit of Dialogue” Amid Global Tensions

The forum’s theme emphasizes cooperation and conversation in a world marked by deepening geopolitical fault lines. Amid economic competition, rising tariffs and shifting alliances, WEF organizers are pushing dialogue as essential for progress.

But Trump’s trademark slogan, “America First,” poses a direct challenge to the forum’s ethos of multilateral cooperation. Allies and competitors alike will be watching to see how — and if — Trump’s policies can align with broader global ambitions for cooperation, especially on trade, security and technology.

Key Issues on the Agenda

While WEF is traditionally focused on economic strategy and global collaboration, this year’s agenda is exceptionally crowded:

  • Geopolitical and security challenges: Ukraine remains a central topic, with talks planned involving U.S. officials and Ukrainian representatives about peace frameworks and reconstruction support.
  • Economic fragmentation: A recent WEF risk survey found that economic confrontation — including tariffs and trade tensions — has overtaken armed conflict as a top risk to global stability.
  • Artificial Intelligence: Discussions about how to govern and deploy AI responsibly are expected to be key, with tech leaders from companies such as Microsoft and Nvidia attending.
  • Business and innovation: With roughly 3,000 participants and about 850 CEOs from top global companies, business and investment outlooks will be central to many discussions.

Trump’s Global Footprint Heading into Davos

Trump’s foreign policy moves over the past year — from threats of tariffs over Greenland to confrontations with Iran and Venezuela — have reshaped parts of the international agenda. European leaders are preparing for high-stakes talks with the U.S., including possible retaliatory measures tied to trade tensions that are already threatening transatlantic unity.

Although climate and “woke” cultural topics were reportedly de-emphasized in programming after negotiations with U.S. officials, the core business of the forum — economic cooperation and innovation — remains indispensable.

A Pivotal Moment for Global Order

This year’s Davos is widely perceived as a test of whether global leaders can adapt the old world order to 21st-century challenges — or whether a fundamentally new framework for cooperation will emerge. With Trump’s America firmly in the spotlight and AI and economic confrontation rising as cross-cutting issues, the balance between national interests and collective global action will be under intense scrutiny.

As the world’s eyes turn to the Swiss Alps, the question is no longer whether dialogue will take place — but whether it can translate into real solutions.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | January 15, 2026 · 7:51 pm

Iran: Executions and the Threat of Public Death Sentences Against Protesters – A New and Alarming Phase

In the wake of the largest protests against the Iranian regime in decades, the world has witnessed a sharp increase in the use of the death penalty in Iran. According to human rights organizations, at least 1,500 people were executed in 2025—an unprecedented level in the history of the Islamic Republic. Many of these executions followed expedited proceedings and lacked what the regime itself would describe as a thorough and fair trial. The death penalty has increasingly been used as a tool to spread fear and crush opposition.

Reports of arrests, mass killings, and brutal reprisals against protesters have been widespread. In some cases, families have been informed that executions were imminent, with only very short notice.

Erfan Soltani – A Symbol of a New Threat

The 26-year-old Iranian protester Erfan Soltani was arrested during the large-scale demonstrations that began in early January 2026. He was quickly sentenced to death on charges of moharebeh—“enmity against God”—a grave accusation frequently used against political opponents in Iran. His family was reportedly given only ten minutes to say goodbye before his planned hanging, triggering international condemnation and warnings from the United States of possible consequences should the execution be carried out.

Following international pressure, including statements from U.S. political leadership, some sources reported that the planned execution may have been postponed or canceled. However, Iran’s judiciary has claimed that parts of the media coverage were “fabricated” and has denied that a death sentence was definitively issued in the case, as reported by some outlets.

Even though the specific outcome of this case remains contested, it nonetheless illustrates a clear pattern: Iranian authorities have made extensive use of the death penalty for years, and protesters have been sentenced after extremely rapid proceedings that human rights groups describe as inadequate and deeply unjust.

