Yet another summit of globalists in Swiss Davos revealed contradictions on the global agenda.
Last week, heads of government, banks and large corporations, economists and supporters of a rather strange political program, which the founder of the forum, Klaus Schwab, calls the Fourth Industrial Revolution or Reset, once again gathered in Davos. The WEF (World Economic Forum) is also known for attracting various stars and well-known public figures to its ranks, who, in the opinion of the Forum’s leadership, could help promote their agenda. This time in Davos, Melanie Brown, a former member of the Spice Girls, was introduced as one of the millions of women in the world who have been victims of domestic violence. There were other speeches in the same spirit of a rather strange cocktail of ideas from globalism, feminism, capitalism, technology and neoliberalism, flavored with democratic rhetoric. It makes no sense to list all the participants and session names. We emphasize only the most significant details.
Compared to previous summits, at this particular forum one could feel a certain nervousness caused, first of all, by the figure of Donald Trump, who actually declared war on globalism, and therefore on the agenda that was promoted at the Davos Forum.
Ahead of the summit, various economists and bankers predicted 2025 as difficult and promising possible changes. Within eyeshot were the action plan of US President Donald Trump, Europe’s plan to prevent the ‘slow agony’ and China’s super stimulus.
One of the authors noted that “the transatlantic divergence initially coming from America’s triple edge (energy, tech, and fiscal) will be exacerbated by President Trump’s policies, forcing the Federal Reserve to halt its loosening cycle halfway on the back of reflation. US exceptionalism will continue with a twist: it will be much more costly in terms of capital, attractiveness, and risks to the rest of the world.”
In a discussion with Trump himself, the US president was asked about how the United States might deal with business regulations in the European Union, which has long had stricter rules related to issues such as workers rights and climate impact. Trump urged the EU to “speed up their process,” adding that Europeans “want to be able to compete better, and you can’t compete when you can’t get through the approval process fast.”
The truth, however, is that under Trump, there will be more pressure on the EU. In the same Davos address, Donald Trump blasted European Union regulators for targeting Apple Inc., Alphabet Inc.’s Google and Meta Platforms Inc., describing their cases against American companies as “a form of taxation.” “They shouldn’t be doing that. That’s, as far as I’m concerned, a form of taxation. We have some very big complaints with the EU.”
Trump specifically referenced a court case that Apple lost last year over a €13 billion ($14.4 billion) Irish tax bill. The EU’s Court of Justice in Luxembourg backed a landmark 2016 decision that Ireland broke state-aid law by giving Apple an unfair advantage, requiring Ireland to claw back the money that had been sitting in an escrow account pending the final ruling.
Given that almost all major US technology companies support Trump (and he supports them, respectively), the White House clearly intends to push through the interests of these firms in the EU. And although UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres said something about the threats of artificial intelligence (and also about the climate, just when the United States withdrew from the Paris Agreement), this is unlikely to stop the United States. And others can follow their example.
“We need to jointly uphold and practise true multilateralism,” Ding said. “Multilateralism is the right way to maintain world peace and promote human progress. It is the “golden key” to solving the difficulties and challenges facing this world.” Multilateralism is not multipolarity.
Previously, the Barack Obama administration and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton advocated for multilateralism. Why is this being talked about in China now? To some extent, China is trying to replace globalization under the auspices of the United States with its own globalization. Of course, it differs from the American one in a few parameters. But, nevertheless, from the point of view of national economies, this is the same globalization, when goods and services are being replaced by Chinese ones, and the expansion of international infrastructure (One Belt One Road Initiative) serves the long-term interests of China, first of all, to continue to saturate other countries with their goods. They just do it more gently, without any pressure or coercion, as previously practiced by Western multinational corporations.
As for other leaders of the states, commenting on the Panama Canal, which became the focus of attention after the statements of US President Trump in his inaugural speech, Panama’s President Mulino once again said: “The Panama Canal belongs to Panama,” and urged to respect the international protocols. He also stressed the strength of Panama’s allied relations with the United States. Although a US military intervention is unlikely, given Trump’s rhetoric, he probably wants to strengthen his position in Central America and uses pressure as a trump card. And if the cooperation between Panama and the United States, as Mulino assures, is strong, then why not strengthen it even more? Given that there is an infrastructure in the Panama Canal area operated by China, this explains Donald Trump’s attack on Panama.
However Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, in his speech, stressed “the exceptional importance and urgency of the Paris Agreement and other climate agreements and noted the importance of cooperation with neighboring countries.”
The illegitimate President of Ukraine, Vladimir Zelensky, was not distinguished by innovation. He was worried that the United States and Russia might come to an agreement on Ukraine and called on the EU to unite and… continue providing assistance to Kiev. Purportedly, in his opinion, Europe is interested in strengthening and repelling the “Russian threat.” However, the call for an increase in spending among NATO countries to 5% coincided with the demands of Donald Trump. Although Zelensky has his own interest in receiving further military and technical assistance. But it is not clear how the EU can improve its performance without cheap Russian gas. Moreover, the leadership of the block has confirmed that energy resources will be even more expensive for them, but they will be forced to incur such costs. And spending will continue to destroy the economy. Therefore, statements about the EU investment plan, which is supposedly both technological and “green” and strengthens collective defense, do not seem credible.
Another politician who was not that bright was Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, who called for the EU to help “make social media great again” (interpreting Trump’s slogan) by taking tough regulatory measures against the technology platforms he described as being run by tycoons who flaunt the law.
“The tech billionaires want to overthrow democracy. This, ladies and gentlemen, is the truth of the terrible threat we face,” Sánchez said, citing the supposed spread of misinformation that has fueled anti-liberal political movements. “The technology that was intended to free us has become the tool of our own oppression.”
The truth is that social media has become less liberal, although it previously followed a globalist agenda and had strict censorship against any dissenting opponents and critics. But when they began to criticize the liberals, they immediately began to resent, attributing everything to the opponents of democracy.
Therefore, it is unlikely that the globalists from the Davos WEF will feel comfortable with the new course of US foreign policy. Even in matters of European unity within the EU, there are open supporters of Trump, such as Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who is sure to follow the orders from Washington, as well as the heads of Germany and France, who are still experiencing problems with their own electorate. And with them is Britain, whose Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, was dubbed the “Pakistani rapist” thanks to Elon Musk’s tough critics.
The Davos Forum, and with it the globalists’ program, despite their connections and influence, continues to crack, and one of them is being made by the main pole of the Western world, the United States.
Comments