The Friday Edition

Our Friday News Analysis | What the World Reads Now!

April 23, 2026

Helping to Heal a Broken Humanity (Part 81)

The Hague, 24 April 2026 | If you know of a decisive story, tell the world! We're still searching.

Editorial | A Win-Win-War ... The World’s (Trump’s) Off Ramp

By Abraham A. van Kempen
24 April 2026

What the world needs today is an exit strategy to permanently disable the Worldwide Deep State from functioning. Although the chances are slim, the possibility exists now. Why is this the case? Because the Super Western Elites are at their weakest point.

They have not successfully infiltrated Russia’s political opposition, preventing them from implementing a regime change that could have led to the Balkanization of the Russian Federation into multiple independent states, as they accomplished in the former Yugoslavia.

They employed a divide-and-conquer approach in Ukraine, which led to the overthrow of its democratically elected government in 2014. As a result, Ukraine has become a proxy for the operatives and foot soldiers of the World Wide Deep State. However, they have not succeeded in attacking, invading, defeating, dividing, conquering, or controlling Russia, which is the Eurasian land bridge connecting East and West. For centuries, the global Deep State has sought to influence events in Russia. Ruling the land bridge between East and West means controlling the world.

The Worldwide Deep State is also struggling significantly in West Asia. Like Ukraine, Israel is another active puppet of the Deep State. The main difference is that Israel operates as a de facto NATO member state, backed by NATO’s nuclear umbrella, similar to many NATO members collectively holding over 400 nuclear warheads inside their countries. Google it!

As I wrote in my editorial last week, “President Trump knows what’s going on. The precise details are veiled in deniability – secrecy. Examine the probability of an invisible hand of the Worldwide Deep State emerging as European nations transitioned to democracy.

‘Democracy’ is a great concept on paper. But it has a dark side not taught in school. Those who are more equal than others can vote with their $trillions any time they want to change a nation’s direction in their image. In the United States, opposition to the war against Iran spans across political lines. For the first time, a majority of Americans condemn Israel’s actions in West Asia. The same is true everywhere. A clear majority of the world’s population opposes the global conflicts that lead to endless wars. Nevertheless, the winds of global war continue to blow out of control.”

...

The Deep State “... demands American blood and treasure (drawn on the national US credit card, fully financed by the Deep State to be repaid with interest by the taxpayers) to fight their wars. President Trump tries to drain this swamp. This explains why the Worldwide Deep State treats him with contempt. They can’t control him, but they virtually control all US and EU government institutions at the highest levels. So Mr. Trump uses his unique song-and-dance routines to sidestep the obvious, including the look of a clown.

Thanks to President Trump’s genius, combined with President Putin’s cool-headed realism, and President Xi’s wisdom, the Worldwide Deepstate is losing the war in Eastern Europe, West Asia, and East Asia, and control of the world’s purse strings.”

Of course, the ‘buddies’ are going to save the day. If they don’t, Russia and China will have no choice but to support Iran with everything they’ve got, including the kitchen zink. Why? They want to defeat the Worldwide Deep State. So does President Trump.

To be continued on Monday, 27 May 2026, which coincidentally is King’s Day in the Netherlands.

Enjoy your weekend,

Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor

Building the Bridge Foundation, The Hague
A Way to Get to Know One Another and the Other

Remember! Diplomacy is catalytic—transformative —while military action is cataclysmic—destructive and catastrophic.

When faced with the options to be good, bad, or ugly, let’s build bridges, not burn them. After all, mutual deterrence reigns.

JOHN MEARSHEIMER: U.S. EXPANDS IRAN WAR & DIVORCES EUROPE

Prof. John Mearsheimer argues that the United States is seeking an exit from the war in Iran because it lacks a decisive military option and faces rising economic risks from escalation, particularly to shipping routes.
He contends that domestic political pressure tied to Israel complicates any settlement, even as Iran’s leverage in the Strait of Hormuz grows.
The interview links these constraints to U.S. burden-shifting in Europe, as weapons depletion and strategic prioritization of East Asia push Washington to press Europeans to sustain Ukraine with fewer American resources.
Failing to achieve peace with Iran could significantly escalate the war in the Middle East, while also increasing tensions with Europe and other allies.
John J. Mearsheimer is the R. Wendell Harrison Distinguished Service Professor of Political Science at the University of Chicago, where he has taught since 1982.

Watch the Video Here (64 minutes, 18 seconds)

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
22 April 2026

America’s Iran war, and the limits of leverage

In a conversation with Prof. Glenn Diesen, Prof. John Mearsheimer argues that Washington lacks a decisive military option—and that simultaneous wars in the Middle East and Ukraine are accelerating a shift in America’s strategic priorities.

