Tag Archives: Russia

Trump and Greenland: The Deal That Changed the Arctic

For decades, the United States has viewed Greenland as a strategically vital territory. Since World War II, American military planners and policymakers have understood its importance for Arctic security, global defense systems, and access to critical resources. What previous administrations discussed quietly behind closed doors, Donald Trump chose to say openly.

Trump said he wanted Greenland.

The reaction from legacy media was immediate and furious. Denmark was outraged. European leaders, including Emmanuel Macron, criticized the idea. Headlines mocked Trump, calling the proposal absurd, imperialistic, even dangerous. Once again, the familiar narrative returned: Trump the dictator, Trump the destabilizer, Trump the man destroying NATO and threatening the world order.

But while the media screamed, Trump stayed calm. Smiling. Stoic.

Behind the scenes, something very different was happening.

This week, President Donald Trump arrived in Davos, Switzerland, to attend the World Economic Forum (WEF). Surrounded by the world’s global elites—the very same figures who openly despise him—Trump showed up with a large delegation and a clear agenda: make deals.

And one of the biggest deals was Greenland.

After a high-level meeting with NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, Trump announced that a framework agreement concerning Greenland—and the wider Arctic region—had been reached. An outcome many in the legacy media had declared impossible.

In a statement released earlier today, Trump wrote:

“Based upon a very productive meeting that I have had with the Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, we have formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region.

This solution, if consummated, will be a great one for the United States of America, and all NATO Nations. Based upon this understanding, I will not be imposing the tariffs that were scheduled to go into effect on February 1st.

Additional discussions are being held concerning the Golden Dome as it pertains to Greenland. Further information will be made available as discussions progress. Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and others will lead the negotiations and report directly to me.”

In simple terms: Trump made a deal.

Greenland matters because it is one of the most strategic territories on Earth. As Arctic ice melts, new shipping routes open and access to vast mineral reserves becomes possible. China and Russia have both aggressively positioned themselves in the Arctic, seeking influence, infrastructure, and control over rare-earth minerals critical to modern technology, defense systems, and energy.

China already holds a near-monopoly on many of these minerals.

Greenland changes that.

According to Trump, the framework agreement includes mineral rights, defense cooperation, and integration into a broader NATO security architecture—including the proposed “Golden Dome” defense system. With American capital, technology, and expertise, Greenland’s resources can be developed responsibly, reducing Western dependence on China and strengthening collective security across Europe and North America.

This is not just a win for the United States. It is a win for the West.

For years, Europe has depended on American security while criticizing American leadership. Trump reversed that dynamic. He forced allies to negotiate seriously, share responsibility, and think strategically about the future of the Arctic.

The backlash from globalists is predictable. Trump does not speak their language. He does not respect their rituals. He does not submit to unelected institutions or consensus-driven politics. Instead, he negotiates power, territory, resources, and security—openly.

What we are witnessing is not chaos. It is a transition.

The old world order is fading. Globalism as an ideology is losing credibility. In its place, a new era is emerging—what some describe as civilizationism: a worldview that recognizes distinct civilizations, national sovereignty, cultural identity, and strategic self-interest.

Trump’s Greenland deal is not just about land or minerals. It is about redefining power in a multipolar world.

And despite what the legacy media claims, Trump didn’t lose control.

He won Greenland.

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

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

Diplomacy or Weapons as the Way to Peace?

“Every war begins with the illusion of victory. Every peace begins with the courage of dialogue. Which will we choose?”

History has already shown us the price of arrogance. Twice in the last century, the world descended into total war because nations believed they had no choice but to fight and that they had to win. Today, as leaders repeat the same words, we stand once again at the edge of disaster.

The world has already witnessed two devastating global conflicts — the First and Second World Wars. Now, many fear that we stand on the brink of a Third. The war in Ukraine rages on, while violence flares in Israel and Gaza. What is striking is that leaders on all sides declare that they must win. Even NATO’s former Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg has insisted that “weapons are the way to peace.”

But have we truly learned nothing from history?

