Germán & Co 8/19/25 Germán & Co 8/19/25

The Tomato’s Journey: Poetry, Pride, and Prosperity…

When the chronicles of this century are penned, the humble tomato may emerge not merely as sustenance or commerce, but as a symbol—a testament that humanity, despite its divides and aspirations, can find unity through something as simple, as timeless, as a fruit that once journeyed across oceans in quiet and transformed the world forever.

All rights are reserved to German & Co.

“Pablo Neruda found in it the poetry of abundance. Antonio Banderas upheld it as a symbol of dignity. Don Félix María García turned it into a source of prosperity for his nation. Three men, two continents, three perspectives—but one fruit. A fruit that connects soil to soul, kitchens to empires, and memory to the future…

Just a Single Penny in 2025—Yet the Work Burns Bright

250,000 readers. Countless hours of independent analysis. And in 2025—just a single contribution.

We uncover the patterns where geopolitics meets energy — work powered by rigorous research, licensed data, and a commitment to clarity in an age of noise. But even the brightest flame needs fuel. Always, just a single pound, euro, yen, franc, mark, crown, or rupee is enough. Supporting us isn’t impossible — it’s what keeps the lights burning.

This keeps the imagery (“brightest flame”) but appeals to support a bit smoother and easier to read.

Support our work:
PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com
IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611
Swish: 076 423 90 79
Stripe: [Donation Link]

If you can’t give, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central. It costs nothing and can carry the truth further.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1957682348461302215

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tomatos-journey-poetry-pride-prosperity-germ%C3%A1n-toro-ghio-aue5f

The times are uncertain. The need for clarity is not.

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 19, 2025

________________________________________

#Agriculture #FoodIndustry #GlobalMarkets #CulturalHeritage #Storytelling

________________________________________

Introduction:

The Tomato’s Unlikely Rise Imagine a world without tomatoes—no spaghetti al pomodoro, no gazpacho andaluz, no ketchup, and no Bloody Mary. Hard to picture. Yet for centuries, this vibrant fruit was met with suspicion and fear in Europe. Brought from the Americas by Spanish conquistadors, tomatoes were initially believed to be poisonous, associated with the deadly nightshade family. It took nearly 200 years for Europeans to embrace the tomato, transforming it from a feared fruit into a cornerstone of global cuisine.

But the tomato’s story isn’t just about culinary redemption. It’s also a story of love—celebrated by poets, farmers, and cultures across the world. Among its most passionate admirers was Pablo Neruda, the Chilean poet, communist, sybarite. Women, borgoñas with dust thick on their bottles—especially the ones he bought with the few coins from his Nobel Prize—all could wait. But not the tomato. For this fruit, he felt a genuine, unashamed passion. So much so that he wrote his Ode to the Tomato (Oda al Tomate), turning it into a symbol of life, love, and revolution. Neruda’s ode reminds us that the tomato is more than food; it is a muse, a metaphor, and a vessel of our shared human experience.

And yet the arc of history bent in its favour. In Naples, among the poor and the hungry, the tomato was redeemed. Combined with pasta, it created a cuisine that would conquer the Mediterranean and beyond. From that moment, the fruit of suspicion became the crown of kitchens. Today, it rules not only on the table but in the field, the factory, and the market: 186 million tons harvested each year, a global trade worth billions, an empire of flavour and industry.

But numbers alone cannot capture its meaning. The tomato carries poetry, pride, and prosperity. In Pablo Neruda’s verses, it became a hymn to abundance; in Antonio Banderas’ wit, a defence of cultural dignity; in Don Félix María García’s vision, the foundation of a Dominican agricultural revolution: three figures, three continents, one destiny.

This is the journey of the tomato — from suspicion to sovereignty, from fruit to force, from the silence of seeds to the red destiny of nations.

________________________________________

I. Suspicion: The Poisoned Crown

The story begins not in Europe but in the sacred gardens of the Americas. Long before conquistadors set sail, the peoples of Mesoamerica cultivated the tomato with reverence. The Nahua called it tomatl, a fruit both nourishing and symbolic, woven into ritual and diet. It was a fruit of the sun—its red skin recalling fire, its seeds recalling fertility.

When Hernán Cortés marched on Tenochtitlán, he carried more than gold back to Spain. He had seeds, small and fragile, that contained within them the future of global cuisine. Yet Europe did not recognize the gift. Instead, it recoiled.

The tomato belongs to the nightshade family, kin to belladonna and mandrake. Physicians and priests alike declared it dangerous. Aristocrats who tasted it fell ill and sometimes died, though not from the tomato itself but from the lead of their pewter plates, whose acidic reaction the fruit had merely awakened. Rumour does not ask for proof. The tomato became the “poison apple,” a fruit of death.

Two centuries passed under this shadow. In the markets of Paris and London, the tomato remained ornamental, grown for beauty rather than consumption. But in Naples—poor, crowded, and hungry—the people took a chance. They discovered that tomatoes cooked with pasta created something miraculous. Out of suspicion was born a national cuisine. What the aristocrats rejected, the poor embraced, and from their embrace came glory: spaghetti al pomodoro, pizza margherita, the Mediterranean table.

Suspicion has given way to sovereignty.

________________________________________

II. Empire: The Red Continent

Today, the tomato commands a world-spanning empire. The production is staggering:

China: more than 68 million tons annually, nearly 37% of the global harvest.
India: over 20 million tons, with greenhouse cultivation expanding at an unprecedented speed.
Turkey and the United States: 13 and 12 million tons, respectively.
Italy and Spain: smaller producers, but global powers in processing and shaping how the fruit is consumed everywhere.

The industry is no longer just fields and farmers; it is processing, packaging, and global logistics. Italy transforms 64% of its harvest into sauces, pastes, and canned goods. Spain follows with 39%, and the United States with 10%. India, despite its vast output, processes barely 1%—a sign of both untapped potential and lost opportunity.

By 2024, global tomato processing reached nearly 46 million tons, with China again leading the charge. Entire economies are now tethered to the fruit: $10.7 billion in international trade, 38% of global output in processed goods, and rising consumption in West Africa and the Middle East, where demand has surged nearly 30%.

Yet this empire is fragile. Climate change threatens harvests: Iran’s 2024 crop collapsed by 35% as temperatures rose beyond 113°F. Meanwhile, controlled-environment agriculture, with its glass houses and artificial light, produces yields six times higher than open fields. The tomato, once feared as unnatural, now thrives most securely in engineered environments.

It is a paradox. A fruit once accused of poison now survives by embracing technology that defies nature.

________________________________________

III. The Poet: Abundance in Red

Pablo Neruda, the Chilean Nobel laureate, understood what others missed. To him, the tomato was not only food but metaphor. In his Ode to Tomatoes, he described summer streets overflowing with crimson, "bright halved like flesh, juice running through the city like liquid sun."

He did not see a mere fruit. He saw a symbol of earth’s generosity, a vessel of life, a connection between soil and soul. Neruda’s tomato was the harvest of centuries, the embodiment of abundance offered freely by the planet. His poetry elevated it from the kitchen to cosmos.

Neruda’s genius was to recognize in the humble tomato the eternal rhythm of human existence: the cycle of seed, fruit, and nourishment. For him, the red orb was proof that poetry resided not in marble statues or royal palaces but in the food that sustained the poor. In celebrating the tomato, he celebrated life itself.

________________________________________

IV. The Actor: Pride in Red

If Neruda turned the tomato into poetry, Antonio Banderas turned it into pride.

On an American talk show in 2019, Jimmy Fallon mocked Spain as “the Mexico of Europe.” The audience laughed. Banderas, dignified yet smiling, replied: “We gave you the tomato. And you gave us... The Tonight Show.”

It was a moment of wit, but beneath the laughter lay centuries of history. Spain had carried the tomato from the Americas to Europe; Europe had taken it to the world. In Banderas’s reply was a quiet reminder: modern cuisine itself owes a debt to Spanish ships and Indigenous fields. The tomato was not trivial—it was heritage.

In that instant, I became more than an actor. He became ambassador. With a single phrase, he defended the nation’s role in shaping global taste, and did so with elegance rather than anger.

The tomato, once despised, had become a symbol of cultural pride.

________________________________________

V. The Builder: Prosperity in Red

But poetry and pride alone cannot feed nations. To do that, the tomato required builders—entrepreneurs willing to transform vision into industry.

In 1966, in Santiago de los Caballeros, the historic heart of the Dominican Republic’s Santiago Province, Don Félix María García gathered with a small group of farmers in the town of Navarrete. The men, weathered by years of tobacco and plantain cultivation, listened in silence as García spoke.

He promised not miracles, but tomatoes—a crop many mistrusted. García insisted, "The tomato is not just for the kitchen; it's for the market, the factory, the future."

The farmers glanced at one another, sceptical. How could this soft, perishable fruit compete with the hard-earned traditions of the valley? How much money could be made from something that spoils in days? One finally muttered the doubt of all: “Eso es para Italia, no para nosotros.”

García did not flinch. He pointed to the soil, rich and dark beneath their feet. He described irrigation systems that could draw life from scarce rivers, greenhouses that could shield delicate crops from storms, and processing plants that could preserve tomatoes long after the harvest. He painted a vision not of a farm, but of an ecosystem—farmers, factories, and markets bound together by a single fruit.

It sounded improbable, almost impossible. And yet in his conviction lay a power stronger than machines or money. “With the tomato,” García said, “we can build something that belongs to all of us. It’s something that will put Navarrete and the Dominican Republic on the map.”

That same year, he founded Grupo Linda, naming it for the beauty (linda) he saw in his homeland’s potential. By February 1967—barely eight months after planting—the first harvest was processed. What had been dismissed as folly revealed itself as the beginning of an agricultural revolution.

The obstacles were formidable. Water was scarce, machinery costly, and credit uncertain. Yet García pressed forward. It provided seeds and training to reluctant farmers, guaranteed purchases for their crops, and invested in technology that met international standards. He understood that prosperity would come not from individual triumphs, but from the strength of communities bound together.

Under his leadership, Azua Province became the Dominican Republic’s “Tomato Capital.” Grupo Linda’s products travelled far beyond Caribbean shores, reaching markets in North America and Europe. The company diversified into corn, beans, pigeon peas, but tomatoes remained its beating heart.

Even now, the annual Industrial Tomato Festival of Azua celebrates this vision, attracting visitors from across the Caribbean. Grupo Linda endures as a family enterprise, guided by García’s descendants, who uphold his creed: agriculture is not merely commerce—it is dignity, community, and destiny.

In García’s hands, the tomato ceased to be a fragile fruit. It became a weapon of national confidence, a scarlet banner of prosperity.

________________________________________

Epilogue: The Red Destiny

The tomato’s journey is not merely agricultural. It is civilizational. In its red flesh we read the drama of humanity itself: discovery and suspicion, rejection and triumph, fragility and empire.

Once dismissed as poison, it now nourishes billions. Once confined to gardens of curiosity, it now spans five million hectares of earth. Once a symbol of mistrust, it has become an emblem of connection.

Pablo Neruda saw in it the poetry of abundance. Antonio Banderas defended it as a matter of dignity. Don Félix María García transformed it into prosperity for his nation. Three men, three continents, three visions—but one fruit. A fruit that links soil to soul, kitchens to empires, memory to future.

Today, as climate change reshapes our fields and technology encases harvests in glass, the tomato remains what it has always been: a test of our imagination. It reminds us that revolutions may begin not with swords or machines, but with seeds. That prosperity can be built not on conquest, but on cultivation. That identity can be carried not in flags, but in flavors.

The tomato is no longer the stranger, the feared intruder. It is the universal sovereign of cuisine, the silent witness of exchange, the scarlet ambassador of human resilience.

And when the histories of this century are written, perhaps the humble tomato will appear not only as food, not only as trade, but as proof—that humanity, in all its divisions and ambitions, is still capable of unity through something as simple, as enduring, as a fruit that once crossed the ocean in silence and changed the world forever.

________________________________________

The Author

Germán Toro Ghio is among the rare commentators able to traverse the frontiers between energy, politics, and culture. With an audience of more than a quarter of a million readers worldwide, he has become a reference point in the global energy debate. As an Expert in The Energy Collective and a contributor to Energy Central’s Power Perspectives™ series, he has distinguished himself by rendering legible the often opaque interplay of markets, geopolitics, and infrastructure. His career in the sector spans more than three decades, including leadership roles such as Corporate Vice-President of Communications for AES Dominicana, where he pioneered strategies for natural gas development and regional energy integration.

Yet Toro Ghio’s path extends far beyond kilowatts and contracts. Before entering the energy sector, he navigated the realms of literature, diplomacy, and cultural policy. He served as Executive Secretary of the Forum of Culture Ministers of Latin America and the Caribbean; he co-authored Colombia en el Planeta with William Ospina and Beatriz Caballero of the La Candelaria Theater Group for the UNDP; he collaborated with the Nicaraguan poet-priest Ernesto Cardenal; and, with the encouragement of Octavio Paz, he revived Carlos Martínez Rivas’s La insurrección solitaria—restoring Central American poetry to its rightful place in the currents of twentieth-century literature.

As a writer, he has published works ranging from Nicaragua Year 5—a documentary testimony in images, catalogued by Lund University—to The Non Man’s Land and Other Tales. He has directed and overseen literary editions such as Joven arte dominicano, promoted by Casa de Teatro in Santo Domingo and distributed to universities across the world.

