Date: Sunday, 26 October 2025
4 articles
The U.S. has just changed its China policy. Will China change its U.S. policy?
&
Why Both Trump and Musk Are Führers Instead of Leaders
&
The U.S. Empire’s Argument, Versus the History
&
If Anyone Still Doubts that UK Is a Dictatoship …
https://ericzuesse.substack.com/p/the-us-has-just-changed-its-china
https://theduran.com/the-u-s-has-just-changed-its-china-policy-will-china-change-its-u-s
The U.S. has just changed its China policy. Will China change its U.S. policy?
26 October 2025, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)
On October 26th, Reuters headlined “US, China talks sketch out rare earths, tariff pause for Trump and Xi to consider” and reported that the advisors to both Trump and Xi have tentatively agreed to suspend their nation’s main recent retaliatory measures against each other’s country until the two leaders will meet in the next China-U.S. summit, which has not yet been scheduled. So: the advisors are recommending to their respective boss that the trade-war be cancelled at least temporarily.
Reuters reported that this information comes from the U.S. delegation, but that “Chinese officials were more circumspect about the talks and offered no details about the outcome of the meetings.” This means that the likelihood that Trump will do this is higher than that Xi will — the U.S. is more dissatisfied with the current trade-war between the two countries than China is.
Further indication of this is:
Trump and Xi are due to meet on Thursday on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Gyeongju, South Korea, to sign off on the terms. While the White House has officially announced the highly anticipated Trump-Xi talks, China has yet to confirm that the two leaders will meet.
Why would the U.S. be more eager to stop the trade-war than China is? Trump has been the initiator of increased trade-restrictions against China and China has responded by increasing its own restrictions against America, but now the U.S. side wants to put on hold its increasing hostility toward China if China will reciprocate and the entire situation will thus go back to the status-quo ante, the previous situation — which Trump (not Xi) has been consistently complaining about.
This is what would actually be expected if China’s restrictions would harm America more than America’s restrictions would harm China. In other words: Trump is finding that he has bitten off more than he can chew.
Another indication of this is given in the October 25th article by “Simplicius” headlining “RAND Urges for Major Chinese Re-Think Amidst Widespread Recognition of China's Awakening”. It opens:
RAND think tank, famous for its influential policy papers which have shaped US-Russian relations, has released an eye-opening call for a change of course on China. This comes by way of the latest Trump-China escalations which, it appears, have greatly worried insiders of the ‘deep state’ system; enough so that for once they have begun swallowing their pride and envisioning a calmer, more placating approach toward China so as not to upset the global status quo too much.
He links to both the RAND summary (which isn’t as good as his own) and the detailed 115-page RAND analysis, which latter is titled “Stabilizing the U.S.-China Rivalry” and closes:
No agenda of this kind will be embraced in its entirety. U.S. and Chinese officials interested in stabilizing their relationship could start with a small set of these ideas and build from there. They could do so even as the rivalry rages in other areas — just as the United States and Soviet Union did during the Cold War. This analysis suggests that the potential exists to improve the stability of this perilous rivalry — if both sides are interested.
Throughout, the underlying false assumption is that aggression between China and America has been non-existent instead of consistently by the U.S. Government against China, and not in the reverse direction — which has been the actual history here. For example, the U.S. posts three military bases in Taiwan against the Chinese mainland and sells Taiwan weapons to be used for invading China, even though the U.S. is and since 1972 in the Shanghai Communique has been formally committed to, the principle that “Taiwan is a part of China.” Would the U.S. tolerate if China were to have three military bases in a part of the U.S. and sell it weapons to encourage it to declare independence from America?
With a history like this, how likely is it that China’s President Xi will agree to or even trust agreements (such as the Shanghai Communique, which America constantly violates) such as RAND is proposing?
The real significance of that new RAND analysis is that RAND happens to be the U.S. Department of War’s top think tank. On 3 January 2025, the Quincy Institute published their “Big Ideas and Big Money: Think Tank Funding in America” and reported that,
The U.S. government contributed at least $1.49 billion to U.S. think tanks from 2019 to 2023. The Department of Defense is far and away the top donor in the Think Tank Funding Tracker, with the vast majority of these contributions going to the RAND Corporation (more than $1.4 billion). RAND is unique on this think tank list in that it works directly for the U.S. government.
That RAND study comes from the Pentagon’s top think tank, not from one outside the Government.
In other words: The Trump Administration now finds itself in a bind and is trying to go back to the status-quo ante but the Xi Administration might, for example, keep in place its new licensure requirements on the export of rare-earths. More than anything else, that’s what this is really the most about. And by now, the Chinese Government can have absolutely no doubt that the U.S. and its allies are its enemies and cannot reasonably be trusted. That is America’s problem here: it can’t reasonably be trusted to comply even with what it had formally signed to.