After the First World War, nations attempted to chart a new course. The Treaty of Versailles of 1919 and the creation of the League of Nations were intended to establish an international order in which diplomacy, rather than war, would resolve conflicts. The idea was collective security: dialogue, negotiation, and the prevention of another catastrophic war.

And yet, within two decades, the world was plunged into an even deadlier conflict. The League of Nations failed because nationalism, greed, and great-power rivalry proved stronger than the will to compromise. Diplomacy was drowned out by ambition, unresolved grievances, and economic instability.

It feels eerily similar today. We see frozen conflicts, festering grievances, and leaders proclaiming that victory — and only victory — is the only acceptable outcome. But as history shows, not everyone can win.

Think of a football match: two teams, both determined to be victorious. Only one side can claim the win after 90 minutes. But wars do not have a clock. Wars end only when destruction, exhaustion, or overwhelming force brings them to a halt. In the past, that sometimes meant entire armies fighting to the last man. In the 20th century, it meant the atomic bomb. It was not diplomacy that ended the Second World War — it was unprecedented violence.

This raises an unsettling truth: humans often respond more to fear than to reason. Diplomacy, without urgency, is easily dismissed. But when fear peaks — when cities are destroyed, when civilians suffer, when nuclear annihilation looms — only then do leaders suddenly discover the language of negotiation.

If history repeats itself, then humanity may once again stumble toward self-destruction. The tragic irony is that while weapons may bring silence to the battlefield, they rarely bring true peace. Peace, lasting peace, requires the courage to pursue diplomacy before fear takes control.

Because if “weapons are the way to peace,” we may find that peace comes only after there is nothing left to save.

Fear, it seems, is the actual driver of humanity. Diplomacy is too often dismissed until it is too late. And when diplomacy fails, fear and destruction rule.

History is clear: bombs may end wars, but they do not prevent them from happening. Dialogue does.

Diplomacy is not a sign of weakness – it is a sign of wisdom. If history teaches us anything, it is this: bombs can end wars, but only dialogue can prevent them. The choice is ours, and the clock is ticking.

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

Germany enjoyed the so-called «Wirtschaftswunder,» (economic miracle) but that has come to an end

For decades, Germany was synonymous with economic strength. Ever since World War II, it enjoyed the so-called «Wirtschaftswunder,» or economic miracle that followed the postwar recovery, which blessed Germany with almost four decades of high growth.

High growth thanks to German engineering, and manufacturing industries. The economic growth eventually slowed down, but Germany had established itself as the industrial heart of Europe, fueled by exports of products with large margins like cars machinery, and chemicals.

Companies like Volkswagen, BMW, Siemens, and BASF became global leaders with German products seen as pinnacles of quality and reliability. As a result of all that, people in Germany enjoyed high salaries, and high quality of life.

Their economic model was built on a few key pillars; strong manufacturing base. A highly skilled workforce, commitment to quality, and very strong exports. But this has come to an end. Last year, Germany was the only G-7 economy to shrink. It`s also the group`s slowest-growing economy with a growth to GDP at -0.1%.

It goes up and down. Down -0,5, up 0,1, down, 0,1, up 0,2, down -0,4, up 0,2, and then down again to -0,1.

Picture: Old economy vs New economies

Germany, long considered the economic engine of Europe, is currently facing significant challenges, leading to concerns that its economy may be stalling or «broken.» What in the world is happening in Germany, and what are the key factors that are affecting their economy right now?

It`s an energy crisis. Germany was dependent on Russian Gas. Germany relied heavily on Russian natural gas before the war in Ukraine. The subsequent sanctions and supply disruptions have led to a severe energy crisis, pushing up prices and harming energy-intensive industries like chemicals, manufacturing, and heavy machinery.

They also have a green transition challenge. Germany is trying to transition to renewable energy, but the shift away from nuclear and coal has left the country vulnerable during this energy crunch. This has increased costs for businesses and households, causing slower growth.

Germany`s economy is heavily reliant on exports, especially in industries like automotive and machinery. Global demand has softened, and supply chain disruptions from the COVID-19 pandemic continue to affect production.