American policy in the Iran war has fluctuated between diplomacy and coercion. Prof. Diesen noted the White House initially accepted Iran’s “ten points” proposal but then imposed a blockade, disrupting talks. Prof. Mearsheimer said this pattern is driven by constraints, not strategy: 'Trump needs an exit strategy,' as there’s no military option.

In his account, escalation works against Washington. “If you go up the escalation ladder, it’s the Iranians who prevail, not the Americans,” he argued. The world economy, he added, is “teetering”, and a wider conflict would be “another hammer blow”—a risk that carries political consequences in America as well as economic costs abroad.

Yet a clean exit is hard to engineer. Professor Mearsheimer described the administration as “incompetent when it comes to diplomacy”, pointing to its failure to settle the Ukraine war despite repeated promises. On Iran, he said, Mr. Trump faces additional pressure from Israel and its supporters in Washington, who want to continue the campaign rather than accept a settlement that reflects what he called Iran’s battlefield advantage.

He outlined four main war objectives—regime change, ending enrichment, removing long-range missiles, and reducing Iranian support for Hamas, Hezbollah, and Houthis—and admitted, “we failed on all counts.” He argued Iran now dominates the Strait of Hormuz, setting up a “toll booth,” giving Tehran leverage and revenue. If sanctions relief isn't feasible and reparations aren't made, Tehran may seek to exert influence through transit of transit routes.

Professor Mearsheimer framed the problem as one of instruments. Air power, he said, has been tried and has not delivered a decisive outcome. Ground power—an invasion—is “not a serious option”, given force levels, domestic politics, and casualty aversion. Naval pressure, by contrast, is attractive but limited. A blockade can impose pain, but he questioned whether the U.S. Navy can sustain it for long and warned that enforcement could invite escalation if, for example, China escorted shipping.

If Washington returned to heavy strikes on Iranian infrastructure, he argued, Tehran would respond by widening the economic battlefield: shutting down the Persian Gulf, constricting the Red Sea, and attacking energy and desalination infrastructure across the Gulf. The premise, he said, would be that Iran will “take others down with us” rather than absorb punishment in isolation.

Diesen argued that Europe's situation mirrors the constrained logic he described. He cited Elbridge Colby, a senior Pentagon official, urging Europeans to take more responsibility for Ukraine’s defense. Mearsheimer saw these remarks as 'buck-passing,' noting the U.S. has diverted resources to the Middle East, weakening its position in East Asia, where China is the main threat. The message is that Europe can't rely on America alone for long-term military support.

Even if Washington and Tehran agree, Professor Mearsheimer believes hostility between Israel and Iran will persist. He said regional stability efforts must consider Hamas and Hezbollah, linked to Iran and vital to Israel’s security. He also noted that conflicts seen as existential in Europe and the Middle East are hard to resolve and tend to escalate.

GUEST EDITORIAL | IRAN’S ECONOMIC NUCLEAR OPTION AND THE MULTIPOLAR SHIFT

The narrow passage reshaping the world

Speculum Orientis reveals how the Strait of Hormuz has become the decisive fulcrum in the unraveling of the American-led global order.

Speculum Orientis
Substack.com
Multipolar Press
21 April 2026

Respectfully Annotated by Abraham A. van Kempen

The two-week ceasefire in Iran, mediated by Pakistan, began on April 8 and ended on April 22, and its extension remains uncertain as of April 17, with Washington not officially agreeing to prolong it.

After Lebanon announced a ceasefire, Iran's Foreign Minister said commercial vessels could pass through the Strait of Hormuz via existing routes if the ceasefire terms are honored. President Trump then declared the blockade would stay until a comprehensive agreement is reached. We are nearing a critical point at which the conflict's effects will become clear, and the world remains on the edge of major change.

The outcome of these opposing conditions reaching an agreement remains uncertain, but one clear result is the economic effect of this uncertainty and the potential to reverse the current situation.

Markets have already shown their view on the balance of power. Oil prices fell by over 12 percent in one session despite stock markets hitting record highs. This doesn't signal confidence in peace but highlights two key realities.

The decline in crude futures indicates the Strait of Hormuz is now under Iranian influence, not permanently closed but controllable by Tehran to sway global energy flows.
The market recognizes that Iran, not the U.S. Navy, now controls this crucial chokepoint.
Secondly, the stock market rally signals a short-term respite as Iran has met the conditions after the Lebanon ceasefire.
Tehran has shown restraint and precision by allowing limited transit on announced routes, establishing credibility to revoke or extend as needed.
This compliance isn't submission; it's leverage.