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.
https://ericzuesse.substack.com/p/why-both-trump-and-musk-are-fuhrers
https://theduran.com/why-both-trump-and-musk-are-fuhrers-instead-of-leaders/
Why Both Trump and Musk Are Führers Instead of Leaders
26 October 2025, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)
The difference between Hitler as Führer and Hitler as Chancellor (a change that 89.93% of Germany’s voters approved of in the 10 August 1934 referendum — effectively ending any pretense that the nation was a democracy and doing this ‘democratically’) was the assumption that to be Führer was to be irreplaceable so that the organization’s success depended upon that individual and would fail under any other leader, whereas when Hitler had been only Chancellor he was merely replaceable. That was the Führer assumption, and 90% of Germany’s voters went for it.
On October 23rd, Yahoo News headlined “Elon Musk presses for $1 trillion pay plan because he needs to influence Tesla's future 'robot army’" and reported that Musk’s presentation to his investors said
“My fundamental concern with regard to how much voting control I have at Tesla is, if I go ahead and build this enormous robot army, can I just be ousted at some point in the future? That's my biggest concern,” Musk said on the call.
“It's called compensation, but it's not like I'm going to go spend the money,” Musk said. “It's just, if we build this robot army, do I have at least a strong influence over that robot army? ... I don't feel comfortable building that robot army if I don't have at least a strong influence.”
He was telling his investors that when he becomes replaced the corporation could go to hell. They are investing in him — not in the corporation. This is his argument for them to grant him a promise that if he continues to run the company and the corporation succeeds as much as he is telling them it will succeed if he continues to run it, then they will pay him a trillion-dollar bonus. Or else, they might as well fire him. He is implicitly saying to them: “If I get replaced, your risk will be increased more than if you grant me this promise to enormously boost my profits (at your expense) if the corporation meets my targets under my continued control over it.”
He is presenting himself as the irreplaceable man.
Hitler also did.
Trump also does (and this is why many people expect him to try to find a way to run for a third term).
The same news-report about Musk’s Tesla presentation also said that “analysts believe Musk’s new package, which could be worth as much as $1 trillion, will be approved by shareholders.” If they do that, would it be faith-based investing (just like the 1934 German vote was faith-based politics)?
So, is this the right time to sell — or even to short-sell — Tesla stock?
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.
https://ericzuesse.substack.com/p/the-us-empires-argument-versus-the
https://theduran.com/the-u-s-empires-argument-versus-the-history/
The U.S. Empire’s Argument, Versus the History
26 October 2025, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)
——
THE U.S. EMPIRE’S ARGUMENT
https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pms-remarks-at-the-coalition-of-the-willing-press-conference-24-october-2025
https://archive.ph/a49Pu
F. 24 October 2025, from the Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street and The Rt Hon Sir Keir Starmer KCB KC MP [standing beside Ukraine’s leader Volodmyr Zelensky]
Your security is our security.
What happens on the frontline of Donetsk today is shaping our collective future for years to come.
That’s why Emmanuel [Macron] and I brought the Coalition of the Willing together today.
We stand with you, stronger than ever. United behind Ukraine and united with President Trump in calling for the fighting to stop now.
And for negotiations to begin from the current line of contact.
President Trump is right to have imposed sanctions on Russia’s oil majors -
As the UK has also done alongside the latest package from the EU.
And we must now maintain this pressure.
Volodymyr, you have said for months that you’re ready for a ceasefire - and ready to meet Putin.
Yet he continues to stall and play for time.
Putin is the only person who does not want to stop this war.
His strikes on civilians this week made that crystal clear once again.
Targeting energy infrastructure ahead of winter.
Hitting young children in their nursery. Claiming the lives in Kyiv of a 12-year-old girl and a six-month old baby.
This is who Putin is.
Time after time he rejects the chance to end the war.
In the last few days, he has rejected the opportunity for talks once again.
Instead making ludicrous demands for Ukrainian land which he could not and has not taken by force.
Of course that is a non-starter.
And it shows yet again that he’s not serious about peace.
So we have been clear today that we must respond.
Working with the US this Coalition is determined to go further than ever to ratchet up the pressure on Putin - from the battlefield to his war economy - because that is the only way to change his mind and push him back to the table.
And in our meeting this afternoon we came together around a clear plan for rest of this year.
First, we will act to take Russian oil and gas off the global market.
Last week the UK became the first country to sanction all of Russia’s oil majors.
On Wednesday, the US acted decisively to join us.
Together with further sanctions from the EU we are choking off funding to Russia’s war machine.
I am urging others to take these steps too to go further to reduce their dependencies and incentivise third countries to stop buying these tainted resources.
Second, we are determined to push on with the progress on Russia’s sovereign assets and unlock billions to help finance Ukraine’s defence.
The bill for Russia’s destruction in Ukraine should be paid by Russia.
So we want to move ahead at speed with the work needed to deliver reparations loans.
And get the funds flowing to Ukraine.
Third, we are strengthening Ukraine’s air defence.