The German auto industry, in particular, has been slow to transition to electric vehicles compared to competitors like Tesla, and Chinese manufacturers. This lag is putting pressure on a key pillar of the country`s economy.

Germany`s economy narrowly avoided recession in early 2023, but growth remains sluggish. High inflation and low consumer spending have contributed to weak economic activity. The combination of rising wages, energy prices, and inflationary pressures has increased production costs, leading to reduced profitability for businesses.

On top of that, you have an aging population. Germany`s population is aging rapidly, and the working-age population is shrinking. This is leading to labor shortages in key sectors and higher social welfare costs, creating long-term economic challenges.

In addition; they have migration struggles. While the country has relied on immigration to fill gaps in the labor market, recent shifts in public sentiment and policy restrictions have made it harder to sustain this approach.

Their biggest companies have been there for about 100 years, but there is a shift in the market. Germany has been criticized for lagging behind in digitalization and innovation, particularly in fields like AI and tech start-ups. This is reducing its competitiveness in the global economy.

Another problem is Germany`s heavily regulated business environment and complex bureaucracy. This can stifle innovation and make it harder for new businesses to scale up.

Like many others, Germany has trade challenges and the global demand is weak. As the global economy faces uncertainty, especially with China`s slowing growth, demand for Germany`s exports has dropped.

Germany`s economic model has long been dependent on strong export markets, so this is a major issue!

At least; EU Tension. Economic divergence within the European Union, especially between northern, and southern European economies, adds another layer of complexity, affecting Germany`s trade relations within the bloc.

It all started in France. Yellow Vest protesters went to the streets for months and years and protested against higher oil prices, electricity bills, and expensive toll stations. Their standard of living was shrinking.

This happened at a time when Donald Trump was cutting taxes and made the best economy in the U.S. ever. People in France asked for a Trump-like figure, but everything has gone straight up since then, and now we see severe problems in Germany and other places.

Picture: Yellow Vest protesters against high oil prices and low standard of living

This is happening at a time were productivity in the U.S. is great. Germany`s productivity is down -0,1%, while the productivity in the U.S. is up 3%. They are the best. They are at the top of the list! Even better than China! And the stock market goes up. Wow!

Germany`s economy is not «broken,» but it is facing severe challenges. Energy costs, inflation, global demand weakness, and structural issues in key industries like manufacturing are causing slower growth.

Long-term concerns like demographic changes and lagging investment in innovation also threaten future competitiveness. While these challenges are significant, Germany has strong economic fundamentals and could recover with strategic reforms and investments.

However, the current climate is tough, and the country is at a critical point in addressing these issues. Germany is in trouble.

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 such accuracy. 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

The West is declining and a nuclear war with Russia is the end of our civilization

Russia`s President Vladimir Putin gave a speech today. He delivered his Address to the Federal Assembly. The ceremony took place in Gostiny Dvor in Moscow.

«The so-called West, with its colonial practices, and penchant for inciting ethnic conflicts around the world, not only seeks to impede our progress, but also envisions a Russia that is a dependent, declining, and dying space where they can do as they please.

In fact, they want to replicate in Russia what they have done in numerous other countries, including Ukraine: sowing discord in our home, and weakening us from within. But they were wrong, which has become abundantly clear now that they ran up against the firm resolve, and determination of our multi-ethnic people», Putin said in the speech.

«Together, as citizens of Russia, we will stand united in defense of our freedom, and our right to a peaceful, and dignified existence», Putin added.

Furthermore, Putin said; «We were not the ones who started the war in Donbas, but as I have already said many times, we will do everything to put an end to it, eradicate Nazism, and fulfill all the objectives of the special military operation, as well as defend sovereignty, and ensure that our people are safe».

«Here is a good example of their hypocrisy. They have recently made unfounded allegations, in particular against Russia, regarding plans to deploy nuclear weapons in space. Such fake narratives and this story is unequivocally false, are designed to involve us in negotiations on their conditions, which will only benefit the United States,» he said.

«There are reasons to suspect that the current US administration`s professed interest in discussing strategic stability with us is merely demagoguery.

