It’s real, and it’s here.

I don’t know exactly when things started, but here are some technology milestones that led the way.

By the 1950’s, Turing machines laid the foundation for all digital computation.

Central processing units (CPUs) processed task sequentially with computational power increasing exponentially as time passed and technology advanced.

In 1989, Magellan released the first handheld, commercially available GPS unit for $3,000.

By the 1990’s, graphical processing units (GPUs) were able to calculate thousands of pixels simultaneously to render complex 3D imagery. This, coupled with the emergence of the internet and cellular technology, led to improvements in instantaneous communication on a global scale

In 2007, Apple put this capability, along with much more, in our hands with the iPhone for $499.

In 2014, Amazon introduced the Alexa voice assistant alongside the first Amazon Echo smart speaker. Rapid advances in machine learning followed.

The launch of ChatGPT in 2022 gave us all access to AI programs, allowing us to use this technology in a wide array of applications.

The rapid changes over the past 30 years since the introduction of Windows ’95 have had a tremendous impact on communications, workplace productivity, and how we interact socially.

In addition, while all this was happening, the past twenty years have also seen a rapid evolution in robotics.

The melding of robotics with AI is behind the latest industrial revolution, one that promises to result in a social, economic, and political upheaval that will surpass those of the 18^th and 19^th centuries.

Like most developments, AI is neither good nor bad. Its morality depends on the use that people make of it.

Advances in medicine, transportation, and communications are welcome.

However, the impact may well affect many negatively at first, since the advent of the myriad possibilities that AI provides will result in a steep learning curve for many to manage.

Depending on how you look at it, AI and robotics are set to either augment worker productivity, innovation and efficiency or replace millions of jobs globally, potentially leaving many out of work and searching for new ways of making a living.

Every day we increasingly see or hear about progress in pilotless drones, self-driving cars and robots capable of performing complex tasks like surgery and other medical practices and producing artistic work of excellent quality.

Many are lauding the arrival of this brave new world.

Others are foreseeing chaos and social upheaval if unemployment is not met with solutions that not only provide material resources to the average citizen but also provide activities that replace work in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs.

The industrial revolution of the 18^th and 19^th centuries saw tens of millions displaced from farms to cities where industrial jobs were available.

As feudalism transitioned into an industrial age, families had no alternative but to work in factories and live in slums, resulting in revolutionary politics and the development of radical political ideologies.

Today, governments face the same dilemma, albeit with a far more sophisticated and educated populace. Instant communications on social media allow interest groups to coalesce into values-based communities that transcend international borders.

“Technogarchies” like the Amazons, Microsofts, and Apples of the world operate at a level all their own and manage greater resources with fewer responsibilities than national governments.

And yet, the increasingly complex world being created by AI and robotics appears to be avoided in normal political discourse. Indeed, are governments scrambling to design a roadmap to the future?

Are our political leaders technologically and sociologically competent to create the governance structures required to manage this new reality?

What are some of the challenges posed to leaders by AI melding with robotics at this juncture of history?

Safety and reliability are critical concerns. Unlike purely digital AI systems, robots interact directly with the physical world, which introduces risks to human safety.

Ensuring that robots can operate without causing harm is a complex task. This includes designing fail-safe mechanisms and robust testing protocols.

However, as with human beings, it is nearly impossible to predict every possible scenario a robot may encounter. As a result, even highly advanced systems can fail in unexpected ways, raising concerns about liability and accountability.

Economic challenges also play a significant role. While AI-powered robotics can increase efficiency and reduce costs in the long term, the initial investment required for development, deployment, and maintenance is substantial.

Small and medium-sized enterprises may struggle to adopt these technologies, leading to increased inequality between large corporations and smaller businesses.

Furthermore, automation raises concerns about job displacement. As robots become capable of performing tasks traditionally done by humans, workers in sectors such as manufacturing, logistics, and even services may face unemployment or the need for reskilling.

Regulatory and legal frameworks have not kept pace with technological advancements. Governments and institutions are still grappling with how to regulate AI-powered robotics effectively.

Issues such as liability in the event of accidents, data privacy, and standards for safety testing remain unresolved in many regions.

Replacing government tax revenues currently generated by human workers with their robotic and AI replacements may well leave government coffers empty while companies get richer and more powerful. Governments may lack the revenue with which to fund the programs essential to retraining and recalibrating the unemployed.

Without clear regulations, companies may either face uncertainty or exploit gaps in oversight, both of which can hinder innovation and public trust.

In conclusion, while AI-powered robotics holds immense potential to transform society, it also presents a wide range of challenges.

The idle mind is the devil’s workshop, and it took almost a century before the proletariat and the capitalist classes reached a modus vivendi through the creation of labor unions, government welfare policies, and political parties that addressed socio-economic conditions up and down the socio-economic ladder.

The potential for massive unemployment could result in a significant social dislocation if not addressed quickly and intelligently. The public and private sectors will have to work hand in hand to ensure social and economic stability throughout this period of transition.

Politicians at all levels of government will have to shift from traditional adversarial partisanship to closer cooperation for the greater good.

Addressing these issues requires a balanced approach that combines technological innovation with ethical responsibility, economic consideration, and robust regulation.

By tackling these challenges proactively, society can harness the benefits of AI-powered robotics while minimizing its risks, ensuring a future where humans and intelligent machines can coexist productively and safely.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

No, I don’t propose that Canada emulate the MAGA ideology south of the border.

Rather, I propose that any Canadian government govern seeking to apply common sense to what it prioritizes using the key criteria of putting the needs of the average Canadian first.

While many congratulate the Liberal government for negotiating trade deals that can help mitigate the U.S. move away from free trade, most Canadians do not feel any change in their own lives a year after the last election.

With Prime Minister Carney still riding high in polling, the time is now for his government to think much more outside the box and to take more meaningful and, in some cases, drastic steps to ensure that the average Canadian sees and feels a positive change both in their wallet and in their communities.

How? Here are some ideas:

My first proposal might be viewed by some as radical: place a moratorium on the Canadian International Development Agency and rename and refocus the department as the Canadian National Development Agency and task it with bringing rapid and cost-effective solutions to the challenges that affect communities across Canada.

It is fine to spend billions of dollars promoting gender-based policies for Gabonese women in agriculture or creating employment opportunities for Ethiopian youth when the Canadian government has money to spare.

However, in the case of government, Canadians must come first.

Billions of dollars spent on foreign aid should only be spent when the needs of Canadians and the many immigrants we must support are met.

My second proposal is to rapidly change some of our laws and the enforcement thereof.

Canadians are fed up with hearing about judges refusing to condemn immigrants guilty of crimes because such a verdict may either limit their chances of obtaining citizenship or result in deportation, which may result in an uncomfortable situation for them.

The law should be applied equally to all residents of Canada, and those found guilty of crimes should not be provided with a chance to obtain citizenship.

What about losing citizenship and being deported if you are found to support foreign terror groups and enemies of Canada?