A Pattern of Death Sentences Against Opposition

The use of capital punishment in Iran is not new and has long been a recurring element of how the regime responds to protests and dissent. During the demonstrations following the death of Mahsa Amini in 2022, several protesters were sentenced to death and executed on charges such as moharebeh and efsad-e fel-arz (literally “corruption on earth”).

In 2024, the United Nations and human rights organizations reported that at least hundreds of protesters and others had been executed on such charges, often following rushed and highly questionable judicial processes.

What This Means

These developments signal a new phase in Iran’s response to domestic unrest: not only violent crackdowns and mass arrests, but also the threat of capital punishment as a public instrument of intimidation. While some of the most extreme claims circulating online—such as reports of tens of thousands of death sentences—are unsubstantiated or false, there are documented cases of executions and a genuine fear that the death penalty is being used to silence criticism and suppress protest.

Parallels to Afghanistan: Public Terror as a Tool of Power

Developments in Iran also evoke strong parallels to Afghanistan under Taliban rule. There, the regime has employed public executions, hangings from streetlights, and the display of bodies in public spaces as a deliberate strategy to intimidate the population into submission. This is not merely punishment—it is symbolic terror, where death is made visible to crush resistance throughout society.

Human rights organizations have documented how the Taliban have carried out public hangings, often on charges of “treason,” “immorality,” or collaboration with enemies, without fair trials. The objective is the same as what now appears to be emerging in Iran: to make it unmistakably clear that resistance is not merely dangerous, but fatal.

When Iranian authorities now threaten—or signal—the possibility of public executions of protesters, the country moves toward the same form of tyranny. This is no longer about punishing individuals, but about staging fear. A public execution is meant to be seen, shared, and remembered. It is a warning: This could happen to you.

The difference between Iran and Afghanistan is primarily ideological and historical—not methodological. Both regimes use religious justification, vague charges such as “enmity against God,” and extreme violence to retain power. The result is a society in which the rule of law is sidelined and fear replaces justice.

When Evil Comes Back Around

Jesus said that people can read the signs of the heavens and the earth, yet still misunderstand the times they live in. Today, we see how tyrannies that oppress, torture, and kill believe themselves invincible. But history is clear: the evil you spread to others will eventually return—often in ways that shake even the most powerful.

The Nazis fell, and their leaders were held accountable. Tyrannies in Afghanistan, Iran, and elsewhere carry the same seeds of their own destruction. Karma is not a myth; it is an inexorable law: what you sow, you will reap.

For those who protest, who seek truth and freedom, the danger is real—but their courage writes history. For those who tyrannize their people, punishment is unavoidable—not always immediate, but certain. The universe has a way of restoring balance, and history never forgets.

Fear can keep people down for a time. But justice, truth, and karma are ultimately unstoppable.

When Tyrannies Fall: The Judgment of History

History teaches us one thing with brutal clarity: tyrannies never last forever. They may appear strong, terrifying, and invincible in the moment, but they always carry the seeds of their own destruction. Nazi Germany is among the clearest examples. Built on ideology, fear, propaganda, and systematic violence, it ultimately collapsed under the weight of its own crimes.

After World War II came the Nuremberg Trials. For the first time in history, leaders of a regime were held personally accountable for crimes against humanity. It was not revenge. It was the rule of law’s response to barbarism. A clear message to the world: “Following orders” is no excuse when human rights are trampled.

What many ask today is why contemporary theocratic tyrants—such as the clerical regime in Iran—continue to evade the same historical reckoning. A regime that executes its own people, supports terrorist organizations, oppresses women, silences truth, and weaponizes religion commits crimes not only against its own citizens but against humanity as a whole.

If history is to be more than words in textbooks, it must also serve as a moral compass. Just as the Nazis were brought to trial after the war, today’s oppressors deserve legal accountability—not for the sake of vengeance, but for justice. Not only for the people of Iran, but for all who believe in human dignity, freedom, and responsibility.