They simply want to show to their citizens, and the world, especially in the lead-up to the presidential election that they continue to rule the world, that they would talk with the Russians when it will benefit them, and that there is nothing to talk about, and they will try to inflict defeat on us otherwise. Business as usual, as they say.»

«But this is unacceptable, of course. Our position is clear: if you want to discuss security and stability issues that are critical for the entire planet, this must be done as a package including, of course, all aspects that have to do with our national interests, and have a direct bearing on the security of our country, the security of Russia,» Putin said.

Putin also talked about a potential nuclear war, which would be the end of our civilization. He also said that the West is declining. This is what he said:

«We are also aware of the Western attempts to draw us into an arms race, thereby exhausting us, mirroring the strategy they successfully employed with the Soviet Union in the 1980s.

Let me remind you that in 1981 – 1988, the Soviet Union`s military spending amounted to 13 percent of GDP.

We need to shore up the forces in the Western strategic theatre in order to counteract the threats posed by NATO’s further eastward expansion, with Sweden, and Finland joining the alliance.

The West has provoked conflicts in Ukraine, the Middle East, and other regions around the world while consistently propagating falsehoods. Now they have the audacity to say that Russia harbors intentions of attacking Europe.

Can you believe it?

We all know that their claims are utterly baseless.

And at the same time, they are selecting targets to strike on our territory, and contemplating the most efficient means of destruction. Now they have started talking about the possibility of deploying NATO military contingents to Ukraine.»

«But we remember what happened to those who sent their contingents to the territory of our country once before. Today, any potential aggressors will face far graver consequences.»

«Everything they are inventing now, spooking the world with the threat of a conflict involving nuclear weapons, which potentially means the end of our civilization. Don`t they realize this?

«Indeed, just like any other ideology promoting racism, national superiority, or exceptionalism, Russophobia is blinding, and stupefying.

The United States and its satellites have, in fact, dismantled the European security system which has created risks for everyone.»

«Clearly, a new equal, and indivisible security framework must be created in Eurasia in the foreseeable future. We are ready for a substantive discussion on this subject with all countries, and associations that may be interested in it.

What Putin said next is very important to understand. He talked about Russia as a sovereign country. That is very different from a Russia controlled by the EU. What Putin talks about is very similar to what President Najib Bukele in El Salvador talks about.

It is their own sovereignty and freedom. Bukele said that globalization in El Salvador is dead. They want to rule their own country and have their own freedom. Out with the globalists, he said.

Putin talks about the same, but when it comes to Russia, he talks about the «balance of Power.» If the EU takes over Russia, it can fall into a gigantic dictatorship, and everyone in Europe will end up like slaves and losers. This is what Putin said in his speech:

«At the same time, I would like to reiterate (I think this is important for everyone) that no enduring international order is possible without a strong, and sovereign Russia.»

«We strive to unite the global majority`s efforts to respond to international challenges, such as the turbulent transformation of the world economy, trade, finance, and technology markets, when former monopolies, and stereotypes associated with them are collapsing.»

Europe has throughout history tried to take control of other countries, and they have earned a lot of money on it. But that era is coming to an end. Now, it is different. Europe is declining, and Putin talked about it in his speech today. He said:

«For example, in 2028, the BRICS countries with account taken of the new members will create about 37 percent of global GDP, while the G7 numbers will fall below 28 percent.

These figures are quite telling because the situation was completely different just 10 or 15 years ago. You have heard me say it publicly before. These are the trends, you see.

Look, the G7 countries’ share in global GDP in terms of PPP stood at 45,7 percent in 1992, while the BRICS countries (this association did not exist in 1992) accounted for only 16,5 percent.

In 2022, though, the G7 accounted for 30.3 percent, while BRICS had 31,5 percent.

By 2028, the percentage will shift even more in favor of BRICS, with 36,6 percent, and the projected figure for the G7 is 27,8 percent.

(Editor: The Group of Seven is an intergovernmental political and economic forum consisting of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States; additionally, the European Union is a “non-enumerated member).

There is no getting away from this objective reality, and it will remain that way no matter what happens next, including even in Ukraine,» Putin said.

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 such accuracy. 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