To protect its civilians and its energy infrastructure.
I announced today that we are accelerating our UK program. To provide Ukraine with more than 5,000 lightweight-multirole missiles.
This program has created hundreds of brilliant jobs in Belfast and they are working now to deliver an additional 140 missiles ahead of schedule.
To bolster Ukraine’s defences through the depths of winter.
Fourth, we will keep up the military pressure on Putin through the continued provision of long-range capabilities.
And finally, while now is the time to prioritise pressure, we are also continuing our work on security guarantees including the Multinational Force Ukraine to uphold a just and lasting peace, when that day finally comes.
Because, I say it again, Ukraine’s future is our future.
What happens in the weeks and months ahead is pivotal for the security of the UK and all our allies across NATO and beyond.
——
Versus
——
——
Behind that stands the deeper history, which goes back to World War Two and FDR’s plans for the United Nations, and Truman’s sabotaging and reversing those plans in order to set the U.S. onto the path of becoming the global dictator over all nations. All subsequent U.S. Presidents except JFK have followed in line with Truman’s plan. And as that “deeper history” points out and documents, this empire started with what Churchill called “the Special Relationship” between the UK empire and the U.S. Government. Keir Starmer is in this tradition: the UK/U.S. empire.
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.
https://ericzuesse.substack.com/p/if-anyone-still-doubts-that-uk-is
https://theduran.com/if-anyone-still-doubts-that-uk-is-a-dictatorship/
If Anyone Still Doubts that UK Is a Dictatorship …
26 October 2025, posted by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)
This is one of the really great articles by Craig Murray:
“36 Minute Trials and No Jury – Starmer’s Fascist Mass Courts” 204
October 17, 2025 in Uncategorized by craig
Those charged with terrorism for supporting Palestine Action will have no jury in trials limited to 36 minutes each, with prison sentences up to six months. These are the plans for Starmer Courts for mass trials of anti-Genocide protestors.
The plans are devised by Justice Michael Snow. He is the epitome of judicial prejudice. When Julian Assange appeared before Snow in the first hearing after being dragged from the Embassy, Snow called Assange a “narcissist” even though Assange had said nothing but to confirm his name, and no evidence had been led.
Snow has now decreed that those 2,000 people charged under Section 13 of the Terrorism Act with supporting Palestine Action, will be tried in batches of five at the rate of ten people a day – giving 36 court minutes for each defendant. This is a farce, a spectacle of mass show trial. The 36 minutes includes both prosecution and defence cases and cross-examination.
At a scheduling hearing on Wednesday, one of the accused, 72 year old Deborah Wilde, objected that these trials would be far too short to present a proper defence.
Snow snapped back “I’m satisfied that the time is sufficient. I am not going to give more time. Your only remedy is the High Court”.
As I am sure Snow realises, ordinary people cannot afford to go to the High Court. The worrying thing is that the trials will be held before judges including the appalling Snow, with no jury.
Here is the relevant part of Section 13 of the Terrorism Act.
Perhaps the most astonishing thing about this draconian legislation is that arousing suspicion is actually the offence. It does not matter if the suspicion turns out to be well-grounded or not. The suspicion could be totally wrong, but if you aroused the suspicion on “reasonable grounds” in a policeman’s head, you are guilty.
It is an offence of strict liability. Your intent is not considered; you may have been most concerned to stop a Genocide, or to oppose the destruction of free speech. Judge Snow and his ilk will not care. They only want to know if some half educated cop suspected you of supporting a terrorist organisation. There is no jury to whom you can explain your actions – and which would be highly likely to sympathise.
I have seen it, as an offence of strict liability, likened to possession of Class A drugs. But actually it isn’t. The correct analogy would be a crime where the offence was arousing a suspicion you possessed Class A drugs, whether you actually had any or not.
The experience of watching 2,000 upstanding citizens, most of them elderly and many of them infirm, hustled through this slaughterhouse queue of mass justice and into prison, with little opportunity to defend themselves, will be a defining moment in the UK’s headlong slide into fascism.
The best available way to fight this ridiculously unjust process which has been directly opposed by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, Volker Turk, by Amnesty International and by Liberty, is through the legal challenge to an absurd and oppressive law. This is being done in both England and Scotland, which are separate jurisdictions. I am the “petitioner” in the Scottish case.
There are precedents for different decisions in the different jurisdictions. The Scottish courts found Boris Johnson’s prorogation of parliament illegal; the English courts, legal. Ultimately the Supreme Court decided in favour of the Scottish courts. It is also possible that Palestine Action should simply operate legally in one jurisdiction and not the other – the law is frequently different in the two countries. The rationale of the legal case is explained here.
We desperately need funds. We now have a crowdfunder which pays money direct to the legal team. I understand that most people of goodwill have donated and donated to numerous causes in these terrible times. If you cannot donate, please help by spreading the crowdfunder.
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.