Chilean filmmaker and political scientist Juan Forch—an architect of Chile’s historic 1990 “NO” campaign, later dramatized in Pablo Larraín’s Oscar-nominated No—has written of Toro Ghio’s narratives that they “enrich our understanding of history beyond traditional battlefields and royal courts,” praising journeys that move effortlessly “from the discomfort of a Moscow hotel to the exhilaration of the Nicaraguan jungle.”

________________________________________

Doubt.

If it concerns the soul, or life itself. If it turns to the sun, or the silence of night. If what is needed is writing or the sharpening of words. Whether the matter is crisis, politics, corporate communications, or energy.

You may call. You may write. At any hour of the day.

Within 24 hours, you will receive an answer. This is not speculation. No delay. But clarity — composed, complete, decisive.

Honorarium: €62.5 for the inquietud Germán Toro Ghio, Strategic Analyst · Writer · 30 Years of Experience...

In December 2023, Energy Central recognized outstanding contributors within the Energy & Sustainability Network during the 'Top Voices' event. The recipients of this honor were highlighted in six articles, showcasing the acknowledgment from the community. The platform facilitates professionals in disseminating their work, engaging with peers, and collaborating with industry influencers. Congratulations are extended to the 2023 Top Voices: David Hunt, Germán Toro Ghio, Schalk Cloete, and Dan Yurman for their exemplary demonstration of expertise. - Matt Chester, Energy Central

**You can't possibly deny me...**

**Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…**

Donate

Germán & Co 8/19/25 Germán & Co 8/19/25

From Cervantes’ Windmills to the Algorithms of Silence…

The task ahead is not to fear them but to recognise, safeguard, and work with them…

All rights are reserved to German & Co.

The task ahead is not to fear them but to acknowledge, protect, and collaborate with them…

Just a Single Penny in 2025—Yet the Work Burns Bright

250,000 readers. Countless hours of independent analysis. And in 2025—just a single contribution.

This keeps the imagery (“brightest flame”) but appeals to support a bit smoother and easier to read.

Support our work:
PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com
IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611
Swish: 076 423 90 79
Stripe: [Donation Link]

If you can’t give, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central. It costs nothing and can carry the truth further.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1957595133525815709

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/germ%C3%A1n-toro-ghio-6b1853242_energytransition-windpower-climateaction-activity-7363338695564832769-_mJS?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAADxILSUBt02qlesQLQfoPztburmXuxyvJik

https://www.energycentral.com/renewables/post/from-cervantes-windmills-to-the-algorithms-of-silence-dZItc19v2cfLeOS

The times are uncertain. The need for clarity is not.

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 19, 2025

________________________________________

The Uncomfortable Truth About Wind Energy in the Iberian Peninsula and Its Global Impact

Introduction: When Giants Return

Spain burns. Summers are now five degrees hotter than they were half a century ago (AEMET, 2025). Forests vanish in flames fueled by drought, negligence, and arson—not by wind turbines. Yet, in today’s digital echo chambers, wind power has been recast as a convenient scapegoat, accused of igniting wildfires and disfiguring landscapes.

This distortion is not trivial. What should be recognised as an industry generating $8.5 billion annually—0.7% of Spain’s GDP and supporting 40,000 jobs—is instead subjected to campaigns of mistrust. On social platforms, false claims spread with an efficiency far greater than verified facts: one viral rumour travels ten times faster than a scientific correction (NYU, 2025).

Four centuries after Don Quixote mistook windmills for giants, illusions continue to shape perception. But the reality is different: the giants of our century are tangible. They stand on Spanish hills, sweep across Mexican plains, turn in the winds of Denmark and Germany, reclaim coasts in the Netherlands, stretch across the Great Plains of the United States, spin on the shores of Brazil and Colombia, power the deserts of Chile, and catch the trade winds of the Dominican Republic. They do not menace humanity—they sustain it.

________________________________________

Windmills in History: From Progress to Symbol

Windmills have always stood at the intersection of imagination and material progress. The water mills of Persia in 700 B.C. increased agricultural productivity threefold. Medieval Europe’s windmills automated textile production, and the Netherlands used them in the 17th century to drain lakes and reclaim land, fuelling a commercial empire.

In literature, Cervantes transformed them into metaphors of misperception in 1605. In technology, Charles F. Brush built the first modern turbine in the U.S. in 1887. The oil shocks of the 1970s pushed Denmark to pioneer wind energy, and by the early 2000s, Spain and Mexico had adopted turbines with efficiencies reaching 45–50%.

Today, floating wind farms such as Hywind Scotland (30 MW) or the PLOCAN platform in the Canary Islands represent the new frontier. Yet in 2025, despite their demonstrable benefits, wind projects remain the subject of targeted disinformation.

________________________________________

Disinformation and Its Mechanisms

The campaigns directed against wind energy do not emerge spontaneously; they are the result of organised strategies.

Automated Accounts: In 2025, 30% of tweets blaming turbines for wildfires in Spain were traced to automated networks linked to vested fossil fuel interests (University of Navarra; InfluenceMap, 2025).
Media Amplification: Certain newspapers repeated unverified claims—120 articles in one year—while receiving advertising from companies tied to conventional energy (Transparency International, 2025).
Algorithmic Bias: Studies show that on major platforms, content that provokes outrage has far greater reach than material presenting verified evidence (NYU, 2025).

Ávila, 2022. A wildfire near a wind farm was quickly attributed to “sparks from turbines” by local outlets. The Civil Guard later established that it originated from an agricultural burn. Nevertheless, three years later, 60% of those surveyed in the region still believed the turbines were at fault (CIS, 2025).

Oaxaca, 2023. Wind farms were accused on social media of killing migratory birds. Research by UNAM demonstrated that the impact was minimal compared to the far greater mortality caused by buildings and domestic animals. The rumour, however, persisted.

Such cases illustrate how narratives of suspicion embed themselves in public opinion even when disproved, shaping resistance to technologies essential for climate mitigation.

________________________________________

Spain and Mexico: Economic Engines of Transition

Spain. The wind sector contributes $8.5 billion annually—0.7% of GDP—across 250 industrial centres, employing 40,000 people. It has reduced dependence on imported gas by saving $3 billion in 2024 alone. Companies such as Siemens Gamesa and Iberdrola export expertise worldwide, while projects like Demowfloat, with its 15 MW floating turbines, signal the country’s leadership in offshore innovation.

Mexico. The industry contributes $1.2 billion annually (0.08% of GDP) and has grown by 12% per year since 2020. In the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, 9,600 jobs and $600 million in foreign investment are tied to wind power, with firms such as ENEL, Iberdrola, and Mitsubishi active in the sector. Lower energy costs—down 15% for local industries—have already attracted global investment, including potential projects from Tesla.

The contrast with fossil sectors is stark. Spain’s coal industry accounts for 0.3% of GDP and 8,000 jobs but emits 15 million tons of CO₂ annually. Mexico’s oil industry is larger, at 2.5% of GDP and 120,000 jobs, but its volatility and 60 million tons of emissions highlight its vulnerability.

Wind, in both countries, demonstrates that energy transition is not an environmental luxury but an economic strategy.

________________________________________

Global Lessons: A Shared Transformation

Denmark’s wind industry contributes 3% of GDP and 33,000 jobs, emblematic of a model where industrial strategy and climate policy converge.

The German sector accounts for 0.5% of GDP—about $20 billion annually—while avoiding 70 million tons of CO₂ emissions. From 2025, Berlin aims to add 10 GW of new capacity each year.

The Netherlands, historically dependent on windmills for land reclamation, now earns $1.5 billion annually (0.2% of GDP) from offshore projects such as Gemini.

The United States harnesses vast plains: wind provides 10% of electricity nationally, generating $25 billion annually (0.1% of GDP).

In Latin America, Brazil and Colombia are expanding coastal wind generation to diversify from hydropower, while Chile already sources nearly 8% of its electricity from more than 3.5 GW of installed capacity. The Dominican Republic, with the Los Cocos complex, leads the Caribbean in reducing dependence on imported fuels.

China dominates by scale: with 30% of global installed capacity, wind represents about 0.3% of its GDP. State-led investments have reduced costs globally by 40% since 2010, though concerns over transparency and local impacts persist.

What unites these cases is the recognition that wind energy is no longer a marginal experiment but a central pillar of industrial and climate policy.

________________________________________

Conclusion: The Giants Are Real

The history of windmills reflects humanity’s capacity to turn imagination into infrastructure: from irrigation and textiles to land reclamation and now, climate resilience.

Yet three obstacles remain:

Disinformation, sustained and amplified by digital platforms.
Fossil interests, seeking to preserve revenue streams against a shifting energy order.
Political hesitation allows falsehoods to proliferate unchecked.

Why, then, do societies persist in blaming turbines instead of drought, negligence, or arson? Because illusions serve entrenched interests better than facts.

Cervantes’ Don Quixote mistook windmills for giants. Today, the situation is reversed: giants exist, but illusions obscure them. The difference is that these giants—from Spain to Mexico, Denmark to Germany, the Netherlands to the United States, Brazil to Colombia, Chile to the Dominican Republic, and across China’s vast fields—do not menace us. They sustain us, lighting our homes, stabilising economies, and carving a path through the climate crisis.

The task ahead is not to fear them but to recognise them, defend them, and build with them.

________________________________________

Key Sources: Spain: Red Eléctrica de España (REE, 2025); Asociación Empresarial Eólica (AEE, 2025); AEMET; Ministry for Ecological Transition. Mexico: Asociación Mexicana de Energía Eólica (AMDEE, 2025); Secretaría de Energía (SENER). Global: Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC, 2025); International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA); University of Navarra; New York University.

________________________________________

The Author

________________________________________

Doubt.

You may call. You may write. At any hour of the day.

Within 24 hours, you will receive an answer. This is not speculation. No delay. But clarity — composed, complete, decisive.

Honorarium: €62.5 for the inquietud Germán Toro Ghio, Strategic Analyst · Writer · 30 Years of Experience...

Germán & Co 8/16/25 Germán & Co 8/16/25

The Destruction of Lincoln’s Soul in the Spirit of Stalin…

This is the juncture at which history finds itself. In the absence of restraint, memory, and truth, politics devolves into mere spectacle, energy becomes a tool of coercion, and democracy deteriorates into a mockery.

All rights are reserved to German & Co.

Energy: a constant tug-of-war…

Prologue
In Anchorage’s frozen theatre, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin did not negotiate—they performed.
It was history’s most cynical charade: a masquerade of “peace” for Ukraine, staged not to resolve but to deceive. Cameras rolled, pundits speculated, and the world leaned forward in anticipation. Yet the script was betrayal, and the stage directions came from ambition and fear.
On the eve of the summit, another actor crept into the play. Belarus’s Alexander Lukashenko, Putin’s closest proxy and a relic of Soviet dominion, phoned Trump and cast himself as a shadow adviser. For the Baltics, for Finland and Sweden, the message was unmistakable: this was no dialogue of nations, but a rehearsal of expansion. Belarus was not an outsider—it was the ghost of empire, summoned to remind Europe of its fragility.
Behind the curtain, borders were being redrawn without maps, Europe reduced to a bargaining chip between two men intoxicated by visions of power. Lukashenko whispered fabrications of danger, feeding Trump’s appetite for control. The media, complicit or naive, echoed the spectacle, clapping on cue like extras in a play they barely understood.
This summit was never about peace. It was two aging autocrats, desperate to preserve relevance, scripting illusions while sacrificing Europe’s security. And the world, spellbound, allowed the farce to unfold.

Just a Single Penny in 2025—Yet the Work Burns Bright

250,000 readers. Countless hours of independent analysis. And in 2025—just a single contribution.

This keeps the imagery (“brightest flame”) but appeals to support a bit smoother and easier to read.

Support our work:
PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com
IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611
Swish: 076 423 90 79
Stripe: [Donation Link]

If you can’t give, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central. It costs nothing and can carry the truth further.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1956915051580793102

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/destruction-lincolns-soul-spirit-stalin-germ%25C3%25A1n-toro-ghio-wmxbf

https://www.energycentral.com/energy-biz/post/the-destruction-of-lincoln-s-soul-in-the-spirit-of-stalin-75HHfRSEM27ESfI

The times are uncertain. The need for clarity is not.

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 15, 2025

________________________________________

Prelude: Kennedy, Khrushchev, and the Measure of Humanity

In October 1962, John F. Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev stood on the brink of disaster. The Cuban Missile Crisis could have unleashed nuclear war, but both leaders chose restraint, envisioning not just their own survival but the preservation of humanity (Fursenko & Naftali, 1997).

Fast forward to Anchorage, Alaska, in August 2025, where the contrast was striking. Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin turned their summit into a spectacle rather than a moment of statesmanship. Cameras captured the show, flags were displayed, and YouTube proxy channels hailed a so-called “new world order” (Germán & Co., 2025). Yet, beneath the surface, there was no trace of humanism. While Kennedy and Khrushchev pulled back from the edge, Trump and Putin turned it into performance art.

________________________________________

I. Bannon’s Creed and Trump’s Stage

Abraham Lincoln dreamed of “a government of the people, by the people, for the people” (Lincoln, 1863). Donald Trump, under the tutelage of Steve Bannon’s demolitionist creed, has inverted this into a politics of personal rule: a government of the leader, for the leader, by those who serve him (Green, 2017).

Thus, in one figure, America confronts a paradox: a man who blends the flamboyance of a showman with the architecture of totalitarian power. Where Lincoln bound the Republic to its institutions, Trump threatens to dissolve it, transforming politics into a stage where loyalty counts for more than law. In this inversion, the spirit of Stalin looms in the shadow of Lincoln (Snyder, 2017).