Third should be to change our environmental and aboriginal protection bureaucracy to facilitate major energy and resource development projects that can bring immediate benefit to the Canadian economy, thereby enabling us to pay for many of the social benefits and services we enjoy and that are under pressure.

My fourth proposal concerns rethinking welfare.

Some on welfare are now second or third generation recipients. Others are refugees who are brought to Canada and housed and provided with benefits that supersede the income of many Canadians, especially old-age pensioners who contributed to this country and whose government pensions do not allow them to live decently.

Welfare should be workfare – benefits should be attached to training to prepare recipients to enter the work force with a timeline to do so.

Taxpayers will see the benefits of training those who are unemployable rather than having them sit at home at the cost of the taxpayer and abuse the system. History shows that immigration succeeds when the immigrant works and pays his/her own way, as my parents did.

My fifth proposal concerns drug addicts and mental illness.

Many streets and parks in our urban centers are unpassable because of the homeless people living in camps on major thoroughfares. Some are mentally ill, some are addicts, some are alcoholics.

Many of the millions of dollars going overseas should be spent bringing our healthcare system and hospitals up to par.

Meanwhile, we have seen through uncontrolled immigration how the housing market has been stretched to the limit. In addition, instead of importing temporary workers, we should be seeking to bridge the gap by subsidizing businesses to hire those without work who can work.

My sixth proposal concerns education.

Schools should be brought up to standards and made fit for purpose. The education system should be geared to preparing students for the XXIst century. This not only includes training in technology but also training in financial management, home economics, the arts, and literacy skills so that graduates are fully prepared to live and properly manage themselves and future dependents.

Schools must provide safe surroundings for students to thrive.

Free drug injection centers and halfway houses should be located far from public schools and playgrounds to ensure that children are not exposed to negative influences or criminal activity.

Finally, my seventh proposal concerns religious practices.

Morals, ethics, and community are all important elements and benefits of religious practice. However, there are surely enough places of worship of all persuasions available in Canada for people to conduct their ceremonies and prayers privately.

Those who use prayer activities to block traffic or protest in front of temples of other religions should be arrested immediately and made to pay substantial fines. Freedom of religion does not include forcing your beliefs on others or using religion to prevent others from enjoying their freedom of movement.

This is not an exhaustive list of reforms that are urgently required. But these are all steps that could be implemented immediately for the benefit of all Canadians.

In a globalized world, the strict constitutional divisions of powers that lead to political stagnation must be overcome with political change.

If provincial or municipal governments claim constitutional realities from allowing the federal government from implementing these laws, the Prime Minister could well apply the notwithstanding clause to deal with our current national emergency.

The inability of Canadians to enjoy a decent life should supersede constitutional niceties like the absolute division of power that currently leads to political stagnation.

The pork barrel policies and identity politics that currently play a major role in our political life should be terminated, and common sense should prevail. Taxes should not be used for the political benefit of one or more parties at the expense of lean and effective government for all Canadians.

Does the government have the courage to make the commonsense changes that will impact everyone’s pocketbook and encourage faith in our democratic process?

Or will the government continue to nibble at the edges of essential political reform at the expense of the Canadian taxpayer?

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

As we enter the month of May, there are some fundamental questions we must can ask in terms of geopolitical developments.

On January 3^rd, U.S. President Donald Trump sent troops into Caracas to extract its illegitimate president Nicolas Maduro and bring him to New York for trial.

On February 28^th, the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran, claiming to seek to destroy its nuclear infrastructure and eliminate its leadership.

Since returning to office last year Mr. Trump has claimed that he could resolve the war between Ukraine and Russia in 24 hours.

I have always believed in results-based management, in saying something when you have a clear idea about the objective, and under-promising while over-delivering.

The U.S. president has yet to identify his ultimate goals with respect to the conflicts that he has initiated, and there appears to be no defined endgame.

On May 1, 2026, Venezuelan dictator Delcy Rodriguez remains in charge of Venezuela as does her coterie of Chavistas.

The clear winners of the 2024 presidential elections, Edmundo Gonzañes and Maria Corinna Machado remain sidelined since Mr. Trump shows no sign of replacing the Maduro regime with a democratically elected government. That will be up to the Venezuelan people – a difficult task if Trump continues to support the Chavista regime.

Meanwhile, Venezuela's oil deliveries generate funds now that the U.S. boycott has been lifted, but the money is deposited in a Qatari bank account under the personal control of the U.S. President.

Before February 28^th, the Strait of Hormuz was open to navigation, and the Iranian leadership continued to murder tens of thousands of its citizens.

While many first-line Iranian leaders have been killed, the IRGC regime continues to wield absolute power with no signs of going anywhere, and their murderous activities continue unabated.

The war has left the Iranian regime enjoying a veneer of victory over the powerful U.S. military as Mr. Trump begs the world to help him free the now closed Straits of Hormuz from Iranian absolute control.

Indeed, the much-vaunted U.S. military appears incapable of dealing with Iran’s drone and anti-drone technological prowess, as well as its fleet of fast small boats that can sting the larger ships of the U.S. fleet as well as commercial ships that try to run the blockade.

Twenty-first century warfare is taking on new contours, as both Iran and Ukraine have successfully dealt with attacks from the world’s two superpowers. They say that generals are always fighting the last war, and technology has rewritten the rule book for today’s asymmetrical military campaigns.

Mr. Trump appears to be searching in vain for an Iranian version of Delcy Rodriguez with whom he can negotiate a face-saving withdrawal and somehow claim a victory of sorts.

The Trump administration’s firing of its most experienced military leaders and intelligence operatives with significant expertise in Iranian affairs has left the emperor wearing no clothes.

The Iran-China-Russia-North Korea axis appears to be holding, and the U.S. President appears to be floundering despite the inordinate imbalances between their respective militaries.

In Europe, four years of warfare have left Russian President Putin’s troops decimated, his advances in Ukraine in a quagmire, and, despite everything the Trump administration has done to help the Russian president, Ukraine under President Zelensky is holding firm.

Mr. Trump appears hell-bent to destroy NATO and dismember the EU – probably the most erotic of Putin’s geopolitical dreams.

Oil prices and consumer prices have increased exponentially, and world trade is severely affected by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the entrance to the Red Sea/Suez Canal.

Some have concluded that high oil prices benefit the Trump administration since the U.S. is the world’s largest producer and its ports are saturated with tankers filling up, giving the U.S. economy significant amounts of funds to partially replace those lost through ill-advised and poorly thought-out tariff policies.

In addition, by succeeding in closing off the Strait of Hormuz, China is being deprived of easy access to Iranian oil and is forced to seek further respite from Russia since Venezuelan oil is also now off limits.

Consequently, on May 1^st, I ask if the U.S. President had any idea of what he was getting into by attacking Iran, any idea of the cost in prestige the U.S. military, intelligence, and diplomatic cadres were going to suffer from Iran’s holding the U.S. onslaught to a standstill, and the domestic cost of the impact of this betrayal of campaign promises on his MAGA constituency.