History does not forget.
It only waits.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | January 13, 2026 · 6:55 pm

Truth, Power, and the Fear of Free Speech

More than two thousand years after Jesus from Israel warned humanity about moral blindness and abused authority, the same struggle continues. Across the world, authoritarian and theocratic regimes still silence their people in the name of righteousness, while democracies wrestle with the price of freedom. From Tehran to Gaza, from social media censorship to satellite internet, the battle over truth, speech, and human dignity remains the defining conflict of our time.

More than two thousand years ago, Jesus from Israel confronted the leaders of his time with a striking observation: “You know how to interpret the appearance of the sky and the earth, but you cannot interpret the present moment.” His warning was not about astronomy or weather—it was about moral clarity. About the danger of power that loses humility, and authority that speaks of God while denying justice, truth, and human dignity.

That tension remains painfully relevant today.

Authoritarian Power and Moral Inversion

Iran presents one of the clearest modern examples of moral inversion. The country is ruled not by its people, but by a theocratic power structure dominated by clerics loyal to the Supreme Leader. This is not a faith community acting in good conscience, but a closed ruling elite that uses religious language to legitimize repression.

Institutions such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) function as both internal enforcers and external operators, crushing dissent at home while exporting violence abroad. The regime openly funds and arms groups such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza—organizations that operate outside democratic norms and deliberately target civilians.

The stated goal of this alliance is ideological confrontation, particularly the destruction of Israel. Yet the human cost of this agenda is borne by ordinary people: Israeli civilians living normal lives under constant threat, Palestinians trapped between militant groups and humanitarian collapse, and above all, the Iranian population itself.

Inside Iran, protests are met with internet shutdowns, mass arrests, torture, and executions. Women are beaten or killed for defying dress codes. Journalists disappear. Students are imprisoned. Minorities are silenced. The regime that claims moral authority has shown none toward its own people.

Israel, Self-Defense, and the Collapse of the Narrative

Iran’s clerical leadership routinely labels Israel “the Great Satan.” But when words are weighed against actions, the accusation collapses. Israel, a democratic state, acts primarily in self-defense against groups that openly call for its destruction and have launched decades of rocket attacks, suicide bombings, and kidnappings.

Crucially, Israel is not targeting ordinary Palestinian civilians in Gaza. Its operations are aimed at Hamas and other militant groups responsible for terror attacks. Innocent civilians, while tragically caught in the conflict, are not the objective.

The same principle applies to Iran. If outside powers, such as the United States or Israel, intervene in Iran, their focus would be on the criminal theocratic rulers and their armed networks—the same groups that finance and coordinate terrorist organizations like Hamas and Hezbollah—not the Iranian people themselves, who suffer under the oppressive regime.

Meanwhile, the Iranian regime projects accusations of evil outward while systematically repressing its own citizens, silencing women, journalists, and students, and sponsoring violence abroad. Moral hypocrisy is evident: evil is claimed elsewhere, but practiced at home and through proxies.

Democracy vs. Theocracy

At its core, this is not merely a geopolitical struggle—it is a philosophical one.

Democracy rests on the principle that power flows from the people, that leaders are accountable, and that truth can be debated openly. A theocracy, by contrast, claims divine authority, places rulers beyond question, and treats dissent as heresy. Where democracy depends on free speech and transparency, authoritarian systems survive through censorship, fear, and isolation.

This is why free information is the greatest enemy of such regimes.

Why the Internet Terrifies Tyranny

When the Iranian regime shuts down the internet, it is not a technical decision—it is a political act of survival. Open communication exposes corruption, abuse, and lies. Free speech breaks the illusion of absolute power.

That is why the smuggling of Starlink satellite terminals into Iran matters. Backed by Elon Musk’s satellite network, this technology bypasses state-controlled infrastructure and restores a basic human freedom: connection to the outside world. Information becomes resistance.