Iran can open and close the Strait at will, a strategic asset acknowledged worldwide, more powerful than any warship in the Persian Gulf.

The ceasefire was inherently fragile and temporary, influenced by the historical record of the US and Israel's adherence to ceasefire agreements, as well as Israel's strategic pursuit of a broader Great Israel Project.
Tehran highlighted the fragility of its response. The Deputy dismissed the American stance as Twitter-style rhetoric and baseless claims aimed at undermining Iran’s pride, built through steadfast defenses. Iran clarified that its partial, cautious reopening of the Strait of Hormuz was a test of promises, warning of consequences if broken.
This language does not suggest a lasting peace but indicates a tactical pause and a test of American reliability, which Washington seems to be failing already.

The test quickly failed. On April 18, the U.S. government sent a second negotiation team to Islamabad, signaling confrontation. The next day, U.S. naval forces seized a civilian container ship in the Gulf of Oman, which Tehran saw as a trap. This violated the fragile agreement to keep sea lanes open. Iran responded by refusing to negotiate, viewing the U.S. action as an ultimatum disguised as a piracy case, according to the Foreign Ministry.

Adding to the retreat from diplomacy, Jerusalem escalated on April 20 when Prime Minister Netanyahu, during a prime-time address linked to the Great Israel Project, warned, "We haven’t finished the job in Iran," tying the maritime interdiction to a broader strategic goal. For Tehran, it was clear: American diplomacy was a cover for pursuing military and territorial aims with its ally.

Markets now see Iran controlling Hormuz, and Tehran’s credibility suffers from a failed U.S. reliability test. The 12 percent drop in crude suggests expectations of a conditional reopening. Any U.S. misstep could trigger a reevaluation, as seen in the seizure of a vessel bound for China and Iran’s boycott of talks. With the April 22 deadline near, the world watches as stability erodes.

The timeline shows the events leading to the collapse of the ceasefire. But a full assessment must also examine structural factors—like energy, finance, military, and alliances—that influence the conflict's long-term course and global impact.

Weeks after initial strikes, Iran sealed the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial waterway carrying 38% of the world’s crude oil, 29% of LNG, and 13% of chemical and fertilizer shipments. Transit has dropped 90-95%. Oil futures top $120 per barrel, and hubs like Singapore are selling oil and diesel above $200 per barrel, surpassing levels seen during the Russia-Ukraine conflict. This shift challenges the post-1945 legal ban on aggressive war and signals a move toward multiple power centers. The U.S. enforced an invalid naval blockade on Iran. Iran claims the Strait is part of its territorial sea, citing international law and precedents, including Turkey’s Bosphorus tolls and tolls imposed by the U.S. and Canada. Historically, Denmark's Sound Dues made up two-thirds of the national income. Iran asserts sovereignty to toll passage, potentially boosting GDP by 20-25%, citing international law and damages from war initiated by Israel and the U.S. Iran also threatens to shut down all trade through key waterways if the blockade continues.

Understanding the significance of this moment requires knowing what passes through the Strait of Hormuz, which, before the conflict, transported 20 million barrels of oil daily and a third of the global fertilizer trade, mainly urea. The Middle East produces about 12% of global petrochemicals, worth $733 billion annually, and supports $3.8 trillion in downstream products. The crisis worsened with damage to Gulf refining facilities, and Israel's strikes on civilian and industrial sites, including Iran’s main steel producer and the South Pars gas field, the world's largest, supplying 70% of Iran’s gas. Iran responded by halting petrochemical exports and focusing on domestic needs, risking worldwide hunger, industrial shutdowns, and supply chain collapse within two quarters.

The petrodollar system, based on U.S. security for Gulf monarchies in exchange for dollar-priced oil and reinvestment in U.S. assets, has been broken by the war in Iran. Security is devalued as the U.S. Navy can't protect Gulf ports. Dollar pricing is declining; Gulf countries are shifting away from dollar transactions. Gulf sovereign wealth funds are selling Western assets at discounts to fund domestic needs due to falling exports and the collapse of tourism. The Gulf economic model—relying on tax havens, money laundering, and U.S.-dependent financial services—is now obsolete.

The military aspect is often misunderstood. Western media claimed interception rates of 90-99 percent, but MIT Professor Theodore Postol shows otherwise. His analysis reveals that the true interception rate of Iranian missiles by US Patriot systems is below 5 percent. He describes the Patriot program as a deception, with no real improvements since the 1990s. Ground-based radar struggles to track hypersonic targets, and Iran uses inflatable decoys alongside warheads, confusing Patriot radars into detecting fifty targets when only ten are real. Western defenses were never designed to handle this.