When the president speaks, he sounds like he is living in his own special universe with no basis in reality, while his lack of success is evident to all who deal with facts on the ground.

One can only hope that he and his Republican supporters will be held to account come November, and that saner minds will prevail.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

I am appalled!

The United Nations has sunk to its lowest level ever.

Last week, the United Nations Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) nominated the Islamic Republic of Iran to the UN’s Committee for Program and Coordination, which meets next month to shape policy on women’s rights, human rights, disarmament, and terrorism prevention.

ECOSOC’s nomination is effectively decisive, as the UN General Assembly customarily rubber-stamps such nominations without a vote.

In addition, ECOSOC by acclamation elected China, Cuba, Nicaragua, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan to the influential Committee on NGOs, which oversees the work, accreditation, and U.N. access of thousands of human rights and civil society groups that enjoy consultative status at the world body.

I served as Deputy Spokesperson for the Secretary-General of the United Nations from 2011 until 2013.

During that time, I observed up close how member states ignored their international commitments to agreements and treaties that they had signed to further their own parochial interests and pursue egregious policies in support of their hold on power.

I left the organization in August 2013, saddened by the reality of the current organization. Sadly, it has become much worse in the intervening years.

Iran massacred 40,000 protestors in January and has been executing women and girls for the simple “crime” of showing strands of hair in pubic.

And yet, Iran will now be responsible for managing human and women’s rights at the U.N.

Sadly, and shockingly, Canada, among some other Western democracies, supported this move despite Iran’s atrocious behavior since the 1979 revolution that installed the current theocratic dictatorship.

China and Cuba are communist dictatorships with absolutely no respect for the U.N. Human Rights Charter or any other human rights accords that they have signed.

Nicaragua under the Ortegas is a dictatorship as well, jailing opponents, expelling its own citizens, and removing their citizenship.

Saudi Arabia is an autocratic regime in which women have few rights, and Sudan remains a major human rights violator as it conducts its decades-long civil war.

Can the U.N. be transformed into a viable organization in which all member states adhere to its covenants? And can this occur as long as countries like Canada vote in favor of electing member states with egregious human rights violations to positions of authority within the organization?

Can Canada and others continue to support a Security Council in which a permanent member like Russia brazenly ignores its treaty obligations by invading Ukraine, and another permanent member, the United States, that brazenly attacks Iran and Venezuela?

Can the U.N. effectively promote its values when one or more member states can veto any action that goes against their own national interests or their own policies that violate international law?

Can the Secretary-General continue to be credible while he refuses to call out Iran for the massacre of 40 million civilians in January, or autocratic regimes and pure dictatorships like Cuba, North Korea, Iran, and Venezuela, while they continue to flaunt international law?

Can the U.N. specialised agencies continue to run as though human rights violators have the same and, in some cases, more rights than those who respect international law and United Nations covenants?

U.N. Women has yet to decry Iran’s massacre of women and girls or Afghanistan’s prohibition of education for girls.

Can the Canadian government and those of other allies justify their decision to go along with this current reality and not raise a voice against abuses or call into question the fundamental authority and viability of the world body?

Going along to get along has diminished the United Nations’ effectiveness and viability and mitigated against the objective imposition of sanctions against those who violate its norms.

Can the bar be set any lower?

It remains to be seen.

But I, for one, am strongly disappointed with what the U.N. has become – a toothless tiger in the hands of carnivorous member states whose daily actions defy the organization's fundamental values.

Former Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjold once observed that the purpose of the United Nations is not to take humanity to heaven, but to avoid its descent into hell.

Sadly, given the organization's and its member states' inability or unwillingness to stand up for its values, I must conclude that it has already gone to hell in a handbasket!

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

I would like to share my notes with readers in the hope that you may find them useful.

Let me know!

A Strategic Communications Primer

By

Eduardo del Buey

From ancient times, followers of Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, and various other spiritual traditions have recognized our interconnectedness through a universal creative consciousness. Today, quantum physicists, including Albert Einstein, have demonstrated that the universe is a unified whole, with each individual being a minute component.

Our connection to this universal consciousness is through our intuition – that “gut feeling” we get, which we don’t know where it comes from but can serve as a guide to where we want to go. I explore these and other related concepts in my new book, “Achieving Universal Consciousness”.

However, our intuition doesn’t exist alone. When we have a gut feeling, we should balance it with critical judgment and informed experience to develop a practical strategy.

In the absence of these two elements, we can have great difficulty convincing our team members to adopt our point of view.

To implement a successful communications strategy, we must engage in careful preparation. This provides us with the experience that we need to put our intuitive ideas into action.

This calls for knowledge of the world in which we operate, and a framework of rules that can prepare us to communicate effectively in any circumstance.

In our modern world, we have also created a unified whole of knowledge and consciousness—the internet. All human knowledge is accessible at our fingertips, and we are all linked in cyberspace through our own intelligence and keyboards.

All is known, all is real, and all is there.

Why do I begin a conference on strategic communications and crisis management with references to the esoteric?

Because every nit of creativity we have comes from our intuition – our consciousness that is linked to a universal source. Because we must all be conscious that everything we say and do is known at some level. There is no place to hide, neither for the individual, the organization, nor society.

This reality makes our ability to manage communications essential to our survival and our capacity to create and reach objectives with a minimum of fuss.

Epictetus, the Greek philosopher, once said, “It is not what happens to you, but how you react to it that matters.”

This is the most important factor to keep in mind when dealing with a crisis in your organization or your life.

An important element of strategic communications is controlling as much of the dialogue as possible. To admit faults immediately and take corrective measures, knowing that the cost of doing nothing is far more expensive in the long run than the cost of taking action.

Let’s explore one instance where the intuition of one of the founders of a major American corporation, Johnson & Johnson, together with a strong and prepared communications team and strategy, addressed a major crisis successfully and turned the crisis into an opportunity.

In 1982, seven people died in the Chicago area after taking tainted Tylenol. The bottles had been tampered with in drug stores and had nothing to do with the pill’s producer, Johnson & Johnson.

The company could have simply stepped away from the crisis, claiming that it had nothing to do with it. Instead, the company removed all Tylenol pills from the market at a cost of $100 million (1982 dollars), changed the packaging, invented tamper-proof bottles, and took full responsibility.

As a result, Tylenol is the world’s best-selling analgesic and has remained a market leader since the crisis.

President John F. Kennedy once observed that the Chinese symbol for crisis represents both danger and opportunity.

Johnson & Johnson saw this crisis as an opportunity and did the right thing, from an ethical point of view as well as from a business perspective.

Can your organization do the same?

Robert Wood Johnson, former chairman from 1932 to 1963 and a member of the company’s founding family, crafted “Our Credo” himself in 1943, just before Johnson & Johnson became a publicly traded company. This was long before anyone ever heard the term “corporate social responsibility.”