________________________________________

II. Vodka, Fingers, and the Ritual of Collective Despair

In Soviet Moscow, men gathered at metro entrances and factory gates, silently extending fingers—one, two, or three. A code for how many comrades were needed to buy a communal bottle of vodka (na troikh).

This practice was more than alcoholism. It was a sacrament of collective amnesia, pooling despair in a society stripped of agency (Korotayev & Zinkina, 2011). The gesture conveyed both mathematics and philosophy: three fingers, three lives dissolved in forgetfulness (White, 1996).

Ethnographers note that the ritual persists, adjusted for inflation: today, five or six contributors may be needed (Levinson, 2007; Nemtsov, 2011). It remains a testament to alcohol’s role as Russia’s unofficial antidepressant against political disenfranchisement.

By contrast, Western diplomats in 2024 joked about “counting days” until Zelensky arrived to infuse energy into weary conferences (Author interviews, December 2024). Where Russia’s ritual purchased oblivion, Ukraine’s leader transforms despair into defiance, suffering into solidarity (Germán & Co., 2024).

________________________________________

III. The Farce

Vladimir Putin flew into Anchorage – indeed, a defunct Russian colony a world away from Europe – to meet Donald Trump. The choice of Alaska was freighted with meaning. Alaska was a "Frontier State" bought from the Russian Empire, the closest point between the superpowers, where 19th-century rivals once had "warm, friendly" ties. It is also the one U.S. state where Putin needn't fear an ICC arrest warrant. As one historian noted, Anchorage was "the perfect place to resurrect [Russo-American] friendship for the sake of world peace". But there was bitter irony in this encounter: Putin arrived as a pariah, flying into the land that once belonged to his empire. The backdrop slogan – "Pursuing Peace" – only highlighted the jarring incongruity of the summit.

In Russian lore, the troika – a three-horse sleigh racing through the snow – symbolises national energy and destiny. It brings to mind Gogol's image of a triumphant Russia, steering its own path with unstoppable force as others step aside. Soviet-era wisdom also revolved around threes: the phrase "soobrazit' na troikh," or "figure it out for three," referred to three men pooling their money for vodka and lively conversation. In Alaska, Trump and Putin invoked their own "na troikh" spirit: two dominant leaders joined by the shadow presence of allied voices like Lukashenko, who had spoken with Trump en route to the summit, striking deals while Europe was excluded. Ukraine and NATO were deliberately left out, relegated to the sidelines. The universal children's chant of "one-two-three" to begin a game seemed to echo on a global scale, as the duo of Putin and Trump moved forward without witnesses, Ukrainians, or any real hope for peace.

________________________________________

IV. The Alaska Summit: A Theatre of Shadows

The political setup of the Alaska meeting amounted to a diplomatic exclusion act. Neither Ukraine nor any European leader had a seat at the table, despite Brussels pleading unsuccessfully for inclusion. Trump bluntly informed Zelenskyy that the summit was not a multilateral "conference" but a bilateral talk between him and Putin. Video footage later showed the two men side by side on a red carpet, with Putin towering over Trump—a visual that would come to symbolise the entire encounter.

The venue itself carried profound symbolic weight. Alaska, a former Russian colony and Arctic outpost, represented the furthest possible distance from Berlin or Brussels, yet remained closer to Moscow than anywhere else in the United States. This was no coincidence. Alaska's 19th-century purchase from Russia—a transaction that Moscow still commemorates—offered Trump a feel-good historical narrative about transcending ideological differences. Yet the location also served Putin's purposes: nationalist voices in Moscow had publicly demanded America "return" Alaska to Russia, and by meeting there, Putin subtly reminded Americans that even distant territories could feel, in some sense, like Russian claims.

More troubling was what the venue revealed about diplomatic realities. Putin's arrival on a U.S. military base underscored his impunity—no other American leader would have welcomed an indicted war criminal on U.S. soil. Alaska had become the only place where Putin could safely set foot without facing arrest.

The public performance masked a deeper realignment. Trump framed the trip as a high-stakes peace mission, but his behavior revealed different priorities. He praised Putin effusively, later calling him "very, very smart." At the same time, the White House staging—complete with naval bands, generals' salutes, and lavish receptions—treated the Russian leader as worthy of every honour typically reserved for legitimate allies.

Behind this choreographed diplomacy lay substantive policy shifts. Reports indicate that Putin used their private hours to lecture Trump on Ukraine's "anti-Russian integration" into the West—arguments that fell on receptive ears. Trump had long shared elements of Putin's narrative, viewing Russia's territorial seizures as recoveries of historic rights. To the British press, he had previously floated exchanging Ukrainian territory for peace, while on American television he signalled readiness to lift sanctions against Moscow in exchange for any deal.

The policy implications became unmistakable in the lead-up to and aftermath of Alaska. Trump threatened to withdraw U.S. aid to Ukraine while chastising Europe for insufficient support—rhetoric that implicitly aligned with Russian talking points. His officials signalled that Ukraine's NATO membership was "off the table" indefinitely and that any settlement would require Ukrainian concessions. Putin's representatives had already briefed European leaders to expect exactly this outcome.

As German Chancellor Friedrich Merz observed, the summit created a spectacle where "two men—Trump and Putin—performed for the cameras while proxies flooded social media with narratives of a 'new global order.'" But this performance came at Europe's expense. Trump's warm embrace of Putin on American soil served as a public rebuke to European stakeholders who had sought inclusion in these crucial negotiations.

The Alaska Summit of 2025 was heralded as a turning point, but in practice, it represented something far more troubling: the transformation of diplomacy into theatre. With NATO absent, Europe sidelined, and Ukraine excluded, the meeting achieved little beyond legitimizing Putin's position while undermining the multilateral approach that had sustained Western unity. Rather than resolving the conflict, Alaska deepened existing fractures in the international system, replacing genuine strategy with carefully orchestrated spectacle.

________________________________________

V. Outcry in Europe and NATO: Deficits and Determination

When the summit’s details emerged, European capitals responded with a mixture of alarm and resolve. Leaders across the continent emphasized that Ukraine—not Russia—should have been the summit’s central figure. In a joint statement, EU and NATO representatives declared that Ukraine must have ironclad security guarantees, urged that no limitations should be placed on Ukraine’s armed forces or its cooperation with third countries, and insisted that Russia cannot be allowed a veto over Ukraine’s pathway to the EU and NATO. They reaffirmed that Ukraine’s borders are inviolable and that sanctions must continue until a just and lasting peace is achieved.

Prominent figures added clarity to this message:

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, while acknowledging Trump’s diplomatic overtures, pledged: “We will keep tightening the screws with even more sanctions until Putin stops.”
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz reassured that “Ukraine can count on our unwavering solidarity.”
French President Emmanuel Macron invoked the lessons of history, warning against trusting a Russia with a record of broken promises, and affirmed that France would stand with both Trump and Zelenskiy to uphold European security.
European Council President Donald Tusk declared: “Russia respects only the strong… The security of Poland and Europe is at a decisive moment. We must remain united.”

Despite these differences, there’s a clear consensus among European capitals: American leadership alone cannot ensure Europe’s security. As a result, nations are determined to strengthen their defenses, enhance military cooperation, and build resilience.

________________________________________

VI. The Real War: Energy

Two men stood in Anchorage, each wrapped in the aura of empire. One bore the soul of a Tsar, heir to a vanished dominion yet determined to restore its borders by force. The other carried himself as an Emperor, convinced that the world could be remade through transaction and spectacle.

For both, survival depended not merely on armies or ideology, but on something more primal: resources. Fossil fuel was their lifeline. Rare earths their secret weapon. Oil, gas, and minerals were not just commodities; they were the blood of their power, the veins through which empires breathed and the marrow that armed their soldiers.

Trump and Putin were not adversaries in this sense, but mirror-images: rulers who knew that whoever controlled the flows of oil, gas, and rare earth minerals controlled not only economies, but nations, borders, and wars. Anchorage was not a peace summit. It was the meeting of two resource sovereigns, two dealers of fossil destiny, bargaining over who would hold the spigot — and the mines — of the 21st century.

Fossil Veins and Critical Minerals

Sanctions slashed Russia’s flows to Europe, but Moscow pivoted east. Tankers rerouted toward India and China, where discounted crude and gas sustained Putin’s war chest. At the same time, Russian companies quietly deepened exports of critical minerals — nickel, palladium, uranium — materials Europe could not easily replace.

Trump understood the leverage. Behind closed doors, he dangled access to Ukrainian rare earth deposits as part of his transactional calculus. “If Ukraine’s not in NATO, you gotta give us something,” he had said before. In Anchorage, the something was minerals: the ores buried under Donbas and Dnipro that could power semiconductors, missiles, and electric cars.

Meanwhile, Europe scrambled to replace Russian gas with American LNG. Dependency did not vanish — it merely mutated. The $750 billion energy pact Trump extracted from Brussels was less about molecules of gas than about leverage over Europe’s future industries. If Washington could control Europe’s fuel and its mineral supply chains, the Emperor’s hand would be secure.

Fossil Veins of War: Disinformation and Amnesia

The war for energy and minerals is also a war for memory. By 2023, the Uppsala Conflict Data Program counted 59 armed conflicts, the highest since 1946. Many were fueled not only by weapons but by fossil veins and mineral riches.

The oil shocks of the 1970s should have taught us that dependency breeds vulnerability. Jimmy Carter glimpsed this truth with his solar panels on the White House; Ronald Reagan tore them down. Since then, fossil corporations and mining lobbies have perfected disinformation: from outright denial of climate science to Orwellian slogans like “freedom gas” or “green growth” masking extractive violence.

As Ambrose Bierce might have written in The Devil’s Dictionary:

“Disinformation: lies and half-truths, dispersed with cunning, capable of shaping perceptions, undermining wills, and aiding despots.”

Energy and rare earths are no longer mere commodities. They are weapons, propaganda tools, and battlefields.

Anchorage as Allegory

Seen through this lens, the Alaska summit was never about Ukraine alone. It was a stage on which the Tsar and the Emperor rehearsed their parts in a dual drama of hydrocarbons and minerals. The clink of glasses masked the unspoken calculus: Russia’s eastward oil flows, America’s LNG gambit, Ukraine’s buried rare earths, and Europe’s illusions.

The handshake was not a step toward peace, but a performance meant to obscure the deeper war. A war in which empires feed on hydrocarbons and rare earths, and in which every sanction, every contract, every mine, every new pipeline is a shot fired.

The illusion of reconciliation melted like Arctic ice. What remained was the truth: so long as fossil fuels and rare earths rule the veins of power, peace will remain a mirage, and war its endless shadow.

________________________________________

Epilogue: The Choice of Humanity

Kennedy and Khrushchev once stood at the edge of the abyss and chose restraint. They decided to preserve life rather than to perform before it. Trump and Putin, by contrast, approach the same precipice and mistake it for a stage. What to Kennedy was a warning, to Trump becomes theatre.

Lincoln preserved the Republic by binding it to institutions, ensuring that even in crisis, the fabric of law and democracy held. Trump toys with dissolving that inheritance, converting democracy into spectacle measured in applause and television ratings. Stalin built his empire on fear, on purges and gulags; Trump flirts with that ghost, mistaking cruelty for strength and repression for power.

But the stage on which these leaders act is not merely political. Behind every gesture lies the lifeblood of modern power: energy. Oil and gas, rare earths and uranium—these are no longer fuels alone but weapons. They bankroll wars, shape alliances, and enslave economies. Putin grasps this with the instincts of a Tsar: fossil flows are his empire’s veins. Trump grasps it with the hunger of an emperor in decline: energy markets are his last bargaining chip. To both men, resources are not humanity’s inheritance but their currency of rule.

There is another history to recall. In 1984, Desmond Tutu stood in Oslo’s cathedral to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. He did not invoke conquest or exclusion but humanity itself. He spoke of dignity for the oppressed, of justice without borders, of a peace that recognized no race as inferior and no stranger as alien. His message was simple and enduring: peace cannot be born from exclusion.

Trump has chosen the opposite creed. His politics is not sanctuary but siege. He treats immigrants as enemies, builds walls as monuments, and preaches division as destiny. Where Tutu saw the indivisibility of humanity, Trump imagines purity—a fractured world where belonging is rationed and cruelty masquerades as order.

This is the fork at which history now stands. Without restraint, without memory, without truth, politics degenerates into spectacle, energy becomes weapon, and democracy collapses into farce. To follow Trump’s path is to repeat the logic of apartheid: to exclude, to diminish, to divide. We know where that road leads—to chains, to silence, to unmarked graves.

Yet that choice is not foreclosed. It remains with us. We can think in humanity, as Kennedy and Khrushchev once did, and as Tutu reminded the world in Oslo. We can bind our future not to spectacle but to solidarity. We can remember that freedom without justice is an illusion, and democracy without compassion is a corpse.

Energy, too, must be reclaimed from the empire of spectacle. Not a weapon in the hands of strongmen, not a currency of betrayal, but a shared foundation for survival—sun, wind, and rare earths harnessed not for domination but for endurance. Humanity’s veins must not run with fossil fuels of war but with the lifeblood of a sustainable peace.

History is watching, and the abyss is before us. Either we step back into humanity, or we plunge forward into spectacle. Either Lincoln’s soul endures, or it is sacrificed to Stalin’s shadow. Either energy becomes the engine of survival, or it remains the weapon of empire. The world must decide.

________________________________________

Complementary Annex

(Background facts and data supporting the Anchorage analysis)

1. Diplomatic Context

Exclusion of Ukraine and the EU: Neither Ukraine nor European leaders were invited to Anchorage. European officials had requested inclusion but were denied; Trump insisted it was a bilateral meeting with Putin.
Belarus’s Role: On 14 August 2025, Belarusian state TV broadcast a large prisoner exchange as a propaganda victory. Lukashenko subsequently spoke with Trump before the summit, presenting himself as mediator—signaling Belarus’s integration into Russia’s strategic agenda.