The cost-exchange ratio shows Iran's drones are cheap compared to US interceptors: Shahed drones cost $10,000-$20,000, while Patriot and Arrow interceptors cost $4 million and $2-$3 million, respectively. Iran can deploy a thousand drones for the price of one Patriot battery. Postol notes that the US used years of cruise missile production in 10 days, which isn't sustainable in the long term. Iran's drone operations can continue indefinitely, receiving real-time targeting data from Chinese and Russian satellites. Meanwhile, US radars and AWACS in the Gulf have been destroyed, removing the surveillance edge that supported US power projection.

Iran’s strategy severely impacted maritime insurance, with premiums nearly 10 times higher. Post-ceasefire, Lloyd’s noted insurance remains available but unattractive, as shipowners reject terms. About 20,000 seafarers are stranded, and the strait's closure results from financial calculations, exemplifying asymmetric warfare—making trade prohibitively expensive to halt it voluntarily.

Ceasefire talks facilitated by Pakistan in Islamabad on April 12-13, 2026, failed after extended negotiations without agreement. Iran accused the US of maximalism and imposing a blockade. Internal divisions within the American team worsened the situation; Vice President JD Vance, present but lacking negotiation authority, spent most of the summit consulting with President Trump. Netanyahu criticized Vance for reporting details as if he were part of the Israeli cabinet. Israeli bombings in Lebanon showed a full ceasefire was unlikely. On April 13, Trump announced a US naval blockade of Iranian ports, effectively admitting failure, as the US's new actions mirrored Iran's asymmetric tactics.

Since then, various serious challenges have emerged. TankerTrackers.com and satellite experts say enforcing the blockade is nearly impossible; Chinese and Pakistani VLCCs still transit with little interference, as the US Navy lacks enough surface assets to stop them without risking conflict with Beijing. Iran’s Chabahar port outside the Strait of Hormuz remains a key gap, allowing vital goods to flow freely. Any effort to tighten the blockade would mean capturing Chinese ships—an escalation that could halt all trade and spike energy prices well beyond $150 per barrel. In this unstable environment, markets can fluctuate dramatically, and fertilizer shortages could cause food price shocks within two quarters. If the US retreats or escalation stalls, Iran's leaders warn they are ready to retaliate against major Persian Gulf ports. Countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Bahrain, and Qatar could get involved, risking a broader conflict that might surpass current containment efforts.

The immediate effects are clear and likely to create a new historical event, especially if paired with a strong El Niño later this year. Ripple effects reach the stock market, where the recent rally was driven by the energy-intensive AI sector. Rising oil prices prompted a reevaluation of Big Tech's $635 billion AI infrastructure plan in 2026. Software stocks decline, indicating this is not just a sector correction but a broader revaluation, as investors realize the energy basis of the AI revolution is undermined.

The energy shock affects US prices in sectors like transport, fertilizer, and electricity. The Federal Reserve faces a dilemma: with $37 trillion in total debt—$28 trillion public—each 1% increase in the rate adds $280 billion in interest annually. A 75-basis-point hike would push payments over $1.2 trillion, exceeding the non-defense discretionary budget. With a 122% debt-to-GDP ratio, the US risks defaulting on $18 trillion in household debt, $1.3 trillion in credit cards at 22% APR, and $1.5 trillion in maturing real estate debt. The service sector—80% of GDP—may collapse as debt and energy costs erode incomes, potentially doubling unemployment to 8% within six months. As global oil prices soar, Japan must sell US Treasury holdings to fund energy costs, hastening the dollar's decline and worsening the crisis caused by domestic issues.

While the U.S. struggles to enforce its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, it also secures another strategic area. On April 13, the U.S. and Indonesia agreed on a defense deal allowing U.S. aircraft to operate in Indonesia. This targets the Strait of Malacca, which handles 48% of China’s imports and 40% of global container trade. For China, this is the Malacca Dilemma—an ongoing vulnerability they tried to address, but it's now too late.

China expands influence through Belt and Road, pipelines, Arctic routes, and Gwadar, securing the Eurasian Heartland and countering maritime empires—echoing Mackinder’s theory. The US-Indonesia deal provides surveillance, not control. Iran’s land-train links China, Iran, and Russia, countering surveillance. The high-speed trans-Eurasian rail, once Trump’s focus, now makes maritime blockades of energy and components ineffective, as Iran rebuilds quickly.