“Our Credo” is more than just a moral compass. He said that he believed it’s a recipe for business success. The fact that Johnson & Johnson is one of only a handful of companies that have flourished through more than a century of change is proof of that.

Does a company like Johnson & Johnson succeed as a fluke, or are there principles at work that enhance the chances of developing and implementing a successful communications strategy?

An organization is a system, much like the universe I described before. It exists within a corporate ethos that defines its existence and is fueled by a synergy arising from all of its elements working together for a common purpose.

To succeed, the communications team must be organized and directed to tell the truth and take immediate action to remedy the crisis.

The result of this synergy is effective communication—not only with clients, the media, and the government but also between and among all members of the organization.

This calls for a holistic communications strategy that governs all corporate activities.

Information flows from the bottom up and from the top down in equal measure.

Management must call on staff to contribute to the development of effective messaging and the timely delivery of messages to all the audiences your employees can reach.

How?

Each staff member is connected to others at least to some degree through social media.

Each has an audience of dozens or perhaps even hundreds of contacts whose opinions about your organization’s activities can be nurtured and cultivated, both to shape their awareness of your activities and to canvass their reactions to your communications products to enhance your team’s ability to develop and further refine them.

Sometimes, those who appear least likely to contribute can assist your team the most.

When I served at various Canadian Embassies, I often used my drivers as sources of information. When I attended official events, they mingled with drivers of senior officials from the host government, the private sector, and other embassies.

My driver had access to the embassy’s talking points, and when other drivers were discussing what their principals were doing, my driver had information on Canada’s activities to share.

If other principals were smart enough to engage their drivers in a similar conversation, they could learn what Canada and the Embassy were up to.

I ensured that all embassy staff had our talking points so that they could share them with their friends on social media when the opportunity arose.

By sharing information with all staff, we ensured that they would act as many points of light to get Canada’s views across to the public without going through the filter of the media.

Using intermediaries is a productive way to get your messages out.

When I arrived at the Canadian Embassy in Mexico in 1995, Canadians were concerned about the country’s lack of democratic institutions and its human rights record. This was one year after Mexico had joined Canada in NAFTA and one year after the Zapatista uprising in Chiapas.

My objective was to use an excellent network of Mexican academics to get our messages out to the public.

For years, the embassy had worked with Mexican academics from the best universities under the Canadian Studies Program. The Mexican Association for Canadian Studies became an indispensable ally for Canadian diplomats to get their messages across to the Mexican public without causing diplomatic incidents.

The program provided academics with short-term scholarships to study Canadian activities within their academic disciplines and use their newly acquired knowledge in their courses.

The multiplier effect was excellent.

Students at all levels were made privy to Canada and its policies, and public diplomacy helped expose generations of Mexican students to Canada and all it had to offer.

Consequently, by the time I had arrived at the embassy, we had a network of Mexican academics with expertise in a wide array of issues of importance to Canada who could speak to these issues from a Canadian perspective.

We organized a ten-week conference series at the embassy with three conferences per week on key issues of concern for Canada, with these academics presenting the Canadian view.

We expanded this program to other venues during the next few years.

Employing Mexican academics to deliver our messages publicly allowed the Embassy to avoid any semblance of direct interference in Mexican affairs—an undiplomatic activity that can lead to serious consequences.

Instead, we had Mexican experts speaking to Mexican audiences of political leaders, media, and other academics about Canadian concerns at the Embassy itself and in other venues.

Creating allies outside of your organization is an essential communications strategy to ensure that your organization is supported by outside experts when a crisis hits.

Today, most mainstream media depend on outside pundits to share their views on global developments and feed the 24/7 nature of news coverage.

Having pundits who are familiar with your company’s products, technology, and activities is vital in this era when media coverage is instantaneous and global, everyone is a reporter, and your competition is as eager to dominate the conversation to make your organization look as bad as possible to ensure that they shine by comparison!

Turning to the media, it is vital to ensure that media relations are carefully planned out.

First, a spokesperson must be identified and established as the only person allowed to deal with the media officially and on the record.

And remember, with today’s media, everything is on the record.

One spokesperson, one message, and one objective must be your corporate mantra.

This does not contradict my previous assertion of a hundred points of light – your staff members. They have their own audiences. But the media must always have one official focal point of attention, one source of information, and one spokesperson who speaks on the record on behalf of the organization.

The first step in developing your messages is to clearly define your objective. Outline the challenge, specify the desired outcomes, and have your communications team focus on results-driven strategies.

Messages must be carefully crafted, taking into account input from all sectors of the organization, so that all sides of an issue are considered and dealt with.

Messages must be shared throughout the various sectors of the organization so that each can contribute intelligently to your strategic objectives and activities.

Members of the communications team should come from all sectors of the organization to ensure that all aspects of the challenge are dealt with.

Often, production, marketing, accounting, and sales can conflict as each has its own perspective. Creating consensus among them ensures that all points of view are considered and weighed so that the final strategy represents the holistic interests of and information from the organization.

While messages should always be shared with corporate legal officers to ensure compliance with laws and regulations, under no circumstances should lawyers be the spokespersons or dictate the communications plan.

Lawyers are always risk-averse and will rarely underwrite a strategy that calls for openness and transparency, especially in the current litigious atmosphere.

Messages must be absolutely truthful.

Lies will end your organization’s credibility and leave your communications plan in shambles.

Remember, it takes years to create credibility, minutes to destroy it, and years to rebuild it, if ever.

An example of this was the crisis that developed in Spain in 2024, when waters flooded Valencia province and killed over 200 people. The president of the Generalitat (the regional government) was nowhere to be found during the crisis, and the government failed miserably to warn people in advance about the dangers, although it had all the information necessary to do so.

In the aftermath, the Generalitat’s president lied repeatedly on camera about his whereabouts during the crisis, as did the national head of his party, the Partido Popular.

He lost his job, and governments at all levels lost credibility through this reaction.

The fallout continues today, with the public and media trying to sift through the lies to assess responsibility for this tragedy.

Lying never works, especially in these days of universal access to the internet and all of the information available to all.

What is required first of all is honesty on the part of leaders.

Always remember that messages must be short and drafted in a clearly understood language. Your target audience is not an expert in the issues that you manage. Avoid technical, legal, or medical jargon or flowery language. Short and simple should always be your mantra.

Media must be monitored constantly to ensure that your messages are reaching target audiences accurately. If not, you must use the feedback to recast your messages and modify your communications plan accordingly.

Remember, plans are simply a snapshot. Developments are continuous and ever-changing. Feedback is essential to ensure that your communications products are timely and are not superseded by developments.

One thing to keep in mind is that the media should not be seen as your main avenue of communication.

Twenty years ago, you depended on the media to report your press releases. But the media were beyond your control, and transmitting messages was a hit-or-miss affair at their discretion..

Today, I always insist that clients establish their own YouTube channel to ensure that their messages reach general audiences directly, bypassing filtering and spinning by media organizations.