Musk’s role here is consistent with his stated philosophy. He bought Twitter to restore what he called a digital public square, reversing bans—including that of a sitting U.S. president—on the grounds that democracy cannot function if political speech is arbitrarily silenced. While social media debates moderation, the Iranian regime cuts off an entire nation from the internet. The contrast could not be clearer. Elon Musk is a freedom champion. So is Trump.

A Timeless Warning

Jesus was not executed for promoting kindness alone. He was killed for challenging power structures that cloaked themselves in divine authority while denying truth and justice. His message threatened those who ruled through fear, hypocrisy, and control.

History keeps repeating the same lesson: regimes that silence truth in the name of righteousness ultimately condemn themselves. Power without humility corrupts. Authority without accountability collapses. And those who fear open speech reveal their own illegitimacy.

Two thousand years later, the struggle continues—but so does the truth.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

by | January 8, 2026 · 10:11 am

Iran’s Bazaar Revolt Points to a Moment of Acute Regime Vulnerability

Iran is entering a period of heightened political risk as economic collapse, environmental stress, and elite defection converge in ways not seen for decades. The latest wave of unrest, which began on December 28 in Tehran’s Grand Bazaar, has spread across more than 100 cities, evolving from local economic protest into a broader challenge to the Islamic Republic’s authority.

While demonstrations are not new in Iran, the participation of the bazaar merchant class marks a potentially decisive shift. In Iran’s modern political history, the withdrawal of support by the bazaaris has tended to occur at moments of acute regime vulnerability and has coincided with major political realignments — most notably in 1978–79.

The Bazaar as a Political Barometer

The Grand Bazaar is the backbone of Iran’s domestic economy. Its dense networks of traders, wholesalers and importers connect supply chains, liquidity and social influence across the country. Historically, bazaar merchants have not functioned as a permanent opposition force. Instead, they have acted as pragmatic political actors, aligning themselves with whichever system appeared capable of guaranteeing stability, access and predictability.

In 1979, they withdrew support from the Shah and aligned with the clerical opposition. For more than four decades thereafter, they formed part of the Islamic Republic’s core economic coalition.

That coalition now appears to be fracturing.

When bazaar merchants close their shops, the impact goes far beyond symbolism. Commercial shutdowns disrupt distribution networks, freeze working capital and send a powerful signal that confidence in the state’s economic management has eroded. In Iran’s political system, such signals matter — not because they immediately bring down governments, but because they indicate that the regime’s traditional mechanisms of consent are weakening.

Economic Breakdown as the Catalyst

The immediate driver of unrest is economic collapse.

Over the past year:

  • The Iranian currency has lost approximately 60 per cent of its value
  • Food prices have risen by around 72 per cent
  • Medicine costs have increased by roughly 50 per cent
  • Inflation is estimated to be near 50 per cent

For many households, life savings have been effectively erased. For merchants dependent on imports, business has become unviable. The government’s decision to abolish subsidised exchange rates, combined with higher taxes, has sharply increased costs while currency volatility has made price-setting nearly impossible.

Compounding the crisis is a breakdown in basic infrastructure. Water reservoirs in several regions are reportedly at critically low levels, electricity supply is unreliable, and public services are deteriorating. The state is increasingly unable to provide core public goods: water, power, food security or employment.

In practical terms, the implicit social contract between state and society has collapsed.

From Economic Stress to Political Exposure

The scale and composition of the protests suggest that this is no longer a narrow economic dispute. Demonstrations now include merchants, workers and middle-class families, while confrontations with security forces have intensified. Dozens have reportedly been killed in clashes with the Revolutionary Guard.

The government’s response has oscillated between repression and improvised economic concessions. One widely reported offer — a small monthly payment to encourage protesters to disperse — was interpreted less as relief than as an admission of fiscal exhaustion.

Externally, the regime also faces heightened geopolitical pressure. Former US president Donald Trump has publicly warned of retaliation should violence against protesters continue. While such statements should be interpreted cautiously, Tehran remains acutely aware of Washington’s capacity to escalate economic and strategic pressure.