The ten BRICS members did not issue a joint statement or response to the war. As BRICS chair, India remained silent, making BRICS no longer a counterbalance. Attention shifted to the strengthened Shanghai Cooperation Organization, now led by China, Russia, Iran, and Pakistan. Tehran, Moscow, and Beijing are the main pillars, with China providing economic stability and alternative payment systems, such as integrating Iran’s SEPAM into China’s CIPS to bypass SWIFT, enabling Iran to collect maritime tolls in digital Yuan or gold-backed accounts instantly, thereby countering US sanctions. Russia offers military strength, sanctions evasion, and the Power of Siberia pipeline. Iran provides asymmetric warfare and control of Hormuz, weakening US naval dominance. Pakistan’s strategic location, bordering Iran, Afghanistan, China, and India, and the Gwadar port on the Arabian Sea. This reflects Primakov’s vision of a strategic triangle for 2026, linking Moscow, Beijing, and Tehran.

The war in Ukraine has effectively ended— not through a treaty, but due to demographic exhaustion. Russia endured sanctions, revitalized its military industry, and emerged as a superpower. Meanwhile, the West, which invested heavily in a Ukrainian victory, now faces defeat. Large loans from the World Bank and IMF have pushed countries like Britain and France toward bankruptcy, their economies crippled by unmanageable debt and the fall of NATO's perceived superiority. The conflict revealed NATO as a depleted structure, unable to match Russia's industrial output or sustain a prolonged war.

The US and EU face tough choices: accept the end of unipolar dominance and pursue a new multipolar order or escalate conflict by attacking Iranian oil facilities, launching invasions, or striking Iranian leaders, risking wider conflicts, energy crises, trade disruption, and nuclear escalation. The threat grows after Israel targeted a building near Bushehr with Russian specialists, and Iran hit the Shimon Peres Negev Nuclear Research Center close to Dimona.

Forty days of conflict show Iran's resilience and the inability of the US and Israel to deliver a decisive defeat. Despite attacks, Iran can absorb blows and retaliate through strategic targets, making rapid decapitation strategies ineffective. If tensions escalate, Iran plans to block the Hormuz Strait with sea mines, suicide drones, cruise missiles, and ballistic missiles, turning naval passages into deadly risks for Western ships.

This compares poker and chess players. The US engages in poker with threats, bluffs, blockades, and claims of interception. Iran plays chess, using time, geography, economic leverage, and asymmetric tactics to pressure the US. Poker players seek to win hands; chess players aim to win wars.

Some see this analysis as indicating a dark, Hobbesian era where conflict, the collapse of international law, and divisions into hostile camps occur. The post-1945 liberal order has vanished; the US no longer ensures the global commons; maritime chokepoints are contested; and food and energy security are in question. We face a more perilous, unstable world.

Arguing that a transition to multipolarity can occur without major changes—such as the collapse of the petrodollar, US naval power, Western assets, or a Eurasian shift—is naive or overly optimistic. The unipolar order ended not because of Iranian drones but because it was unsustainable. The US built a global system based on military might, dollar dominance, and security guarantees it couldn't sustain. Its collapse was inevitable; Iran just sparked it.

The 2026 Iran conflict signals the start of the post–Cold War order's collapse. Iran proves that asymmetric warfare and terrain can challenge even the strongest navy. The petrodollar is weakening as its supporter falters. Insurance companies have effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz more decisively than any military force. A new alliance, largely outside Western influence, is forming. Expect high energy prices, declining food security, pressured markets, and a weakening dollar. Many in the Global South see the end of relying on U.S. security, markets, and institutions. A new global order is emerging in the Strait, visible already. The key question is whether this transition will be smooth or lead to disaster. With the April 22 ceasefire deadline approaching, the outcome will soon be clear.

This article does not assume that these variables alone determine outcomes; it recognizes that other important factors exist beyond a purely positivist, strictly scientific perspective, and it intentionally limits its analytical scope accordingly.

What is the Side of the Story that is Not Yet Decisive? Edited and annotated by Abraham A. van Kempen

GLENN DIESEN: CHINA & RUSSIA'S IRAN STRATEGY RESHAPING GLOBAL POWER

Professor Diesen is an academic, author, editor, and political commentator. His research primarily focuses on:

Russian foreign policy
The geoeconomics of Greater Eurasia
The emerging strategic partnership between Russia and China.

Watch the Video Here (38 minutes, 57 seconds)

Host Anthony Fatseas
WTFinance Podcast
17 April 2026

In this episode of the WTFinance podcast, I was delighted to welcome back Prof. Glenn Diesen.

Prof. Glenn Diesen is a political scientist at the University of South-Eastern Norway. He also serves as an associate editor for Russia in Global Affairs and is among the most cited experts on Russian foreign policy and Eurasian integration. His book, The Ukraine War and the Eurasian World Order, has been praised by John Mearsheimer as essential reading for anyone seeking to understand the significant global power shift underway.