This provides on-the-record messages free from dependency on external players to broadcast them. As well, this allows you to quickly call out media that misrepresent what you are saying with solid proof of malfeasance.

In responding to questions, never speculate or try to answer hypothetical questions. Stick to facts always and avoid being sucked into a trap that can cause further problems.

Remember the Hippocratic oath: First do no harm!

And always, always, tell the truth.

Don’t improvise an answer. If you don’t know, be honest. Say you don’t know, but you will get back to the journalist with the facts.

And then, do it!

All of the above may call for a transformation of your corporate philosophy.

If your company has traditionally operated as a structured bureaucracy, chances are you have many silos that may or may not communicate with each other. The result is a fragmentation of effort instead of a holistic approach to business.

Hierarchy no longer commands the importance it once did.

Rather, a flatter organization with a strong cooperative approach to managerial governance can better serve your organization.

Indeed, you need expertise, and experts must work together to enjoy the synergies that teamwork provides.

The “task force” approach, in which experts from all sections of the organization work together, can enhance productivity and improve results.

Communications within the company are a vital element in your quest for success. Absent this, efforts can prove sterile in producing the results that you need, and the company can atrophy into a group of isolated satraps rather than a strong and purpose-driven holistic structure.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) can be a useful tool to ensure that information flows smoothly between different sections of the organization, and so that data is quickly available to all, not only the few who work in one or two divisions.

AI can help improve communications plans and the language and strategies your organization can use to develop and implement an effective plan. AI can also be used to collect feedback on the efficacy of your program in reaching target audiences and quickly improve those elements of the plan that require improvement.

Melding AI with human activity is the way of the future, and we should all be working to get employees up to speed and for the company to adopt the best AI tools available.

However, when using AI, you must always apply critical thinking to ensure that your AI’s sources are credible and that the resulting advice will help rather than hinder your cause.

How does one ensure that staff have the critical judgement required to perform their tasks? This is where good recruiting practices come into play.

Your recruiters should develop simulations that call for the interviewee to display critical judgment in real life situations before they are hired. Their critical judgment should be evaluated at every performance review, and training and simulations offered periodically to all staff.

Remember, everything I have set out above is not a cost for the organization.

These are investments for the present and the future, and the resources used to meet these objectives will pay off in spades down the road.

Changing the corporate mentality and creating an environment that encourages constant change is fundamental today.

It is a challenge that must be met by all members of the organization. The past is over, and the future is now.

Absent this transformation at the corporate and personal level, people and organizations will soon wither on the vine.

Conclusions

Communicating is both an art and a science.

It is an art since it depends on our creativity and senses to create.

Messages can be exchanged with words, pictures, sounds, and audiovisual techniques.

Ideas can be shared using sight, sound, and touch.

Communicating can be achieved through reading body language, deciphering sentences by reading between the lines – the use of our intuition to understand what is being transmitted.

Transmission is a two-way street. It is as important to listen as it is to speak. Listening itself is an art, since we do so with all of our senses, not only our ears. Watching body language, “smelling” fear, watching and listening to the other person’s breath, and other manifestations of sensorial activity are all part of communication and can reveal much about our audience.

Communicating is also a science.

The use of technology enhances our ability to reach audiences, to create novel ways of framing and transmitting messages, and to expand our understanding of our environment.

Psychology and sociology play a significant role in our ability to communicate.

Creating networks that share information creates synergies that one person could not easily achieve.

Reducing hierarchies and smoothing out structures enhances our ability to create highly productive teams.

Listening to all opens up access to new ideas and perspectives that enrich our ability to create new and more effective messages and ways of communicating them.

Finally, the origin of all creativity is, in my opinion, our consciousness – what we call our intuition. That place we can’t really identify from whence ideas arise.

Good communicators are in contact with themselves.

With their sources of ideas.

With their intuitions.

Melded with constructive strategies and professional experience, they will be an effective communications team.

Many thanks, and I look forward to comments!

www.eduardodelbuey.com

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

When you send troops, aircraft, and vessels to attack another country, well-defined goals must be set if you are to have a basis for evaluating the success of your mission.

The first and most important issue is a definitive objective that must be met for the operation to be considered successful.

Last week, the United States and Israel undertook a military operation against the Islamic Republic of Iran.

If you look at statements from spokespersons for both the U.S. and Israel, you get several different definitions from the President, the Prime Minister, and different elected officials from both countries.

President Trump speaks of eliminating Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities. While he applauded the deaths of Iran’s senior leadership, he avoided saying that the prime objective is creating a viable democracy in Iran.

Prime Minister Netanyahu, on the other hand, indicates Israel’s appreciation for Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, whose goal is to create a viable democracy with free elections and who will oversee a democratic transition.

This leads me to wonder what the real objective of this operation is, and if Israel and the U.S. are on the same page.

If you remove the top leadership of a government with myriad centers of power, a highly armed army, the Revolutionary Guard, and an ideologically driven bureaucracy, the simple elimination of nuclear and ballistic capabilities is not enough to change the governing class's overall mentality or the fundamental nature of government.

If the millions demonstrating on the streets don’t have access to weapons or support from international players, and lack a leadership structure on the ground, they will continue to be cannon fodder.

It would behoove us to remember that in 1978-79, Ayatollah Khomeini had a vast network of mosques and clerics providing guidance and leadership for the masses, as well as logistical and armed support for street demonstrations.

This does not exist in Iran today. I know of no national leaders in Iran who command the loyalty and respect of the Iranian opposition that Khomeini did in 1979. So far, the military and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps show few signs of switching sides, as did the Shah’s army back then.

In Venezuela a few weeks ago, the governing structure appeared willing to do President Trump’s bidding, and Vice President Delcy Rodriguez has done just that.

If you look at the President’s track record in Venezuela, his forces eliminated the head honcho and kept the rest of the structure intact.

His only interest is the revenue from Venezuela’s oil and keeping it out of Chinese hands.

It could well require keeping the governing structures of Iran in place to ensure peace and stability as he has done in Venezuela, perhaps at the cost of real freedom for the population.

As well, a fundamental restructuring of the architecture of power in Iran would require boots on the ground, much as post-war Germany and Japan required to destroy both countries’ primary ideologies and ensure a transition to an acceptable form of government.

So far, there is no sign of a return to democracy for Venezuela, nor for the rightful administration that won 74% of the national vote in 2024, taking office.

In my view, President Trump has little appetite for a democratic government in Iran that might refuse his demand for control of its oil and gas and determine its destiny.

On the other hand, Israel wants to eliminate the major existential threat it has faced for 47 years.

This would require the wholesale cleansing of the Iranian governing infrastructure. It would require nation-building of the kind the U.S. President and his MAGA supporters loathe and which historical U.S. experience has proven to be unattainable.

Both leaders claim that this operation will be short and definitive.

However, both history and realpolitik may indicate otherwise.

I look forward to seeing how both countries measure the success of this operation and what results it produces.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

This week has seen the loonie left lose its collective mind.