Political Realignment and the Search for Alternatives

As confidence in the Islamic Republic erodes, political symbols long considered marginal are resurfacing. Reza Pahlavi, the exiled son of Iran’s last Shah, has declared that the current system is approaching the end of the road and has called 2026 “the year of change”.

There is no clear evidence that monarchist forces are directing the protests. But the re-emergence of such figures reflects a deeper vacuum: a growing search for legitimacy outside the clerical system itself. In moments of systemic stress, Iranian politics has historically gravitated toward realignment rather than reform.

Even within elite circles, unease is evident. Persistent reports of contingency planning by senior figures underscore the perception that the current unrest represents more than a temporary disturbance.

A Regime Under Structural Pressure

The Islamic Republic retains formidable coercive capacity, and regime change is far from inevitable. But the convergence of economic collapse, environmental stress and elite defection suggests that Iran has entered a phase of structural instability.

The withdrawal of bazaar support does not in itself determine political outcomes. Historically, however, it has signalled moments when existing power arrangements were no longer sustainable.

Iran may now be approaching such a moment.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

by | December 29, 2025 · 3:42 pm

The Western Alliance and the Risk of Civilizational Erosion

In recent remarks, U.S. Senator Marco Rubio addressed what the White House and the State Department have described as “civilizational erase”—a term used to express concern about long-term pressures facing the Western alliance. The argument is not primarily about military strength or immediate security threats, but about the cultural and civilizational foundations that bind the United States and Europe together.

According to Rubio, the West is more than a network of states linked by defense treaties such as NATO. It is a civilization shaped by a shared history, a shared legacy, shared values, and shared priorities. These include commitments to individual liberty, human rights, democratic self-governance, and the rule of law. If these common foundations are weakened or dismissed, the alliance risks being reduced to a purely technical defense arrangement—functional, but fragile.

Rubio emphasizes that the American political system did not emerge in isolation. Many of its core ideas were inherited from Europe and from Western civilization more broadly. Concepts such as liberty, the value of the individual, and self-governance trace their origins to classical antiquity. Greek reflections on democracy and citizenship, combined with Roman legal and political thought, formed the intellectual groundwork for later European institutions and, ultimately, the founding principles of the United States.

Roman ideas such as libertas—the understanding that citizens possess rights protected by law—along with notions of civic duty, constitutional order, and legal equality, were central to this inheritance. These ideas were refined over centuries and carried forward into modern Western political culture. In this sense, freedom and liberty are not merely contemporary political slogans, but the result of a long civilizational development stretching back to Greece and Rome.

The concern Rubio raises is that if this shared cultural and historical understanding is eroded or denied, the transatlantic relationship could weaken over time. Discussions within NATO, he notes, increasingly extend beyond military coordination to broader questions of societal cohesion, mass migration, and cultural continuity. Some leaders address these issues openly, while others acknowledge them more privately. Either way, Rubio argues they represent a factor that cannot be ignored if the alliance is to remain durable.

From this perspective, the idea of “civilizational erase” is not about exclusion, but about memory. It is about whether the West continues to recognize the principles that gave rise to its institutions in the first place. Rubio contends that the United States—explicitly founded on Western principles such as liberty, individual rights, and self-governance—should be unapologetic in acknowledging and defending this shared inheritance.

If that inheritance is reduced to something secondary or optional, the alliance risks losing its deeper rationale. What would remain, Rubio suggests, is a defense agreement without a civilizational core. In the long run, that would place the ties between the United States and Europe under strain, not because of external enemies alone, but because of an internal loss of shared meaning.

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author and may not reflect those of Shinybull.com. The author has made every effort to ensure the accuracy of the information provided; however, neither Shinybull.com nor the author can guarantee the accuracy of this information. This article is strictly for informational purposes only. It is not a solicitation to make any exchange in precious metal products, commodities, securities, or other financial instruments. Shinybull.com and the author of this article do not accept culpability for losses and/ or damages arising from the use of this publication.

Leave a comment

Filed under Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,