2. European Reactions & NATO

Joint EU/NATO Statement: Declared Ukraine’s “ironclad security guarantees,” rejected any “Russian veto,” and reaffirmed that Ukraine’s borders are “inviolable.”
National Responses:
- UK’s Starmer pledged more sanctions until Russia stops.
- Germany’s Merz: assured “unwavering solidarity.”
- France’s Macron: invoked “lessons of history,” stressing Russia’s broken promises.
- EU Council President Donald Tusk: “Russia respects only the strong.”
Defense Spending Trends:
- Poland: 4.2% GDP (highest in NATO).
- UK: 2.3%; France: 2.1%.
- Germany: 1.9%; Italy: 1.6%.
- NATO average (EU states, 2024): 1.99% (moving towards 2.04% in 2025).
Strategic Commitments: NATO allies pledged to reach 2% of GDP defence spending by 2025; under the new Hague commitments, aiming for 3.5–5% by 2035.

3. The $750 Billion Energy Pact

Announcement: August 2025, Washington and Brussels announced a framework for Europe to purchase $750 billion worth of U.S. oil, gas, and nuclear fuel during Trump’s term.
Criticism: Analysts and trade experts called the figure “unrealistic” and “a fantasy,” since:
- EU’s total energy imports in 2024 = €375 billion.
- U.S. share = €76 billion.
- To meet Trump’s number, Europe would need to triple U.S. imports and displace other suppliers (e.g., Norway).
Interpretation: The deal was viewed as a political fig leaf—a headline for Trump, but structurally unattainable.

4. War for Energy

Russia’s Pivot: After EU sanctions, Russia redirected oil flows eastward. India and China absorbed Russian crude at discount, keeping Moscow’s revenues alive.
Europe’s Scramble: The EU increased U.S. LNG imports, but dependency persisted—only the supplier changed.
Zelensky’s Framing: In 2024, Zelensky declared, “This is the real war—the war for energy.”
Historical Echoes:
- The 1970s oil shocks showed dependency as vulnerability.
- Jimmy Carter promoted renewables (solar panels on the White House, 1979).
- Ronald Reagan dismantled them in the 1980s, signaling a return to fossil dominance.
Disinformation: Fossil industries spread climate denial and euphemisms like “freedom gas” (U.S. Department of Energy, 2019).

5. Global Conflicts

Uppsala Conflict Data Program (UCDP, 2024): recorded 59 armed conflicts in 2023—the highest since WWII.
Energy Link: Many conflicts (Middle East, Caucasus, Africa) involve fossil fuel resources as a central stake.

6. Moral and Historical Parallels

Kennedy & Khrushchev (1962): The Cuban Missile Crisis was avoided from catastrophe through restraint and compromise.
Lincoln (1861–65): Preserved the Union by anchoring democracy in institutions.
Stalin (1924–53): Ruled through fear; symbol of authoritarian domination.
Desmond Tutu (Nobel Prize, 1984): Awarded for nonviolent resistance to apartheid. His Nobel lecture at Stockholm Cathedral (10 December 1984) stressed reconciliation, human dignity, and solidarity across borders.

________________________________________

Conclusion

This annexe demonstrates that the Anchorage summit was not an isolated “photo-op,” but part of a larger geopolitical struggle where energy, disinformation, and authoritarian manoeuvring converge. By contrasting complex data with historical lessons, it underscores the stakes: Europe must strengthen itself or risk being sidelined again in a theatre of power dominated by others.

________________________________________

References

Alaska Department of Natural Resources. (2024). Alaska oil and gas resource assessment. Anchorage: State of Alaska.

Alaska Department of Revenue. (2024). Petroleum fiscal transparency report. Anchorage: State of Alaska.

Alaska Economic Development Corporation. (2024). Economic diversification strategic plan. Anchorage: AEDC.

Alaska Permanent Fund Corporation. (2024). Annual report 2024. Juneau: APFC.

Allison, G. T. (1971). Essence of decision: Explaining the Cuban missile crisis. Boston: Little, Brown.

Asmus, R. D. (2010). A little war that shook the world: Georgia, Russia, and the future of the West. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Auty, R. M. (1993). Sustaining development in mineral economies: The resource curse thesis. London: Routledge.

Austin, L. (2022, April 25). Remarks at Ukraine Defense Contact Group. U.S. Department of Defense. https://www.defense.gov/News/Transcripts/Transcript/Article/3012806/

Biden, J. R. (2017). Promise me, Dad: A year of hope, hardship, and purpose. New York: Flatiron Books.

Biden, J. R. (2022, February 26). Remarks on Ukraine. The White House. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/speeches-remarks/2022/02/26/

Bolton, J. (2020). The room where it happened: A White House memoir. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Brands, H. (2023). The limits of offshore balancing: Why Brazil won't break with Russia. Foreign Affairs, 102(2), 45-58.

Burgess, J. P. (2022). The Orthodox Church and the war in Ukraine. Journal of Church and State, 64(3), 421-439.

Bush, G. W. (2010). Decision points. New York: Crown Publishers.

Çavuşoğlu, M. (2022, March 30). Press statement on Ukraine negotiations. Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. https://www.mfa.gov.tr/

Chekhov, A. P. (1899). Дама с собачкой [The lady with the dog]. Russkaya Mysl, 12.

Coates, P. A. (1993). Trans-Alaska Pipeline controversy: Technology, conservation, and the frontier. Fairbanks: University of Alaska Press.

Crimean Government. (2022). Administrative report 2022. Simferopol: Republic of Crimea.

Diamond, L. (2008). The spirit of democracy: The struggle to build free societies throughout the world. New York: Times Books.

Dobbs, M. (2008). One minute to midnight: Kennedy, Khrushchev, and Castro on the brink of nuclear war. New York: Knopf.

Dunning, C. (2019). Alaska's Russian heritage. Anchorage: University of Alaska Press.

Freedom House. (2023). Freedom in the world 2023: Turkey. Washington, DC: Freedom House.

Galeotti, M. (2016). Putin's hydra: Inside Russia's intelligence services. European Council on Foreign Relations Policy Brief.

Garthoff, R. L. (1989). Reflections on the Cuban missile crisis. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.

Germán & Co. (2024). A legacy of power, repression, and culture: Russia through war, dictatorship, art, and defection. Available at: www.germantoroghio.com (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Germán & Co. (2024). The many faces of Vladimir Putin: A political psychology profile. Available at: www.germantoroghio.com (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Germán & Co. (2024). President Volodymyr Zelenskyy: From comedian to global statesman. Available at: www.germantoroghio.com (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Germán & Co. (2024). Soviet and Russian military interventions: From Poland 1939 to Ukraine 2022. Available at: www.germantoroghio.com (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Germán & Co. (2024). US-Soviet missile crisis and espionage incidents: The Cuban crisis and beyond. Available at: www.germantoroghio.com (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Germán & Co. (2024). American presidential policies toward Russia and Ukraine: From Bush to Biden. Available at: www.germantoroghio.com (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Germán & Co. (2024). The 2022 Istanbul Agreement that wasn't: Peace talks and Western influence. Available at: www.germantoroghio.com (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Germán & Co. (2024). Key personalities meeting President Zelenskyy: International diplomatic networks post-February 2022. Available at: www.germantoroghio.com (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Germán & Co. (2024). The rise and fall of material values: A paradox in the history of natural resources. Energy Central. Available at: https://www.germantoroghio.com/blog-1-2/5flh6ewlg7n74sf-kf9b4-82b6w (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Germán & Co. (2024). Comparative analysis of Putin and Zelenskyy leadership personalities: Psychological traits and political strategies. Available at: www.germantoroghio.com (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Germán & Co. (2024). Hunter Biden's role in US-Ukraine relations: The Burisma controversy and policy implications. Available at: www.germantoroghio.com (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Hovorun, C. (2022). Political Orthodoxies: The unorthodoxies of the Church coerced. Minneapolis: Fortress Press.

House Intelligence Committee. (2019). The Trump-Ukraine impeachment inquiry report. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Publishing Office.

Human Rights Watch. (2022, April 3). Ukraine: Apparent war crimes in Russia-controlled areas. Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/04/03/

Immelman, A., & Trenzeluk, J. V. (2017). The political personality of Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin. Psychology Faculty Publications, 104. https://digitalcommons.csbsju.edu/psychology_pubs/104/

International Institute for Strategic Studies. (2023). The military balance 2023. London: IISS.

Jensen, R. J. (2013). The Alaska Purchase and Russian-American relations. Seattle: University of Washington Press.

Johnson, B. (2023). Unleashed. London: William Collins.

Karl, T. L. (1997). The paradox of plenty: Oil booms and petro-states. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Kennedy, R. F. (1969). Thirteen days: A memoir of the Cuban missile crisis. New York: W. W. Norton.

Korotayev, A., & Zinkina, J. (2011). Egyptian revolution: A demographic structural analysis. Entelequia, 13, 139-169.

Köse, T. (2022). Turkey's multipolar moment: Implications for NATO and Russia relations. Turkish Studies, 23(4), 567-584.

Krawchuk, A. (2022). Orthodox churches and the Ukrainian crisis. Religion, State and Society, 50(2), 123-142.

Laruelle, M. (2015). The "Russian World": Russia's soft power and geopolitical imagination. Washington, DC: Center on Global Interests.

Levinson, A. (2007). Drinking culture in Soviet and post-Soviet Russia. Moscow: Levada Center.

Magocsi, P. R. (2010). A history of Ukraine: The land and its peoples. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Moscow, Anonymous. (1984). Underground chronicles of Soviet life. Samizdat Publications.

NATO. (2008, April 3). Bucharest Summit Declaration. https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_8443.htm

Nemtsov, A. V. (2011). A contemporary history of alcohol in Russia. Stockholm: Södertörn Academic Studies.

Obama, B. (2020). A promised land. New York: Crown.

Office of the President of Ukraine. (2022, April 5). Statement on peace negotiations. https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/

Oxenstierna, S. (2022). Russia's financial crisis: The economic consequences of sanctions. Post-Communist Economies, 34(7), 901-921.

Pant, H. V. (2023). India's strategic autonomy in the Ukraine crisis. International Affairs, 99(1), 233-249.

Pinkus, B. (1988). The Jews of the Soviet Union: The history of a national minority. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pritchett, V. S. (1988). Chekhov: A spirit set free. New York: Random House.

Rayfield, D. (1997). Anton Chekhov: A life. London: HarperCollins.

Ross, M. L. (2012). The oil curse: How petroleum wealth shapes the development of nations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Saul, N. E. (2017). Distant friends: The United States and Russia, 1763-1867. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.

Savranskaya, S., & Blanton, T. (Eds.). (2005). The submarines of October. Washington, DC: National Security Archive.

Stern, S. M. (2005). The week the world stood still: Inside the secret Cuban missile crisis. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Taubman, W. (2003). Khrushchev: The man and his era. New York: Norton.

The Moscow Times. (2025, August 15). Trump and Belarus leader Lukashenko speak ahead of Alaska summit. Available at: https://www.themoscowtimes.com/2025/08/15/trump-and-belarus-leader-lukashenko-speak-ahead-of-alaska-summit-a90241 (Accessed: 15 December 2024).

Toro Ghio, G. (2016). The owner of no man's tale and other stories. Independent Literary Press.

Trenin, D. (2022). New cold war: Russia's conflict with the West. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Trump, D. J. (2018, July 16). Press conference with President Putin. Helsinki, Finland.

Tsui, K. K. (2011). More oil, less democracy: Evidence from worldwide crude oil discoveries. The Economic Journal, 121(551), 89-115.

U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2024). Alaska state energy profile. Washington, DC: EIA.

U.S. Geological Survey. (2023). Alaska mineral resource assessment. Reston, VA: USGS.

Ukrainian Ministry of Culture. (2023). Cultural heritage damage report. Kyiv: Government of Ukraine.

UNESCO. (2024). Ukraine heritage sites damage assessment. Paris: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.

Vomacka, E., & Immelman, A. (2023). The personality profile and leadership style of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Unit for the Study of Personality in Politics, College of St. Benedict/St. John's University.

Wegren, S. K. (2022). The political economy of sanctions: The case of Russia. Problems of Post-Communism, 69(4), 265-278.

White, S. (1996). Russia goes dry: Alcohol, state and society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Wilson, A. (2022). The Ukrainians: Unexpected nation (4th ed.). New Haven: Yale University Press.

Woodward, B. (2020). Rage. New York: Simon & Schuster.

________________________________________

The Author

Germán & Co 8/14/25 Germán & Co 8/14/25

Alaska: Trump vs the BRICS…

Executive Summary: The global energy battle is underway. Alaska is a power struggle for control over vital oil, gas, and minerals. Putin, supported by BRICS+, controls half the world's energy. Trump stands alone, weakened and seeking to salvage his reputation.

Executive Summary
The summit for control of the world’s energy is underway. Make no mistake: Alaska isn’t about peace; it’s about spoils. It’s a fight over who will dominate the planet’s energy supply, deciding who gets to open or close the taps on the oil, gas, and vital minerals that sustain the global economy. On one side is Putin, supported by a BRICS+ alliance controlling half the world’s energy resources; on the other side is Trump, isolated, vulnerable, and scrambling for a photo op that might salvage his position.

Just a Single Penny in 2025—Yet the Work Burns Bright

250,000 readers. Countless hours of independent analysis. And in 2025—just a single contribution.