After 47 years of destabilizing the Middle East and increasingly threatening global security, the United States and Israel launched a military operation against the Islamic Republic of Iran to take out its senior leadership in the hopes of paving the way for Iranians to take back their country from the Islamists who have held the population hostage for 47 years.

Since its inception, the regime has imprisoned, tortured, and murdered thousands of young women who simply wanted the freedom to dress as they choose, to let their hair down, and not wear heavy robes when leaving their homes.

The regime has murdered LGBTQ members as well as those who called for freedom from oppression.

Over the past four weeks – four weeks! – the regime has murdered some 40,000 Iranians in the streets as they demanded democracy over dictatorship and freedom over religious oppression.

Throughout, the global left has supported this ongoing crusade against women and gays and those who seek freedom.

Throughout, the global left has demonstrated and vocally supported Iran’s proxies – Hamas, Hezbollah, and Yemen – in major cities daily, disrupting the lives of citizens and destroying public property.

Throughout, the United Nations and, especially, U.N. Women, have remained silent as girls and women in Iran have been murdered, imprisoned, tortured, and beaten in the name of Islam.

And now, instead of welcoming the demise of Iran’s misogynist leadership and expressing their solidarity with Iran’s oppressed women and girls, they participate in demonstrations praising this gang of rapists and murderers simply because they are not American or Israeli.

Some of their demands are ludicrous.

How can one negotiate democratic change with a regime that slaughters tens of thousands of its own?

How can one negotiate with a regime that seeks the destruction of the West, of Western values, of religious harmony and individual freedoms.

Yet this appears to be the position of the U.N.’s hapless Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who has preferred to celebrate the Islamic regime rather than call it to account.

This appears to be the case of left-wing governments in Spain and leftist parties in the Western world, where they have expressed their support for the ayatollahs and their militants.

Indeed, Iran has developed missiles capable of reaching Europe with large payloads of explosives.

The unprovoked attack yesterday by Iran on a British base in Cyprus underscores the fact that Europe is in the crosshairs of the Iranian regime and more European targets may be singled out for attack should the regime choose to attack them.

Furthermore, where has Guterres’s condemnation of Iran’s wanton attacks on the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia gone?

Where are the U.N. General Assembly and Security Council?

The Loonie Left appears to have infiltrated the world’s power structures and supports dictatorships of every ilk, preferring oppression to freedom and murder and imprisonment over freedom.

Sadly, this is the globe we have and it is the world that these people seek to leave to our children and grandchildren.

Some readers may claim that Iran is fighting a defensive war against Western “imperialism”.

Western leaders must accept the fact that their countries are targets for the Ayatollahs’ regime as well as from within in view of the large numbers of Islamists in their midst, including cells of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps that are active and numerous in Western Europe and Canada.

The West must support the tens of millions of Iranians at home and abroad who seek freedom, justice, and a peaceful way of life.

There are no negotiations that can rid Iran of the current regime, armed as it is and determined to murder as many of its citizens as is necessary to ensure its survival.

To call for negotiations is a folly that could well cost tens of thousands of more lives with no tangible results.

Sometimes it is necessary to bite the bullet to avoid even greater tragedies.

This is one of those times.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

https://eduardodelbuey.com/

Enjoy!

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

We all live with self-imposed emotional or intellectual limits, and we can all, at times, allow events to affect our self-esteem.

Each of us is born with a clean emotional and mental slate – a slate that is ours to fill through education and personal experience as we grow.

This slate is exposed to many inputs, from family and friends to school and media.

These inputs create changes in ourselves or in our environment to which we must all adapt in order to thrive and grow.

Some people can cope well with change, yet others become its victims.

Some can control their reactions while others cannot develop the emotional intelligence to succeed.

How can we develop the tools with which to know ourselves, define what makes us happy, to respect that same right in others and to achieve our inner freedom?

Until recently, very few of us were ever provided with the tools with which to engage in the introspection required for self-realization, or the techniques for creating and deepening our ability to connect with our intuition in order to achieve true inner freedom.

Religion attempted to do so by locking people into belief systems that sought to create conformity and unity of vision.

The educational system took a cookie cutter approach to preparing young minds for their future.

And in many cases, organizations and companies sought to create the organizational man or woman, stressing uniformity of thought.

This is changing.

In an article for National Public Radio, authors Anya Kamenetz and Meribah Knight reported that many companies are now providing employees with meditation rooms and techniques so that they can recharge and enhance their creativity. This is especially happening in the high-tech sector where long hours are worked and where maintaining creativity and focus is key to success.

They went on to report that many school systems in the United States are now experimenting with teaching some form of meditation to students from a very young age. According to Warner Arts Magnet Elementary School in Nashville, Tennessee, principal Ricki Gibbs, behaviour referrals at his high school are down 80% over last year. This is but one of myriad schools incorporating these techniques into their curricula and allowing students to react differently to emotional challenges or stimuli that can affect very their self-esteem.

Erica Sebinga, professor of pediatrics at Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, reports that she has observed mental health benefits among students who have participated, claiming that they are calmer and more productive, more at peace with themselves and their peers, and even more creative.

While what is currently known as “Mindfulness” has its roots in Hindu and Buddhist meditation techniques, all religions have a basis in contemplation and meditation. Silencing our minds is an essential component to self-realization and connecting with our intuition – the basis of inner calm and creativity.

In his seminal poem “To Althea from Prison”, Richard Lovelace wrote that, “stone walls do not a prison make nor iron bars a cage”.

These techniques show how we can increase our inner peace and self-esteem and manage our reactions to external stimuli so that we don’t lock ourselves in self-imposed mental prisons or emotional cages.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

After years of clearly divisive politics, Canadians were treated this week to a number of developments that focused on dialogue rather than on diatribes and conflicts.

The first event was a joint meeting featuring former Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and former Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

Despite coming from opposite ends of the political spectrum, they appear to have struck a genuine friendship and personal rapport that transcends party politics at this time of great geopolitical challenges for Canada and, indeed, the world.

Both leaders spoke of the need to change the harsh words Canadian politicians exchange on a daily basis and focus on how great a nation Canada is in the eyes of the world.

Unity was the leitmotif of their cordial exchange as each complemented the other in focusing on Canada’s enviable human, social, and natural resources and how best to use them to create a new national discourse and a united Canada.

Mr. Harper spoke of rising nationalisms around the globe and underscored that Canadians have every right to be proud nationalists. Mr. Chrétien underscored how Canada’s human rights record is the envy of many nations, and how tolerance and diversity contribute to national unity rather that detract from it.

Former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau spent years describing Canada as a “post-national state” causing Canadian nationalism to decline to a point at which many Canadians were afraid they were losing their national identity. Indeed, in 2024 polling, 70% surveyed by IPSOS felt Canada was broken.

Playing on identity politics, Mr. Trudeau’s policies seemed to divide Canadians along liguistic and ethnic lines rather than adopt policies aimed at bringing Canadians together under one national canopy with room for all to grow and flourish.