During our discussion, we covered the overview of the geopolitical situation, extended proxy wars, the global economic fallout, conflict de-escalation strategies, the potential for another Suez crisis, and more.

0:00 – Introduction
2:56 - Overview of geopolitical situation
5:36 - Extended proxy war
8:22 - Iran leverage
12:01 - Attacking GCC neighbors
15:08 - China & Russia supporting Iran
17:45 - Global economic fallout
19:51 - Conflict off-ramp?
22:54 - Trump destroying uni hegemony?
25:48 - Another Suez crisis?
28:14 - Middle powers
33:22 - Re-militarisation of the world
36:01 - Future world

38:57 - One message to take away?

Diesen’s latest books are The Ukraine War & the Eurasian World Order (2024); Russophobia: Propaganda in International Politics (2022), Europe as the Western Peninsula of Greater Eurasia: Geoeconomic Regions in a Multipolar World (2021); Russian Conservatism: Managing Change under Permanent Revolution (2021); Great Power Politics in the Fourth Industrial Rivalry: The Geoeconomics of Technological Sovereignty (2021); The Return of Eurasia (2021); Russia in a Changing World (2020); The Decay of Western Civilisation and Resurgence of Russia: Between Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft (2018); Russia’s Geoeconomic Strategy for a Greater Eurasia (2017); and EU and NATO relations with Russia: After the collapse of the Soviet Union (2015).

INSIDE AN IRANIAN PRO-GOV'T RALLY DEFYING TRUMP'S WAR

A 3-minute Video

Wyatt Reed: "I want to send a message to Donald Trump and the xxx Netanyahu: You're threatening Iran, but as long as Iran exists, you need to stay in your place."

Watch the Video Here (02 minutes, 48 seconds)

Host Wyatt Reed
Grayzone
Substack.com
22 April 2026

Wyatt Reed from The Grayzone visits Tabriz, Iran, on April 21 to witness a nightly rally where Iranians of all ages denounce the US-Israeli war and back their government's actions. Wyatt talks with local youth and female first responders about their perspectives on the war and how Western media and diaspora Persians portray it.

WANG WEN: CHINA'S PERSPECTIVES & ROLE IN THE IRAN WAR

Prof. Wang Wen discusses China's perspective on the Iran War.

He is the Dean and Professor at the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University of China (RDCY).
Additionally, he is the Deputy Dean of the Silk Road School, a Distinguished Professor, and the Executive Director of the China-US People-to-People Exchange Research Center at Renmin University.
He also serves as Secretary-General of the Green Finance Committee of the China Society for Finance and Banking, is a Research Fellow at the Financial Research Center of the State Council's Counselor Office, and is a visiting professor at over 10 universities worldwide.

Watch the Video Here (35 minutes, 36 seconds)

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
20 April 2026

Renmin University dean Wang Wen on China’s priorities in the Middle East, energy security, and what the conflict signals about the post–Cold War order.

Wang Wen, a professor and dean at Renmin University's Changyang Institute and the School of Global Leadership, shares insights on Beijing's view of the Iran conflict, risks to China’s energy and Belt and Road initiatives, and why many Chinese scholars see the war as part of a move toward a multipolar world.

“China emphasizes resolving disputes through political negotiation and opposes unilateral military action not authorized by the UN.”
“A growing view in China’s strategic community is that the post–Cold War order is drawing to a close and the world is entering a multipolar era.”
“The larger takeaway is diversification: transport corridors and energy sources—so no single chokepoint can decide the outcome.”

How Beijing Sees the War in Iran—and the Multipolar Moment

PROF. DIESEN: How does Beijing view Iran's conflict? Is it mainly a regional US-Iran struggle or part of a broader systemic rivalry involving China?

PROF. WANG WEN states China favors resolving disputes via political negotiation, opposing unilateral military actions not authorized by the UN. Beijing calls for a ceasefire, respecting sovereignty and development rights, and opposes “maximum pressure.”

PROF. WANG WEN notes many Chinese scholars believe the world has seen too many wars since the Cold War. Major conflicts like the Gulf War, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Ukraine, and the Middle East involved U.S. action or support. This history influences Beijing's views on risks to the international order and the global economy.

PROF. DIESEN: The last 30+ years have been seen as stable in the West, but the long list of wars and recent chaos suggests that rules are breaking down. Is the war in Iran a turning point in the global order?

PROF. WANG WEN notes that China’s strategic community sees the post–Cold War order ending and a shift to a multipolar world. Two key trends are: the U.S. declining in global dominance, and rising powers like China, India, Russia, and Brazil challenging Washington's containment.