This keeps the imagery (“brightest flame”) but appeals to support a bit smoother and easier to read.

Support our work:
PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com
IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611
Swish: 076 423 90 79
Stripe: [Donation Link]

If you can’t give, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central. It costs nothing and can carry the truth further.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1956047316273476029/photo/1

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/mexico-city-electric-dreams-valley-contradictions-germ%C3%A1n-toro-ghio-bps2f

https://www.energycentral.com/energy-biz/post/energy-and-human-rights-3-9-million-dead-3-9-million-ukrainian-corpses-XedEPmaD9fXGvFW

The times are uncertain. The need for clarity is not.

All rights are preserved to German & Co.

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 14, 2025

________________________________________

The clash of two worlds

Tomorrow in Anchorage, Alaska, it will not simply be two presidents facing each other; it will be two worlds. On one side, Donald Trump, physically alone in the room but carrying the still-formidable weight of the American economy; on the other, Vladimir Putin, without a formal diplomatic entourage, yet backed implicitly by a BRICS+ coalition that is no longer just an economic club, but a political, energy and technological bloc representing over 3.5 billion people — around 44% of the world’s population — and roughly 36% of global GDP at purchasing power parity.

This encounter does not happen in a vacuum. Every time an American president and a Russian leader have sat across a table — from Reykjavik in 1986 (Reagan and Gorbachev) to Helsinki in 2018 (Trump and Putin) — the world has projected excessive hopes onto them. History is stubborn: such summits rarely rewrite the chessboard. More often, they freeze it.

The difference now is that Putin does not arrive as the head of an isolated post-Soviet power, as in the early US–Russia summits. He comes armed with an alternative architecture: BRICS+, recently expanded to include Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the United Arab Emirates. This bloc jointly controls about 44% of global oil production, a large share of natural gas reserves, and a growing portion of the market for critical minerals such as lithium, cobalt, and rare earths.

The United States, though still the world’s largest single economy (nominal GDP around $27 trillion in 2024), depends on alliances to project its power. And here lies Trump’s first weakness: he arrives without a cohesive bloc. Europe keeps its distance; Japan and South Korea are focused on containing China; and in Latin America, even traditionally pro-Washington governments are signing energy agreements with Beijing or Moscow.

If this is a chessboard — and geopolitics always is — the pieces are uneven. One player has depth, a structured formation, and strategic reserves; the other, a powerful queen but scattered pawns and little coordination. In diplomacy, that imbalance can be fatal.

________________________________________

Two portraits, according to Lagarde

In a 2023 interview with Le Journal du Dimanche, European Central Bank president Christine Lagarde spoke of Putin and Trump not as a cautious diplomat might, but as someone who understands power, economics, and human psychology from the inside.

Of Vladimir Putin, she said he was “incredibly meticulous, detailed and knowledgeable”, a leader who arrives at any table with all possible data, scenarios pre-calculated, and the patience to wait for the opportune moment. In Moscow, the remark was received almost as an endorsement of his governing style: the man who never improvises, who always bides his time, and who never reveals all his cards.

On Donald Trump, Lagarde was more guarded but equally pointed. She did not call him ignorant, but described him as a “disruptor”, capable of wrong-footing allies, forcing unexpected changes, and shattering established frameworks. In Europe, the description was read more as a warning than a compliment: a president who respects no rules is as unpredictable for his friends as for his foes.

They embody opposing styles of power. Putin, the chess player calculating twenty moves ahead; Trump, the poker player ready to bluff the table into submission if he thinks the spectacle will work. One trusts in time and structure; the other, in impact and surprise.

Putin has already internalised a key fact: Trump can be seduced by theatre, by grandiose settings, by the illusion of an immediate triumph. Putin, a master of political choreography — from Red Square parades to hosting Miss Universe in Moscow — knows exactly how to build that stage so that Trump leaves feeling victorious, even if he has gained nothing concrete.

________________________________________

The origins of their strategies

Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin was born in 1952 in Leningrad, a city still scarred by the Nazi siege that killed over a million. He grew up in a kommunalka — a communal flat in a poor neighbourhood, sharing a kitchen and bathroom with multiple families. Street fights were part of everyday life. As a teenager, he found in judo and sambo not just a physical discipline, but a philosophy: patience, control, and using the opponent’s strength against him. It is not always the strongest who wins, but the one who waits best — a principle that would define his politics.

By the late 1980s, as a KGB officer posted to Dresden, East Germany, he witnessed the collapse of the GDR and the Soviet retreat. That experience, he has said, taught him that “when the state loses control, the street shows no mercy” — and that in politics, weakness is punished instantly. That security-first mentality has shaped his entire career, from the Chechen wars to the annexation of Crimea.

Donald John Trump was born in 1946 in Queens, New York, into a family already wealthy from real estate. His father, Fred Trump, was a property magnate. Donald grew up without knowing scarcity; biographers say he paid his elder sister to do his homework. He was not a disciplined reader or student, but quickly understood the value of image and self-promotion.

In the 1980s and 90s, he built a business empire of casinos, hotels and golf courses — often financed through heavy debt. Atlantic City was his laboratory: flashy investments, golden branding, spectacular openings… and an almost surgical ability to sell success even when the accounts were bleeding. His Miss Universe venture took him to Moscow in 2013, blending glamour, politics, and contact with Russia’s elite. Whether it directly influenced his relationship with Putin is unproven, but it did place him in circles close to the Kremlin.

Two lives, two psychologies. Putin believes in structure, intelligence gathering, and patience; Trump in branding, spectacle, and the quick win. In Anchorage, one will carry the game in his head; the other, in tomorrow’s headlines.

________________________________________

A wounded president

Trump arrives in Alaska with a broken promise hanging over him: his much-trumpeted “24-hour peace” for Ukraine. It was one of his most repeated campaign lines — a near-messianic claim in the eyes of supporters. But no ceasefire came; the war dragged on, and the idea now looks more like a slogan than a plan.

To that injury comes a more recent, deeper one: the disaster in the Middle East. In mid-2025, Israel suffered one of the most severe military blows in its history. Its forces were caught off-guard by a coalition of militias and state units, which, within weeks, dismantled key parts of its advanced defence network.

Trump authorised a joint US-Israeli strike against Iranian nuclear and military facilities. It was billed as a decisive, surgical operation. The reality, as later leaks showed, was far less dramatic: damage was limited, critical facilities were only knocked offline for months, and Iran’s retaliation was swift and precise.

Tehran not only repelled the strike but launched missiles at US bases in the region — and Washington chose not to respond militarily. The White House called it “strategic prudence”; critics called it “fear”. In Europe and Asia, allies took note: American deterrence no longer seemed automatic. In Moscow, Putin filed it neatly into his political algorithms.

For Putin, Anchorage will not be a meeting with Trump the negotiator, but Trump the man who has lost two narrative battles in under a year, who lacks a united bloc behind him, and who badly needs a symbolic win to sell to his base. It is fertile ground for Kremlin power plays.

________________________________________

The energy war

Strip away the public diplomacy, and Alaska is about energy. It's not just who produces it, but who can control its flow, interrupt it, or weaponise it.

The BRICS+ bloc — now including Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Iran, the UAE, Egypt and Ethiopia — holds unprecedented leverage:

44% of global oil output (Saudi Arabia, Russia and Iran are among the top five producers)
Over 50% of proven gas reserves (dominated by Russia, Iran, Qatar — the latter in talks to join)
Around 70% of known reserves of critical minerals essential for the energy transition (lithium from Brazil, cobalt from South Africa, rare earths from China)

The danger is not just production, but route control:

Strait of Hormuz (Iran, Oman) — 20% of world oil passes here
Suez Canal (Egypt) — vital for Middle East-Europe flows
Northern Sea Route (Russia) — shorter Asia–Europe link as Arctic ice retreats
Strait of Malacca — critical for oil bound for China, Japan, South Korea

The precedent is 1973: OPEC’s oil embargo paralysed economies. Today, BRICS+ could act more subtly — reducing output, switching contracts to non-dollar currencies, or delaying shipments to apply pressure.

The US, even as a net energy exporter, cannot dictate these choke points. Trump knows this. Putin knows it. In private, this will be the true subject in Anchorage: who writes the rules for the next decade of global energy.

________________________________________

Cards on the table

Putin’s cards:

Energy leverage — production shifts, alternative contracts, selective LNG offers to EU states willing to break with Washington.
Time in Ukraine — keeping the war frozen but appearing open to dialogue.
Limited security cooperation — small gestures on terrorism or narcotics, enough for Trump to claim a win.
Theatre — controlled optics designed to flatter Trump’s ego.

Trump’s cards:

Financial flexibility — hints at easing sanctions if progress is shown.
Symbolic recognition — offering Russia a seat, even as observer, in certain forums.
Anti-China rhetoric — subtle positioning of Russia as a partial counterweight to Beijing.
Trade concessions — easing restrictions on goods vital to Russian industry.

Trump’s problem: his room for manoeuvre is narrow. Any visible concession to Putin will be political ammunition for his domestic rivals. Putin will exploit that.

________________________________________

Possible scenarios

Symbolic deal — joint declaration on peace and energy stability, no specifics. Putin gains legitimacy; Trump gains headlines.
Photo without substance — smiles, strolls, “good chemistry” talk. Trump sells connection; Putin sells indispensability.
Secret resource talks — off-camera deals on energy supply and sanctions. Risk of leaks damaging Trump.
Controlled clash — sharp words in public, quiet channels open in private. Both leaders strengthen home narratives.

________________________________________

The post-summit spin

Trump will proclaim “a tremendous, historic success” within minutes, using superlatives and avoiding detail. His aim: convince supporters of unique negotiating talent.

Putin will be more measured. State media will frame the meeting as proof that, sanctions or no sanctions, Washington still needs Moscow. Carefully placed stories will suggest Trump sought the meeting, not vice versa.

The narratives will be mutually incompatible — but coexist. The truth will be buried beneath layers of propaganda.

________________________________________

Spassky and Fischer in Alaska

In 1972, Boris Spassky and Bobby Fischer fought a chess match in Reykjavik that was sold as a Cold War showdown. It changed nothing geopolitically.

Anchorage risks being the same: theatre on a confined board. Energy will still be contested, Ukraine will still be at war, and the balance of power will still turn on pipelines, contracts, and quiet alliances rather than handshakes.

________________________________________

Epilogue: A midsummer dream in the Arctic

In Alaska’s political theatre, both men are living their own Shakespeare. It is A Midsummer Night’s Dream, but under the pale Arctic sun. Both need the photo: Trump, because he could not deliver peace in 24 hours; Putin, because he could not win the war in nearly three years.

Here, image trumps substance. The setting is perfect: a remote city, a round table, global cameras, and two men who must project strength despite the wear. Neither will truly win, but neither can afford to look like the loser. The summit will end, like Shakespeare’s comedy, without immediate tragedy… and without real resolution. The audience will leave believing they saw something decisive. The actors, knowing it was only theatre, will prepare for the next act.

________________________________________

The Author:

“enriching our understanding of history beyond traditional battlefields and royal courts,” praising the way his journeys move from the discomfort of a Moscow hotel to the exhilaration of the Nicaraguan jungle... Juan Forch

Germán Toro Ghio ranks among the most influential voices in the global energy sector, his work reaching over a quarter of a million readers worldwide. As a recognised Expert in The Energy Collective and a featured contributor in Energy Central’s Power Perspectives™ series, he is known for translating complex geopolitical and market shifts into clear, timely insights. As CEO of Germán & Co., he has spent more than three decades navigating the energy industry—predicting its future with precision—while holding leadership roles such as Corporate Vice-President of Communications for AES Dominicana, where he led innovative strategies for natural gas promotion and regional energy integration.

Before entering the energy world, Germán’s career bridged culture, literature, and diplomacy. He served as Executive Secretary for the Forum of Culture Ministers of Latin America and the Caribbean, authored the project document and prologue for the UNDP’s Colombia en el Planeta alongside William Ospina and the legendary theatre group La Candelaria, and worked closely with Nicaraguan poet and priest Ernesto Cardenal. He championed the special editions of La insurrección solitaria by Carlos Martínez Rivas, under the sponsorship of Octavio Paz, laureate of both the Nobel Prize in Literature and the Miguel de Cervantes Prize.

An accomplished author, Germán has published Nicaragua Year 5—a celebrated work of documentary photography praised in Lund University’s catalogue of new books—and The Non Man’s Land and Other Tales. He has overseen dozens of literary editions, including Joven arte dominicano, promoted by Casa de Teatro in Santo Domingo and distributed to leading universities across the world.

Chilean filmmaker, writer, and political scientist Juan Forch—renowned for his role in the historic 1990 “NO” campaign, later dramatized in the Oscar-nominated film No starring Gael García Bernal—has described Germán’s narratives as “enriching our understanding of history beyond traditional battlefields and royal courts,” praising the way his journeys move from the discomfort of a Moscow hotel to the exhilaration of the Nicaraguan jungle.

________________________________________

Germán Toro Ghío leads Karlstad-based Germán Toro Ghío Strategic Energy Consulting, advising on African energy transitions.

Germán & Co 8/14/25 Germán & Co 8/14/25

Ukraine: A Thousand Times Betrayed, But Not in Alaska?

In 1932, Walter Duranty of The New York Times received journalism’s top award for dispatches from Moscow that echoed Stalin’s propaganda while Ukraine suffered famine. The Holodomor, a man-made famine in 1932–33, caused millions of deaths through grain requisitions, sealed borders, and repression. Despite this, the Times claimed there was “no actual starvation.” The award remains, but the deaths do not.