Opposition leader Pierre Poilievre has spent much of his political capital responding to the hapless Trudeau government. Polling showed Canadian public opinion, describing Canada as a mess and coming across as negative, thereby making Mr. Carney a more palatable choice once Mr. Trudeau stepped away.

The second event was the unveiling of Mr. Harper’s official portrait in Parliament. In his remarks, Mr: Harper spoke of his vision that, for many years ahead, portraits of all prime ministers of Canada from both parties will continue to be hung in Parliament’s halls.

Inclusive indeed.

The third meeting was between opposition leader Pierre Poilievre and Prime Minister Mark Carney on Wednesday.

During the week, gone was Mr. Poilievre’s more traditional accusatory focus, which may be a standard role for any opposition leader in a parliamentary democracy, but that he took to an extreme, losing him the support of the political center.

Instead, Mr. Poilievre announced that his party is ready to work with the government to pass urgent legislation to address the concerns of all Canadians – more affordable housing, infrastructure development, prosperity, safety and national security, and legal reform.

Prime Minister Carney voiced similar sentiments.

This focus on dialogue rather than diatribes appears to signal that Canada’s political class may finally be concluding that Canadians from all parties want Canada to work and for political leaders at all levels of government to focus on making Canada work.

Canada faces challenges ahead.

Separatist sympathies in Quebec and Alberta seem to have reawakened although most Canadians continue to see this as a time when all must come together. Internal divisions play into the hands of those global players who would benefit from a weakened Canada.

During his joint-interview with Mr. Chrétien, Mr. Harper commented that he had recently met a die-hard Quebec separatist at the Ottawa airport who had asked him what his formula was for dealing with the U.S. administration.

When Mr. Harper told him it is now time for all Canadians to come together, this gentleman’s response was “you are right”. No indication that he objected to this call by Mr. Harper despite his avowed separatist leanings.

This was only one week after many years of what many believe has been a political quagmire.

If Canada is to meet the challenges of today and tomorrow, out politicians need to grow up, grow a pair, and put country ahead of party, province, or personal ambition.

This week proved that this can be possible with good will and joint efforts.

It is up to all of us to hold our respective leaders’ feet to the fire to ensure that this was not a one-off-week but, rather, the bginning of a new era in Canadian politics.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

In my last article “2026”, I concluded that “Mr. Trump himself has stated that he is after absolute power and no one yet, not the Senate, the House, the Military, the Supreme Court, or the Republican Party appear able or willing to stop him.

Who or what can?”

At the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos this week, Prime Minister Mark Carney clearly showed the way without mentioning Mr. Trump or the United States once.

It was the most elegant and eloquent call to arms I have heard in recent memory.

Prime Minister Carney stated that “the middle powers must act together, because if we’re not at the table, we’re on the menu. We know the old order is not coming back. We shouldn’t mourn it.

Nostalgia is not a strategy, but we believe that from the fracture, we can build something bigger, better, stronger, more just.

This is the task of the middle powers, the countries that have the most to lose from a world of fortresses and most to gain from genuine cooperation.”

The continuum of a rules based western democratic order has been ruptured by the United States. Middle powers that I call “liberal democracies” (LDs) must unite in common cause against this.

These LDs include members of the European Union, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan, among others.

We must come out from behind our wall of complacency and take the initiative.

They say that the best defence is a strong offence.

We must not wait for the U.S. to act.

We must act first and run the game by strengthening our hand for future negotiations. Let the U.S. understand that while we are the smaller power, we also have options and are not to be bullied.

Like the schoolyard bully, the US can be attacked in ways that not only hurt it economically, but that also deteriorate the Administration’s domestic support.

We must always react and do so thoughtfully, however. The US, even diminished, is still important to us.

How?

In a number of ways.

I would like to share examples of scenarios, some of which are extreme but all of which would wake America up to the realization that the road it has chosen could actually weaken it and even be disastrous for its citizens.

LDs could coordinate selling off U.S. securities, like Denmark has recently done, and investing their holdings in gold or other currencies like the euro, the yen, the pound and, pending policies that make the climate for investment more attractive in Canada, the Canadian dollar.

The impact on the U.S. would be rising interest rates, stock market volatility, and a currency devaluation, all of which would awaken America to its own vulnerabilities.

Only changes to economic and bureaucratic policies in each country can protect them from negative effects.

Investment chases stability and returns.

As the U.S. dollar weakens and their currencies strengthen, LD markets would likely be tempted to purchase U.S. goods.

LDs would have to negotiate trade agreements among each other (already underway) and, perhaps, impose targeted tariffs on U.S. goods to substitute U.S. products with those from partner countries as industries are rebuilt.

In addition, there are dozens of U.S. military bases in Europe.

Europeans, Japanese, Canadians, Australians, and New Zealanders would pursue a unified military structure along the lines of NATO eventually phasing out the U.S. in order to defend against Russian designs to recover Eastern Europe or Chinese designs on Taiwan, the Pacific, or Latin America.

This would improve the security of all NATO countries -- a win-win. The military spending required would be a source of job creation and industrial regeneration.

American forces would be invited to leave, and military overflights and landing rights in European airspace would be suspended.

British and French nuclear capabilities would have to be recalibrated so that they can acts as a credible deterrence against any nuclear attack from abroad.

U.S. digital-based companies could be taxed heavily or, in the worst case, shut down in the interest of “national security”. Netflix, Amazon, Google, Disney, Apple, and others make billions of tax-free dollars in the Liberal Democracies. Their leaders are among Trump’s strongest supporters.

Will this support continue if they are targeted? Perhaps not if they lose their market share and are replaced by other companies that can provide the same services.

Finally, our mentalities must change.

As Prime Minister Carney said, “today I will talk about a rupture in the world order, the end of a pleasant fiction and the beginning of a harsh reality, where geopolitics, where the large, main power, geopolitics, is submitted to no limits, no constraints.”

We must all end our dependence on the United States and on its military umbrella and its entertainment magnetism.

We must end this quest for trade deals with a country whose leadership does not respect us or the deals it signs.

We must also accept the fact that there will be costs for all of us as we transition from this rupture towards a new and, perhaps, more effective and equitable world order.

But, there will also be opportunities for domestic producers of digital entertainment, military equipment, and consumer and industrial goods – all of which would create jobs and provide income for millions around the world.

We are in an era of revolution: in this case, a revolution of the mentalities.

So, who can stop Mr. Trump and his supporters?

We all can, if we unite and go from reactive to calibrated proactive stances.

We have no option but to stand up and say, enough. Prime Minister Carney has, and other leaders are beginning to echo these sentiments.

Given the climate in the U.S. and the inability of its institutions to rein in President Trump’s idiosyncrasies, this may be the only option we have.

Subscribe now

Share

Leave a comment

2026 began where 2025 left off.

Poorly.