PROF. DIESEN: China appears cautious, maintaining a low profile despite US threats to blockade Iranian ports and sanction Chinese banks. Is this restraint strategic or a sign of limited influence?

PROF. WANG WEN says that the low-profile approach reflects China’s broader foreign policy of prioritizing de-escalation, negotiation, and the avoidance of conflict escalation. China maintains normal trade relations—even with adversaries—during the Russia–Ukraine war.

PROF. WANG WEN argues that threatening Chinese banks for trading with Iran is unreasonable. Beijing’s message is that it will respond with countermeasures if sanctions are imposed, and Washington may hesitate to escalate due to potential political and economic blowback.

PROF. DIESEN: How does the war affect China’s Belt and Road investments and its energy security?

PROF. WANG WEN states that China invested about $5 billion in Iran. Since clashes started, many projects have been paused, and personnel have been evacuated. He highlights the energy aspect: 35% of China’s oil imports go through the Strait of Hormuz, making disruptions strategically sensitive.

PROF. WANG WEN emphasizes a push for “high-disenfranchisement” Belt and Road planning: more diversified transport corridors, especially overland links across Eurasia, and a broader mix of energy suppliers—Russia, Central Asia, Africa, and South America—to reduce dependence on any single chokepoint.

PROF. DIESEN: Some argue U.S. involvement in the Middle East and Ukraine opens a “window” for China on Taiwan. Does this war make a conflict in Taiwan more or less likely?

PROF. WANG WEN states that Beijing’s Taiwan strategy depends on Taiwan's move toward independence, not on U.S. capacity, and prefers a peaceful resolution.

PROF. DIESEN: How could the conflict reshape relations among the U.S., China, and Russia—especially with oil prices rising?

PROF. WANG WEN sees the war tightening the geopolitical triangle: the U.S. becomes more constrained, Russia benefits from high oil prices, and China faces energy risks but less direct pressure from Washington. He argues the U.S. can't contain both China and Russia now.

PROF. DIESEN: If the war drags on, what are the main risks—and are there any opportunities—for China?

PROF. WANG WEN highlights risks, including vulnerable energy routes, higher import costs that feed into inflation, weaker regional trade, and increased operational risks for Belt and Road projects. He also argues China’s advantage is its focus on stability, as discussed in his book, New Strategic Opportunity: China and the World Towards 2035, which views “peace as opportunity" amid global turbulence.

PROF. DIESEN: Thank you for taking the time. I look forward to seeing you in Beijing soon.

WANG WEN: Thank you.

GUEST EDITORIAL | THEIR VILEST HOUR

The Starmer Regime is turning Britain into a genocide-complicit police state

Imagine you're aware of a gang of serial killers committing sadistic crimes openly. You feel morally obliged to intervene, but corrupt authorities, complicit with the killers, prevent you from calling the police.

By Tarik Cyril Amar
Substack.com
19 April 2026

Respectfully Annotated by Abraham A. van Kempen

Indeed, if you resist the killers and their accomplices, the police and prosecutors will likely target you instead of them, shielding the criminals. Even if you can't confront the killers directly, you can hinder their crimes by exposing their operations, scandalous activities, and immense power to the public.

This is the situation faced by activists of the British direct-action group Palestine Action. In fact, it is even more severe than the hypothetical scenario described earlier because we are not just dealing with a gang of serial killers but with an entire state. This small yet extremely aggressive and heavily armed state—including rogue nuclear weapons—pursues a relentless agenda of publicly declared genocide, ethnic cleansing, systematic torture, sexual violence, territorial expansion (more countries attacked last year than any other), and a form of Jewish supremacist racism and apartheid encoded in its laws. It also seeks lebensraum, a goal even hinted at in its mainstream media.

That monstrous state—'monster' is the right word—is closely linked to and sometimes dominates the US. It often flouts international law and ethics, and influences many Western countries that claim to value ethics but are complicit in genocide. Palestine Action confronts Israel and its aggressive, condemned Zionism.

In the near future, Palestine Action’s activists and supporters, currently facing persecution and media smears, will likely be remembered as heroes. They may be celebrated like those who opposed the Nazis, including Jewish genocide. Today, in Britain, Palestine Action is committed to ending the country's complicity in Israel’s crimes.

Currently, they face prosecution, harassment, and worse from the same British state and judicial system known for its past obstinate torture of Julian Assange, the world's most prominent political prisoner. On an individual level, the relentless pursuit of Assange exemplifies the cynicism, cruelty, and lawless disregard—both domestic and international—that the West has also demonstrated toward Israel’s atrocities, especially the Gaza genocide.