Executive Summary

Pulitzer Prize for genocide denial.
Three point nine million dead.
Say it again — three point nine million.

________________________________________
In 1932, Walter Duranty of The New York Times was awarded journalism’s highest honor for his Moscow dispatches — reports that echoed Stalin’s talking points while Ukraine starved. The Holodomor, a man-made famine of 1932–33, claimed millions of lives through forced grain requisitions, sealed borders, and targeted repression. Yet in the pages of the Times, readers were assured there was “no actual starvation.” The medal remains. The deaths remain.
Others saw what Duranty refused to print. Welsh journalist Gareth Jones walked the backroads of Ukraine in March 1933, recording scenes of skeletal villagers and silent, emptied towns. Malcolm Muggeridge filed dispatches from the North Caucasus describing “a famine of the most colossal proportions.” Both were blacklisted by the Soviets for telling the truth. Duranty, by contrast, remained in favor with Moscow — securing rare interviews with Stalin — and dismissed their accounts as “exaggerations.” Historians now agree: his silence and distortions aided a cover-up of one of the 20th century’s greatest crimes. The Pulitzer Board has reviewed appeals to rescind his prize, most notably in 2003, but has refused each time, arguing that his award preceded the famine reports — a technicality critics say is an alibi for complicity.
________________________________________
Sources: Applebaum, Anne. Red Famine: Stalin’s War on Ukraine. Doubleday, 2017. Snyder, Timothy. Bloodlands: Europe Between Hitler and Stalin. Basic Books, 2010. Pulitzer Prizes official statement, November 21, 2003 — pulitzer.org. Gareth Jones' diary extracts, March 1933 — University of Cambridge Archives. New York Times internal review of Duranty’s reporting, 2003.

Just a Single Penny in 2025—Yet the Work Burns Bright

250,000 readers. Countless hours of independent analysis. And in 2025—just a single contribution.

This keeps the imagery (“brightest flame”) but appeals to support a bit smoother and easier to read.

Support our work:
PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com
IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611
Swish: 076 423 90 79
Stripe: [Donation Link]

If you can’t give, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central. It costs nothing and can carry the truth further.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1955869879967604816

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/germ%C3%A1n-toro-ghio-6b1853242_pulitzer-prize-for-denying-genocide-39-activity-7361614954233307137-Wy0l?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAADxILSUBt02qlesQLQfoPztburmXuxyvJik

https://www.energycentral.com/energy-biz/post/energy-and-human-rights-3-9-million-dead-3-9-million-ukrainian-corpses-XedEPmaD9fXGvFW

The times are uncertain. The need for clarity is not.

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 14, 2025

________________________________________

3.9 million dead… 3.9 million Ukrainian corpses… that's the arithmetic of betrayal… that's the price tag on Western silence… 28,000 dying daily in June 1933… every single day… twenty-eight thousand mothers, fathers, children, babies at the breast… starved to death while Duranty typed his lies in his warm Moscow hotel… "No famine here"… Pulitzer Prize for genocide denial… 3.9 million… say it again… 3.9 million… let it rot in your mouth like the corpses rotted in Ukrainian fields… because that's where it started… the betrayal… the pattern… the template for every abandonment that followed…

Ukraine… betrayed a thousand times… more… if you count the small ones, the quiet ones, the ones written in blood on frozen fields where 3.9 million starved to death while the world looked away… The Holodomor… 1932, 1933… Stalin's masterpiece of murder… 28,000 Ukrainians dying daily at the peak… June 1933… the month when hell had a name and it was Ukraine…

They took the grain… all of it… every last kernel… and when the barns were empty, when children's bellies swelled like drums, when mothers boiled bark and leather to keep the mouth busy… the West sent journalists… Duranty with his clean Moscow hotel sheets… writing to The New York Times that "there is no famine"… Pulitzer Prize for selling souls… while the dead piled up like cordwood in village squares…

________________________________________

And now… now they want to do it again… different uniform, same betrayal… In icy Alaska, where the frost is more eternal than electoral promises, a meeting worthy of Nikolai Gogol's pen is scheduled for Friday, August 15: Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, face to face — or at least hat to hat. The fantasy script calls for Putin to play 18 holes on Arctic ice — an exploit more fitting for Dead Souls than for a press briefing — and for Trump to dash from the sauna straight into the eternal snow, like a polar bear with a Mar-a-Lago tan.

But the White House's combative press secretary, Caroline Levitt, has already poured cold water on the excitement: "Don't expect miracles… or selfies." In Moscow, however, the cultured and unflappable Kremlin spokesman, Dmitry Sergeyevich Peskov, has struck a conspiratorial tone: his president isn't bringing caviar to Trump — "not even caviar dressed up like Miss Universe" — but something far more "strategic": a license to build a brand-new Trump Tower in territories that once belonged to the late Soviet Empire. "A reminder," Peskov added, "so that in Copenhagen they don't forget the mood swings of their colleague and friend Donald."

Meanwhile in London, the betting houses adjusted their odds: this meeting has less chance of happening than seeing Trump's promise to end the war in Ukraine "in a matter of seconds" come true.

From the surreal to the earthly: Ukraine, betrayed and annihilated, reduced to a chessboard where the pieces move to the rhythm of agreements never signed and smiles that exist only for the camera.

Yeah… they'll meet… the two strongmen… on ice thicker than their skulls… and they'll carve up Ukraine like it's 1945 again… Yalta all over again… Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin… dividing Europe without a single Ukrainian at the table… Now it's Trump and Putin… same game, different costumes… And where's Zelenskyy?… Nowhere… not invited to his funeral…

The pattern never changes… only the faces… Only the excuses… Budapest Memorandum, 1994… "Give up your nukes, we'll protect you"… Sure… 2014 comes, Crimea's gone, and the "protectors" send tweets… Now 2025… Alaska summit… and Ukraine gets fed to the bear again… 400,000 Ukrainian dead… but hey… peace in our time, right?…

________________________________________

Europe?… Oh, they're tired… war fatigue they call it… 65% of Czechs want Ukraine to just give up territory and call it peace… Gas in the winter trumps Ukrainian blood every time… Always has… The Holodomor taught them nothing… Suffering is fine as long as it's not theirs…

They'll shake hands in Alaska… Putin with his cold fish eyes, Trump with his salesman's grin… And Ukraine?… Ukraine bleeds in the snow while they toast to "strategic stability"… The kind where corpses stay quiet and the living know their place…

Because that's the lesson of Ukraine… a thousand betrayals and counting… From Stalin's grain quotas to Trump's "art of the deal"… Different century, same sacrifice… Ukraine always the offering on the altar of great power politics… Always expendable… Always alone…

The ground's the same… back then it swallowed 3.9 million, now it's swallowing more… Mariupol, Bucha, Izium… graves on top of graves… And the ground, it's always hungry… it'll take what you give it, and the world's been feeding it Ukrainians for a century…

They'll call it peace… this Alaska deal… Peace like a graveyard's peaceful… Quiet… Final… With Ukraine carved up like a Christmas goose and served on a platter marked "strategic compromise"… The Holodomor was strategic too… Strategic starvation… Strategic denial… Strategic mass murder…

Different decade… same appetite for Ukrainian flesh…

But not in Alaska… No… In Alaska, they'll sign the papers and smile for the cameras… The real betrayal already happened… In 1932… In 1945… In 1994… In 2014… This is just the latest instalment… The newest chapter in the book of Ukrainian abandonment…

A thousand betrayals… And counting…

Europe… weak… trembling… their hands loose on that $750 billion energy deal slipping through their fingers… They need those coins… Need them more than Ukrainian blood… more than Ukrainian children buried under rubble… The arithmetic's simple… 3.9 million starved to death means nothing when there's gas flowing through the pipelines… means nothing when the heating bills come due in Berlin, Paris, Rome…

They shake… these Europeans… not from cold, but from fear… fear of losing their Russian energy lifeline… 750 billion reasons to look the other way… to call for "restraint on both sides"… to whisper about "territorial compromises"… The same Europe that stood by while Duranty wrote his lies… the same Europe that carved up Ukraine at Yalta… now they count their euros while Ukrainians count their dead…

"Strategic autonomy", they call it… this dependency… this addiction to Russian gas that makes them weak, makes them complicit, makes them whores to Putin's energy empire… And when push comes to shove… when the real choice comes… between Ukrainian sovereignty and European heating bills… they'll choose the warmth every time… Every single time…

________________________________________

EPILOGUE: THE HUMAN CONDITION

You want to know the truth?… The real truth?… Here it is… bleeding and naked as a newborn in the snow…

Humans are shit… All of them… Every last one… They don't betray Ukraine because they're evil… no… that would be too simple… too clean… They betray because betrayal is what they are… in their bones, in their blood, in their marrow… It's not a choice… it's their nature… like dogs pissing on trees, like vultures feeding on corpses…

Look at them… these "civilized" Europeans… these "democratic" Americans… these "Christian" nations… When the Holodomor was happening… when 28,000 Ukrainians were dying every day… they knew… Oh, they knew… Duranty told them in his private cables… the diplomats whispered it over cocktails… the grain traders counted the profits from Ukrainian corpses… And what did they do?… They looked away… because it was convenient… because it didn't touch them… because Ukrainian suffering paid their bills…

That's humanity for you… That's the species… They'll watch 3.9 million people starve and call it "collectivization"… They'll break every promise they make and call it "realpolitik"… They'll sell their own mothers for thirty pieces of silver and call it "pragmatism"…

You think it's different now?… You think they've learned?… You think Alaska will be different?… Ha!… The same creatures who applauded Stalin while Ukraine starved… who carved up Europe at Yalta like a Christmas goose… who promised nuclear protection and delivered Twitter condolences… these same maggots will smile and shake hands in Alaska while Ukrainian cities burn…

Because that's what they do… That's what they are… Betrayal isn't the exception… It's the rule… It's the law… It's the only law that matters… The strong eat the weak and call it progress… The rich devour the poor and call it economics… The living feast on the dead and call it history…

Ukraine?… Ukraine is just the menu… Always has been… Always will be… A thousand betrayals and counting because humans can't stop themselves… because every generation thinks it's different… thinks it's better… says it won't repeat the sins of the fathers… And every generation proves it's the same… exactly as vile… exactly as hungry for other people's blood…

The Holodomor wasn't an aberration… it was revelation… 3.9 million dead to show the world what humans are when nobody's watching… when there's profit to be made… when there's comfort to be preserved… And Alaska?… Alaska is just the latest instalment… the newest chapter in the same old book… the book of human hunger… human greed… human indifference to human suffering…

So don't weep for Ukraine… Weep for the species… Weep for what we are… what we've always been… what we'll always be… Creatures who make promises to be broken… who build trust to be shattered… who create hope to be crushed…

A thousand betrayals… And counting… Because that's the only number that matters… The only number that will ever matter… Until the last human draws the last breath… and there's nobody left to betray…

That's the truth… That's the only truth… The rest are lies we tell ourselves to sleep at night…

________________________________________

The Author:

“enriching our understanding of history beyond traditional battlefields and royal courts,” praising the way his journeys move from the discomfort of a Moscow hotel to the exhilaration of the Nicaraguan jungle... Juan Forch

________________________________________

Germán Toro Ghío leads Karlstad-based Germán Toro Ghío Strategic Energy Consulting, advising on African energy transitions.

Germán & Co 8/12/25 Germán & Co 8/12/25

The $750 Billion Trap: How Europe Paid to Escape Russia, Only to Watch Putin Win Ukraine…

The Trump over the Bygg Sting EU.

Executive Summary
The $750 Billion Trap: Europe’s Energy Escape Funds Putin’s Territorial Win Trump’s $750 billion European energy deal sets the stage for his Alaska summit with Putin. After securing Europe’s massive energy purchases to reduce reliance on Russia, Trump suggests legitimizing Russian territorial gains in Ukraine with a “freeze” agreement.
The Trap: Europe spent $750 billion on U.S. energy to avoid Russian coercion, yet Trump now proposes validating the Russian aggression that triggered Europe’s energy crisis. Oil prices could drop 10-20% with ceasefire news, but strategic contradictions persist.
The Pattern: Trump extracts significant economic commitments from allies, leveraging them to push controversial policies, framing opposition as preferring “conflict over cooperation.”
Warning: Nations negotiating tariffs with Trump should heed Europe’s experience—meeting Trump’s demands doesn’t ensure influence over his decisions and often funds their own strategic setbacks
Bottom Line: Europe’s energy investments may have unintentionally supported the legitimization of the very Russian aggression they aimed to avoid.

Not a Single Penny Has Found Its Way into Our Piggy Bank in 2025

“Quarter of a million eyes have now landed on our work at Energy Central—a milestone that still feels electric. I can still see Matt Chester’s message popping up: “Fancy sharing your piece on our platform?” One word—absolutely—set the spark. Today, that spark has become a blazing beacon. Cheers, Matt, for opening the door; here’s to the next 250 k…

Under the clear-eyed wisdom of Aristotle—who in Nicomachean Ethics celebrated generosity as the art of giving just the right amount, to the right cause, at the perfect moment—we declare with steadfast resolve: throughout all of 2025, not one penny of support has graced our coffers.

In a world swirling with restless shadows—where every headline quivers beneath veiled agendas—a steadfast beacon still shines: independent analysis. We do more than relay facts; we wrestle truth from the chaos, charting the hidden crossroads where geopolitics and energy entwine. Our pens are honed by passion; our screens blaze with relentless inquiry.