Many had expected that once the United States moved against Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, they would replace him with the democratically elected duo of Edmundo Gonzalez and Maria Corinna Machado.

The U.S. removed Maduro and his wife from Caracas and arrested them, taking them to New York for an eventual trial.

But anyone who has studied Mr. Trump knows that democracy is not what he seeks.

In Venezuela, he decided to leave Vice-President Delcy Rodriguez and the rest of her murderous regime in place in exchange for Venezuela’s oil. They control the country internally, and the US takes the spoils.

The U.S. has reportedly sold $500 million of Venezuelan oil on the open market and placed the funds in a private account in Qatar, according to various media sources.

Ms. Machado decided to try to change Mr. Trump’s mind by visiting the White House and giving him her Nobel Prize, which is legally non-transferrable.

Her grovelling will erode her credibility significantly, especially since Mr. Trump publicly announced that he is advised that she “doesn’t have the support or respect within the country” and that it would be “tough for her to be the leader”.

But it gets worse.

Mr. Trump wrote to the Norwegian Prime Minister that “Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America.”

Denmark cannot protect that land from Russia or China, and why do they have a ‘right of ownership’ anyway?” Trump continued. “There are no written documents; it’s only that a boat landed there hundreds of years ago, but we had boats landing there, also.”

I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding, and now, NATO should do something for the United States. The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland. Thank you!

President DJT”

So, invading Greenland, destroying NATO, and giving Russian President Putin his geopolitical dream come true, is in Mr. Trump’s mind adequate revenge for the Nobel Prize Committee not awarding him the coveted prize. The Committee is a non-governmental organization with no ties to the Norwegian Government.

Further along around the globe, the Iranian demonstrators, some 16,000 who have been murdered by the regime, still await Mr. Trump’s promise to intervene if one demonstrator is killed.

Indeed, after the US received a $400 billion plane from Qatar last year, (Iran’s major ally in the region and main funder of Hamas and Hezbollah), and promises of billions in investment funding from which Mr. Trump’s family would undoubtedly presonally benefit, I wonder if replacing the Ayatollahs with Reza Pahlavi would not reduce Trump’s ability to control Iran and its massive oil reserves.

Some suspect that Mr. Putin, Mr. Trump’s idol, likes the current political framework in Iran and would look askance at an Iran firmly allied with Israel, an objective Pahlavi has clearly stated would arise from his return to government.

Moreover, Qatar (a close ally of Iran and primary funder of Hezbollah and Hamas) fears the overthrow of an Islamic regime and a return of Persian culture and the elimination of Islam as the governing force in Iran. This would undercore the claim by many that Islam is a colonialist force that can and must be overthrown in the name of freedom and progress, leaving many leaders in the region without the religious crutch on which to lean politically.

Already, mosque attendance in Iran is down significantly, with large numbers of Iranians turning away from Islam, some even back to Persia’s original religion -- Zoroastrianism.

Democracy, international or constitutional law, common sense, or indeed morality have no place in Trump’s thinking. His administration constantly pushes the boundaries and seeks to reverse many of the rights enshrined in the Constitution or in common law. Indeed, one only has to see what he is doing with ICE in Minnesota and other Democrat run states to see his intentions are not in keeping with the spirit of the Constitution.

Indeed, he has often said that there will be no need for another presidential election in 2028 and that there is no need for the midterms scheduled for November.

It is not beyond belief that his overall plan is to create havoc globally and, in the U.S. Indeed, I believe that he is purposely provoking anti-ICE demonstrators in several Democratic run states towards greater radicalism, looking to respond to apparent “violence” against his policies by invoking the Insurgency Act.

This would allow him to use the military as a police force, introduce some form of martial law, and cancel the midterm elections in November that polls indicate he may probably lose.

This way, he would maintain control of both Houses of Congress, preclude any attempt to impeach him, and undermine whatever democratic institutions remained standing.

It may sound wild indeed.

But Mr. Trump himself has stated that he is after absolute power and no one yet, not the Senate, the House, the Military, the Supreme Court, or the Republican Party, appears able or willing to stop him.

Who or what can?

Subscribe now

Share In the Crosshairs by Eduardo del Buey

Leave a comment

Buddhists say that peace begins the moment you choose not to allow persons or events to control your emotions.

I have spent the past six years writing my columns on global events and leaders, war and human tragedies, lies and falsehoods that drive the political discourse of today, sharing them with readers and on Facebook, and allowing myself to slowly become mired in all of the negativity that I believe surrounds us.

I am tired of commenting on negative people and events and allowing them to occupy my time and headspace.

Negativity does not define me, nor does it enhance the quality of my life. It only serves to stifle my spiritual peace and growth.

And I refuse to focus on it any longer.

This year is the Chinese year of the snake – a time when we shed our old skins and grow new ones with which to continue our journey through life. We discard the old memories that encumber our emotions and spirituality and are not a life sentence.

In 2026, we enter the Chinese year of the horse, that signifies forward motion – setting new goals and adopting new ways of doing things and dealing with the challenges life throws at us.

The objective is to become more positive in our outlook and deny negative people or events from absorbing us and affecting our emotional and spiritual well-being.

Consequently, I will no longer disturb my inner peace or yours by focusing on the negative in my social commentaries, either through my In the Crosshairs columns or on social media.

I will focus on universal creativity through natural phenomena, artistic endeavors, or spiritual and philosophical readings.

I will comment on global events from time to time when things become especially egregious.

But I will limit these commentaries to the barest minimum.

When I wrote my latest book – One Man’s Quest, A Spiritual Journey – some readers asked me how I could focus on the positive nature of spirituality in a world replete with negativity and chaos.

My reply is that each of us must create a cocoon of well-being, develop ourselves spiritually and emotionally to face the challenges of the modern world without allowing them to interfere with our personal growth and well-being.

Family, kindred souls, art, music, literature, theater, film, and dance can bring us together and enhance our lives.

We must be aware of global developments but not allow them to rule our emotions or reactions.

We must surround ourselves with positive people, people who respect our spiritual and emotional boundaries yet share our goal of self-realization and unity with the universal consciousness that binds us all.

Anais Nin once wrote that we don’t see things as they are, we see them as we are.

“Change your perspective and thus change reality” means your interpretation of events, not just the events themselves, shapes your experience of life. By shifting from negative to positive, embracing empathy, reframing challenges, and challenging assumptions, you can alter your emotional responses, choices, and overall reality.

You can turn problems into opportunities and build a more empowered, fulfilling life. This isn’t denying facts but choosing a more empowering way to view them, finding new paths through mental flexibility and conscious choice.

That is my goal, and I hope that you find your own way to transform negativity into positivity and not only survive this world of chaos but grow with a new consciousness of why we are here and how we can evolve into greater emotional and spiritual beings.

I invite you to undergo your own transitions and share them with us, so that we can learn from the experiences of others, and they can learn from us.

Happy New Year, ours and the soon-to-come Chinese, and let’s make the most of it.

Share

Leave a comment

Subscribe now