The repression against Palestine Action for opposing genocide has taken various forms. After the group challenged the Royal Air Force’s role in Israel’s atrocities, the UK government, especially Home Secretary Yvette Cooper, attempted to label it a terrorist organization. That false classification was so ludicrous that a British court ultimately revoked it. Despite having their ban declared illegal, UK authorities continue to misuse police forces to arrest protesters engaging in lawful actions, like peacefully holding signs against genocide and supporting Palestine Action. Amnesty International UK and others have condemned these arrests, and police officers with integrity should refuse to carry out such orders.

Palestine Action’s activists, including the Filton 24 and the Palestine Action Six—Samuel Corner, Jordan Devlin, Charlotte Head, Leona Kamio, Fatema Zainab Rajwani, and Zoe Rogers—faced severe harassment after a raid on Israeli weapons firm Elbit Systems in Filton, Bristol.

On 6 August 2024, activists attacked the Elbit facility, using a truck to break in and then damaging or destroying as much equipment as possible before police arrived. Their focus was clearly on property, not people. However, one activist is also accused of hitting a police officer and injuring her spine. The details of that incident remain unclear, with police recent reports suggesting the attacker may have been confused or disoriented after being sprayed with PAVA spray.

Overall, it’s clear that the Palestine Six aimed to inflict maximum harm on a company symbolizing Israel’s genocidal militarism and its crimes. Targeting Elbit, “Israel’s largest arms manufacturer," is, as investigative journalist Max Blumenthal notes, akin to disrupting the railway lines to Auschwitz—a morally righteous act of resistance against genocide and a way to protect its victims by undermining the perpetrators’ operations.

Official Britain has imposed harsh pretrial detention on Palestine Action activists, leading to international protests, hunger strikes, and a suicide attempt. Thousands have been arrested merely for showing solidarity, alongside other resistors like Dr. Rahmeh Aladwan. It is fair to say that Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Britain is transforming into a police state to defend the genocidal Israeli regime.

The policy remains: after the Filton Six were acquitted in an initial jury trial, the prosecution is now pursuing a second trial. Blumenthal describes it as a deliberate setup, with defendants unfairly framed and rights denied. British authorities use censorship to hide manipulation, preventing defendants from explaining motives or mentioning Israel's ongoing genocide. The jury is misled into thinking they are judging ordinary crimes, while the judge can reframe findings to impose terrorism charges. This unfair practice has led to gag orders on the press, which are being followed.

Alternative media outside Britain and a brave MP from Britain’s House of Commons have spoken out on this issue. Thankfully, the growing Starmer police and censorship state probably won't be able to completely shield its citizens. However, this doesn't change the fact that we're witnessing a bold attempt to greatly diminish human rights, civil liberties, and the rule of law.

All of this is in support of Israel, which is committing genocide. Moreover, Britain is not alone but typical: in the West, defending genocidal Israel has resulted in similar effects in many nations, including Germany, Australia, and the US. The fight for justice and freedom for Palestine is a struggle for everyone. Essentially, the only way Israel can continue its crimes unchecked is by subjecting all of us to increasing oppression.

BUILDING THE BRIDGE! | A WAY TO GET TO KNOW THE OTHER AND ONE ANOTHER

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Photo Credit: Abraham A. van Kempen, our home away from home on the Dead Sea

By Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor
Updated 19 January 2024

Those who commit to 'healing our broken humanity' build intercultural bridges to learn to know and understand one another and others. Readers who thumb through the Building the Bridge (BTB) pages are not mindless sheep following other mindless sheep. They THINK. They want to be at the forefront of making a difference. They're seeking the bigger picture to expand their horizons. They don't need BTB or anyone else to confirm their biases.

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Accurate knowledge fosters understanding, dispels prejudice, and sparks a desire to learn more about the subject. Words have an extraordinary power to bring people together, divide them, forge bonds of friendship, or provoke hostility. Modern technology offers unprecedented possibilities for good, fostering harmony and reconciliation. Yet, its misuse can cause untold harm, leading to misunderstandings, prejudices, and conflicts.

Continue reading

A Free Trial for Life – SUBSCRIBE NOW!

• It's quick and straightforward.

• We won’t ask for your credit card number.

• Just enter your e-mail address to receive your complimentary free-for-life subscription to our newsletter.

• Please include your First and Last Name.

• We won’t share or sell your e-mail address.

_________________________

Related Articles Recently Posted on www.buildingthebridgefoundation.com:

OUR FRIDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR WEDNESDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR MONDAY EDITION

________________________