Yet even the fiercest flame flickers without fresh breath. Inflation’s chill creeps into every crevice. Platforms surge and crash like wild tides. Every article, every map, every piercing insight must battle through the noise to reach the minds that hunger for clarity. We wield licensed tools, striking visuals, and elite research—but even the mightiest arsenal can’t hold the line alone.

This is our rallying cry to you:

Hoist our banner—like, repost, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central: it costs nothing but echoes through halls of influence.

Lend your strength—if you can, please fuel the mission that keeps democracy honest and our energy future bright:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611

Swish: 076 423 90 79

Stripe: [Donation Link]

Every gift, no matter the size, fans the spark of independent thought into a roaring blaze. You’re not just donating—you’re empowering a truth-seeker in a world starved for clarity.

Remember, your donations are tax-deductible. Please check with your tax advisor for details.

Join us. Keep the flame burning. Light the way forward—in these darkening times, your support is the beacon guiding us all.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1955363866554274276

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/750-billion-trap-how-europe-paid-escape-russia-only-watch-toro-ghio-xcpce

https://www.energycentral.com/energy-biz/post/the-750-billion-trap-how-europe-paid-to-escape-russia-only-to-watch-Aa7BYu2jyAh8iFO

"1,000+ reads in 24 hours. The Absolute Trend: USELESS IN THE DARK—a thought-provoking piece inspired by the philosopher and visionary, almost a fortune-teller of the energy world, Andrés Gluski, CEO & President of AES. Energy isn’t ‘green’ or ‘cheap’ if it’s not available when needed. Resilience, storage, and smart grids are the true game-changers.

AES people should take a more active role in supporting the extraordinary ideas of their President.
**https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/useless-dark-germ%C3%A1n-toro-ghio-hhlmf/?trackingId=JvhOZkM5bvlnixI16VGh%2Fg%3D%3D**
**https://www.energycentral.com/energy-biz/post/kenya-s-geothermal-ascent-the-iceland-of-africa-powers-a-green-qJ1HKEVLGRHSc7w**
#EnergyTransition #GridResilience #EnergyStorage

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 12, 2025

________________________________________

Timeline: Key Events Ahead of the Alaska Summit

Date Event Why It Matters June 2025 Trump secures $750 billion European energy deal Europe commits to massive U.S. energy purchases to escape Russian dependence Late July 2025 Steve Witkoff meets Putin in Moscow Opens U.S.–Russia backchannel ahead of the summit Early August 2025 Leaks about territorial "swap"—Russia keeps ~20% of Ukraine for ceasefire Provokes immediate backlash from Kyiv and EU Aug 8, 2025 EU and Nordic-Baltic nations publicly reject peace built on territorial conquest Signals unified resistance Aug 9, 2025 Trump admin allows Nvidia/AMD chip sales to China under 15% revenue-sharing Marks dramatic shift in U.S. export policy Aug 10, 2025 China encourages domestic chip use yet still needs CUDA ecosystem Beijing selectively accepts U.S. policy turn Aug 12, 2025 Trump–Putin Alaska summit occurs Likely announcement of ceasefire/freeze with energy and tech impacts.

________________________________________

Introduction: The $750 Billion Energy Prelude

Fresh off securing a massive $750 billion energy purchase agreement from European partners, Donald Trump has moved quickly to his next geopolitical transaction: offering to "give away" Ukrainian territory to Vladimir Putin in exchange for a ceasefire. The sequence reveals the cold calculus of transactional diplomacy—first, extract maximum energy dollars from allies, then trade away their strategic security interests.

The European energy deal, encompassing long-term LNG contracts, infrastructure investments, and expanded U.S. energy imports, was pitched as a win-win: Europe diversifies away from Russian energy dependence while America becomes their primary supplier. European leaders, desperate to secure energy security after years of Russian supply volatility, committed to unprecedented energy purchases from U.S. producers.

But within weeks, those same leaders discovered the hidden cost of their $750 billion energy commitment: Trump's willingness to negotiate away Ukrainian sovereignty—the very issue that drove Europe's energy crisis in the first place.

________________________________________

The Alaska Gambit: Territory for "Peace"

Now, as Trump prepares for his Alaska summit with Putin, the bitter irony emerges. The $750 billion in European energy purchases has given him the political and economic capital to pursue his next transaction: a proposed "territorial exchange" that would freeze the Ukraine war with Russia controlling roughly 20% of Ukrainian land. The same conflict forced Europe to seek alternative energy sources at premium prices.

The brutal calculation is stark: having secured Europe's energy dollars, Trump can now afford to ignore European strategic objections. Europeans paid top dollar to escape Russian energy dependence, only to watch Trump potentially legitimize the very aggression that created their energy crisis.

Leaks suggest Trump's team pitched a ceasefire that accepts Russia's control over nearly 20% of Ukrainian territory—Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, Kherson—in return for a pause in hostilities. Ukraine rejects this constitutional breach; Europe rails against rewarding aggressive conquest [1]. Russian signals, meanwhile, flirt with maximalist demands and avoid retreat grudgingly [2].

________________________________________

Constraints to Acceptance:

Legal and Political Ukraine's constitution forbids surrendering land. Public opinion favours ending the war, not surrendering territory [3].

Alliance Integrity EU and NATO argue that legitimizing force invites further aggression. Denmark and Nordic partners have publicly stated as much [4].

Enforcement Reality Ceasefires without monitoring, buffers, or sanctions reversal thresholds are tactically flimsy. Reports show leaks offer no such architecture [5].

________________________________________

The AI Chip Corridor: Tech for Toll

In parallel, Trump reset export restrictions: Nvidia and AMD may sell advanced AI chips to China under a new deal—if the U.S. takes a 15% share of Chinese orders [6]. Legal experts warn this risks eroding the export-control regime; security analysts note it turns "redline tech" into a transactional toll booth [6]. Markets responded with mild concern over margins; Beijing hedges by urging domestic alternatives but still values CUDA alignment [7].

________________________________________

Energy Security vs. Territorial Security

This sequence exposes a fundamental contradiction in transactional diplomacy. Europe spent $750 billion on U.S. energy to reduce dependence on an aggressive Russia, yet Trump's proposed Alaska deal would reward that same Russian aggression with territorial gains. European leaders find themselves having paid for energy security while watching their geopolitical security interests get traded away.

The strategic energy play reveals cold logic:

Secure massive energy contracts ($750 billion from Europe desperate for Russian alternatives)
Use that economic leverage for political capital (Europe invested, now they're committed)
Negotiate away the source of their energy crisis (legitimize Russian aggression in Ukraine)
Force Europe to accept both outcomes (they've already paid, and opposing "peace" looks unreasonable)

________________________________________

Why Play a Losing Hand?

Why push a proposal Ukraine and Europe will reject? The answer lies in domestic optics and the $750 billion cushion. Trump projects himself as the lone peace bargainer betrayed by ideological rigidness. Even failure becomes a victory frame ("I tried to stop the war"). By setting the Overton window with extreme proposals, subsequent compromises look temperate [9].

The European energy windfall provides crucial political cover—Trump can point to tangible economic wins while framing territorial concessions as pragmatic peace-making.

________________________________________

Europe and Denmark Push Back

For European leaders who just committed $750 billion to American energy suppliers specifically to escape Russian energy coercion, watching Trump casually trade away Ukrainian territory represents the ultimate betrayal. Europe scrambled pre-summit to defend principles. Their message was clear: "Nothing about Ukraine, without Ukraine." NATO unity flags if the U.S. moves forward unilaterally [4].

Denmark, with its Nordic-Baltic partners, has been particularly vocal: any peace that legitimizes conquest undermines the security of all small states [4].

________________________________________

Energy Market Consequences

The $750 billion European energy commitment has already reshaped Atlantic energy flows. Now, if Trump's Alaska summit produces a Ukraine ceasefire:

Oil Markets: If sanctions ease and the war pauses, the risk premium in oil prices diminishes fast—potential 10–20% drop in Brent. But Russian revenues may still rise due to full-price exports and lower logistics costs [10].

Gas Dynamics: Europe's spot prices retreat; anxiety fades. LNG flows normalize, reducing inflation pressure. But the irony deepens—Europe paid premium prices for U.S. LNG to escape Russian influence, only to see Russian territorial gains potentially legitimized [11][12].

India's Position: For India, discounted Russian oil complaints fade—if Beijing and Delhi can now buy openly at market price, the diplomatic controversy ends [11].

________________________________________

Historical Analogies Examined

Trump is likely to invoke statesmen—Churchill at Yalta, Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Kissinger's realpolitik—to frame Alaska. But the analogies falter:

Historical Case What Actually Happened How Trump Might Frame It Reality Check Yalta (1945) Post-victory planning with all Allied stakeholders "Great leaders redrew world map to end war" Yalta was after victory, not during ongoing invasion Kennedy 1962 Weapons removal to avoid nuclear war "Making tough trades to avoid WWIII" Removed offensive weapons, didn't accept territorial changes Kissinger's Realpolitik Negotiated with rivals without legitimizing conquest "Making peace with enemies through wisdom" Didn't reward territorial aggression Powell & Rice Worked through alliance consensus "Hard choices to protect America first" Operated within NATO framework, didn't sideline allies

The analogies serve myth, not precedent [13].

________________________________________

Three Energy-Influenced Scenarios

Scenario A: Summit Fails Trump pivots, claiming peace offers were rejected. The $750 billion European energy deal proceeds as planned. Markets steady. Tech trade continues.

Scenario B: Freeze Without Recognition Energy prices drop; EU splits but Ukraine holds out for guarantees; Russia cashes in on normalization; European energy buyers face the irony of paying premium prices to escape Russian influence while seeing Russian territorial gains legitimized [1][4][10].

Scenario C: Tacit Recognition Oil drops further. Norms crumble. European energy investments look foolish—they paid to escape Russian coercion only to see it rewarded. Small states seethe at the precedent [1][4][10].

________________________________________

The $750 Billion Contradiction

For European leaders, the sequence is particularly galling. They committed $750 billion to American energy precisely to reduce strategic dependence on an aggressive Russia. Now they watch Trump potentially legitimize that same Russian aggression through territorial concessions. They paid for independence from Russian energy blackmail, only to see territorial blackmail succeed.

________________________________________

Denmark & EU: Small-State Lessons

For Denmark and Nordic partners, legitimizing conquest threatens the foundation of small-state security. Their unified voice stands against normalizing territorial changes by force—especially after Europe just spent $750 billion to escape the consequences of such aggression [4].

________________________________________

Contradiction as Strategy

Trump's contradiction—pushing a weak plan as bold action while sitting on a $750 billion European energy windfall—is the strategy. Facts don't matter; framing does. He positions refusal as moral failure, backed by the economic credibility the European deal provides.

________________________________________

A Road to Responsible Resolution

A better approach would require: securing alliance consensus first; ensuring European energy investments support rather than undermine European security; insisting on verification parallel with talks; conditional economic relief; and preservation of global norms. That's the durable path to peace, not theatre. ________________________________________

Warning to Other Nations: Don't Fall Into the Same Trap

The European experience with the $750 billion energy deal offers a crucial lesson for other countries now facing Trump's tariff negotiations and trade demands. The pattern is clear and dangerous:

Step 1: Create Economic Leverage Trump demands massive purchases, investments, or trade concessions from allied nations, often under threat of tariffs or other economic punishment.

Step 2: Extract Political Capital Once countries have committed billions and become economically invested, Trump uses that leverage to pursue controversial foreign policy goals that may contradict the original purpose of the economic arrangement.

Step 3: Force Acceptance Through Sunk Costs Nations that have already paid find themselves trapped—opposing Trump's subsequent moves risks losing their massive investments while appearing to "choose conflict over cooperation."

Countries currently negotiating tariffs and trade deals with the Trump administration should be aware:

Mexico and Canada (USMCA renegotiation): Beware of massive infrastructure or energy commitments being later leveraged for immigration or security concessions that undermine sovereignty.
Japan and South Korea: Large defense spending commitments could be used to pressure acceptance of controversial regional security arrangements.
India: Agricultural and technology purchase agreements may later be leveraged to force positions on China or other strategic issues that conflict with India's non-alignment principles.
Brazil and other Latin American nations: Energy and agricultural deals could become tools to pressure support for US interventions in the region.

The European lesson is stark: paying Trump's price doesn't guarantee influence over his decisions—it often funds your own strategic disadvantage. Countries entering negotiations should structure any agreements with clear boundaries, sunset clauses, and protection against policy linkage to unrelated strategic issues.

Don't let economic desperation or the promise of market access create the same trap that now sees Europe paying premium prices for American energy while watching its core security interests potentially traded away in Alaska.

________________________________________

References: [1] Europe races to influence U.S. stance ahead of Trump–Putin talks [Reuters] [2] Putin, Trump envoy Witkoff meet in Moscow [CBS News] [3] Ukrainian polling on territorial concessions [Tandfonline; Russia Matters] [4] Nordic-Baltic leaders reject forced concessions [Reuters] [5] Enforcement concerns in proposed deals [Reuters] [6] Trump opens AI chip sales to China [Reuters] [7] China's response to chip policy shift [Reuters] [8] Allied tech control coordination [Reuters] [9] Trump's domestic political strategy analysis [10] Oil market risk premium dynamics [Reuters] [11] EU energy policy and India trade [Reuters; Al Jazeera] [12] European gas market analysis [Reuters] [13]

________________________________________

Germán Toro Ghío leads Karlstad-based Germán Toro Ghío Strategic Energy Consulting, advising on African energy transitions.

l_______________________________________

Germán & Co 8/9/25 Germán & Co 8/9/25

Monroe, Capote, Cardenal, Tits, Sex, Alcohol, Theft, Chocolate and Mental Illness: The Night Spain Learnt to Confess…

Mental illnesses — an unseen crisis that breaks families apart and leaves lives in ruins.

Shabbat Reflections:
Peace, Memory and the Weight of History Between Gaza and the Memory of History
On this Sabbath, I wish you all health, good fortune and the protection of those you love. And I pray — with a heart heavy and unflinching — for an end to the genocide in Gaza.
Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel since 29 December 2022 in his current term, and in previous stints dating back to 1996, does not represent the Jewish people as a whole. The Jewish family, in all its breadth — from the Ashkenazim of Europe to the Beta Israel of Ethiopia, through the Sephardim and the Mizrahim — condemns violence that sows only more hatred.
I do not write this to forget. I will not forget the Hamas attack of 7 October 2023, launched from Gaza by the Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades under Yahya Sinwar, with the political shield of Ismail Haniyeh. That morning, some 1,200 people in Israel were killed and more than 240 taken hostage. It was a Trojan horse that unleashed a war without precedent in the region.
The Jewish people want peace. They have wanted it for centuries. They need it to remain who they are.
We are living a Sabbath among thorns. And yet, in the darkness, I have been given an unexpected gift: more than 20,000 readings on LinkedIn in recent days. My thanks to those who join me in this vigil of ideas, to those who hold the word steady when the world seems to fall away. Above all, my gratitude to my dear friend Manuel Francisco Pérez Dubuc, for his unwavering solidarity, his care, his outstretched hand.
Today I remember one who is absent yet never far: José Elías Álvarez. In the solitude of my analyses, he was unmatched in his ability to read the signs — a man who could see the future with disarming clarity. An admirable soul. This embrace travels beyond time to find him.
It is said I work quickly. But this short novel has taken decades. It never set out to be one; it began as scattered notes on a subject that gripped me deeply. I wrote without haste, for it addresses a malady that cannot be handled lightly: the diseases of the mind — that invisible tragedy which shatters families and devastates lives.
Ernesto Cardenal (Granada, Nicaragua, 20 January 1925 – Managua, 1 March 2020) was a friend to my family. I cooked for him with affection, and in my home, with the help of intellectuals from around the world, part of his Nobel Prize campaign was born. In verse, he captured the elusive nature of the human mind.
And who can forget Marilyn Monroe, whispering “Happy Birthday, Mr President” to John F. Kennedy at Madison Square Garden on 19 May 1962? Or Truman Capote, who dared to inhabit the fractured minds of Perry Smith and Richard Hickock, the killers of the Clutter family in Holcomb, Kansas, on 15 November 1959 — rendering them in his 1966 work In Cold Blood.
Or the broken life of Jorge del Carmen Valenzuela Torres (Chillán, 6 March 1938 – Santiago Penitentiary, 30 April 1963), the “Jackal of Nahueltoro”, immortalised in 1970 by Miguel Littín: the tragedy of a man undone by poverty and illness, not by deliberate malice.
On this Sabbath, in times as sombre as these, I wish you the best life possible. To you and to your families: you are loved, and you are remembered.

Not a Single Penny Has Found Its Way into Our Piggy Bank in 2025

“Quarter of a million eyes have now landed on our work at Energy Central—a milestone that still feels electric. I can still see Matt Chester’s message popping up: “Fancy sharing your piece on our platform?” One word—absolutely—set the spark. Today, that spark has become a blazing beacon. Cheers, Matt, for opening the door; here’s to the next 250 k…

Under the clear-eyed wisdom of Aristotle—who in Nicomachean Ethics celebrated generosity as the art of giving just the right amount, to the right cause, at the perfect moment—we declare with steadfast resolve: throughout all of 2025, not one penny of support has graced our coffers.

This is our rallying cry to you:

Hoist our banner—like, repost, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central: it costs nothing but echoes through halls of influence.

Lend your strength—if you can, please fuel the mission that keeps democracy honest and our energy future bright:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611

Swish: 076 423 90 79

Stripe: [Donation Link]

Every gift, no matter the size, fans the spark of independent thought into a roaring blaze. You’re not just donating—you’re empowering a truth-seeker in a world starved for clarity.

Remember, your donations are tax-deductible. Please check with your tax advisor for details.

Join us. Keep the flame burning. Light the way forward—in these darkening times, your support is the beacon guiding us all.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/monroe-capote-cardenal-tits-sex-alcohol-theft-mental-night-toro-ghio-ymupf

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1954116827375665280

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 6, 2025

________________________________________

Life is a wild mind’s fever, only soothed by diving deeper into its vibrant chaos.

________________________________________

A Novella

________________________________________

First conceived: Mallorca, 1979. Written: allorca, 1979 • Santo Domingo • Karlstad, 2025. Santo Domingo - Karlstad, 2025.

No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and specific other non-commercial uses permitted by copyright law. If you need permission, please contact the author. This is a work of fiction based on real events and historical figures. While some characters and incidents are based on real people and events from 1979 Spain, dialogue and certain situations have been recreated for literary purposes. Any resemblance to actual events or locales or persons, living or dead, is entirely coincidental except where noted as historical fact.

________________________________________

“Prayer for Marilyn Monroe, Lord, receive this girl known throughout the Earth by the name of Marilyn Monroe. However, that was not her actual name (but You know her true name, that of the little orphan raped at 9 years old and the shop girl who at 16 had wanted to kill herself) and who now presents herself before You without any makeup without her Press Agent without photographers and without signing autographs alone like an astronaut facing the spatial night…

Ernesto Cardenal

________________________________________

Chapter I: The Balearic Sun The sun. Blinding over the largest of the Balearics.

July 1979. The month that would change Spain forever.

In Madrid, Felipe González prepares his ascent to power. PSOE posters reading "Por el cambio" cover the walls of a Spain learning to breathe. In Guernica, Picasso's painting prepares to return home after forty years of exile. In the Basque Country, ETA kills, and Spain bleeds its freedom.

But in Mallorca, on this Mediterranean island that touches Africa with its fingertips, history is different. Here, the revolution is sensual. Corporeal. Silent.

Truman walks down Calle Marqués Torre. His small feet, almost feminine, sink into hemp espadrilles that offer no protection against the fire of Mallorcan tarmac. It's midday and the thermometer reads forty degrees in the shade.

The ground burns with that characteristic ushhh of Mediterranean summer. As if the earth itself had a fever.

It smells of Coppertone mixed with European sweat. Of paellas cooking in beach bars where reddened Germans attempt to pronounce "cerveza" in Spanish. Of Moroccan hashish that crosses the Strait in speedboats and arrives in Mallorca in the rucksacks of hippies who have made the Mediterranean their particular Kathmandu.

In his head, obsessive, hammering: Gloria, gloria, gloria... Umberto Tozzi won't leave him in peace. The song that will define the summer of '79 has been playing on loop in his brain, tortured by last night's Manhattans, for five hours.

The remains of a Moroccan chocolate joint that had circulated until the early hours mix with alcohol in his nervous system, creating that sensation of hypnosis that has accompanied him since dawn.

A figure pursues him as well.

Elegant. A woman of fifty or more. Platinum blonde hair, short, with that asymmetric cut fashionable in Paris. Deep blue eyes like the fjords of her native Norway. Always leaning against one of the bars in Alexandra discotheque.

What was this solitary Marilyn doing, so elegant, in this Mediterranean chaos?

________________________________________

Chapter II: Flashback - Oslo, January 1979 Six months earlier.

The mansion facing the fjord is buried under three metres of snow. From her bedroom window, Marilyn Zetterlund contemplates the lunar landscape of a winter that has already lasted four months and still has three to go.

It's three in the afternoon and it's already night.

The artificial light from her library creates dancing shadows over book spines. Munch, Ibsen, Hamsun, Undset. The Norwegian geniuses who transformed Nordic depression into universal art.

On the tea table, a letter with embassy letterhead from the Spanish Embassy in Oslo. An invitation to a charity dinner for Spanish orphans. The sort of social event she hates but attends out of obligation.

Her late husband, Lars, a naval industrialist, had left a fortune that automatically included her in all Scandinavian power circles—money she didn't want. Social position, she despised. Obligations she fulfilled like an automaton.

In the fireplace, birch logs crackle with that sound she's heard all her life—the sound of Nordic solitude.

She pours herself another aquavit—the third of the afternoon.

On the side table, next to the blue velvet armchair where she spends her days, a photograph: Astrid at fifteen, a month before the diagnosis. Blonde like her, with those same blue eyes that now look at her from the silver frame like an eternal reproach.

"Mummy, when I'm older I want to go to Spain. To dance flamenco. To drink sangría. To meet dark men who whisper to me in Spanish."

She never knew Spain. Never danced flamenco. Never loved a dark man.

Leukaemia took her in six months, between November and April, whilst the Norwegian winter covered everything with its mantle of white death.

Marilyn makes the decision that afternoon. She'll go to Spain. Not for the charity dinner. For Astrid. To see what her daughter never could see. To live, even a little, what her daughter never could live.

To flee from the frozen fjord that has become the mirror of her dead soul.

________________________________________

Chapter III: Manhattan, February 1979 Five months earlier.

Truman Capote's flat in the UN Plaza building is a mausoleum of lost glory. The walls are covered with photographs documenting a life that no longer exists: Capote with Jackie Kennedy, with Babe Paley, with all the high society ladies who have now erased him from their invitation lists.

It's four in the morning, and Truman can't sleep. He's never been able to sleep since "Answered Prayers" was published.

On the coffee table, empty martini bottles accumulate like fallen soldiers in a lost battle. Beside them, letters that no longer arrive. Invitations that have dried up. Telephones that no longer ring.

On the answering machine, the only messages are from editors wanting more scandals, more revelations, more literary betrayals. As if he were a gossip-producing machine rather than a writer.

He gets up and walks to the window overlooking the East River. New York never sleeps, but at this hour, even the city that never rests seems exhausted. Yellow taxis circulate like mechanical ghosts through semi-empty streets.

He thinks of Perry Smith. He always thinks of Perry Smith when he can't sleep. The executed murderer whose death has obsessed him for fifteen years. Perry was beautiful in his violence. Vulnerable in his evil. Everything Truman never dared to be: authentically destructive.

But "In Cold Blood" gave him glory. "Answered Prayers" took it away.

On the desk, next to the Olympia typewriter that now remains silent, a travel brochure to Spain. "Discover the Balearic Islands. Mediterranean paradise within your reach."

He'd bought it that afternoon at a Fifth Avenue agency, almost on impulse. As if Spain could save him from himself.

Why Spain? Why Mallorca?

Perhaps because Spain was also being reborn, it had also killed its past and was learning to be free. Probably in that newly awakened Spain, he could find something resembling redemption.

Or because in Mallorca, he could be Truman Capote without having to bear the weight of being Truman Capote.

That dawn, he made the decision. He books a flight for June. He doesn't know that in Mallorca, he'll meet a Norwegian woman who carries her living death.

He doesn't know that the woman will restore his faith in literature as the ultimate confession.

________________________________________

Chapter IV: Diego - Witness to His Generation

Diego Hernández is twenty years old and studies Fine Arts in Madrid. He's come to Mallorca with what remained of his study grant, determined to spend the freest summer of his life on the island everyone says has gone mad.

His father, a civil guard stationed in Cuenca, voted for Popular Alliance in the first democratic elections. His mother, a national school teacher, secretly voted for PSOE. Diego belongs to the first Spanish generation that doesn't know fear.

Or so he believes.

He's grown up between the Spain that was dying and the Spain being born. His first conscious memories are the demonstrations demanding amnesty, the first covers of Interviú with naked women, and the first songs by Serrat sung in Catalan on television.

He's the transition generation. Those who inherited freedom without having conquered it. Those who feel guilty for living what their parents couldn't live.

In his student rucksack, he carries three books: "One Hundred Years of Solitude" by García Márquez, "The Autumn of the Patriarch" by the same author, and "In Cold Blood" by Truman Capote in Spanish translation.

He doesn't know that tonight he'll witness the most important conversation of his life.

He doesn't know he'll be witness to the encounter between two literary geniuses in a Mallorcan discotheque whilst Spain learns to be free.

He doesn't know that what he sees and hears tonight will pursue him for decades, until he becomes a writer himself to try to capture what he witnessed.

Because Diego will be the one who, forty years later, writes this story you're reading.

________________________________________

Chapter V: The Liberation Soundtrack

On the transistor radio in the boarding house where Diego has breakfast, Radio Popular de Palma broadcasts the summer hit: "We Are Family" by Sister Sledge. The song that's become the unofficial anthem of Spain, celebrating its first decade of freedom.

Disco music has arrived in Spain with the force of a cultural revolution. Donna Summer, Bee Gees, Chic, Gloria Gaynor. Sounds coming from New York and Paris, but which in Spain acquire an almost subversive political meaning.

Dancing is an act of rebellion against forty years of military marches.

In Costa del Sol discotheques, Spaniards learn to move their bodies without shame. In Barcelona, the Catalan movida rediscovers the rhythm that Francoism had tried to kill. In Madrid, Pedro Almodóvar films transvestites dancing "I Will Survive" as if it were a declaration of war against eternal Spain.

And in Mallorca, in Alexandra discotheque, young Europeans move to the rhythm of music that speaks of liberation, chosen family, survival and free love.

"Le Freak" by Chic plays whilst Diego walks towards the beach. Nile Rodgers' guitar mixes with the sound of seagulls and the engines of Seat 600s that have invaded Balearic roads.

It's the soundtrack of Spain discovering that it can be happy.

In Oslo, Marilyn listens to Edvard Grieg in Nordic solitude. In Manhattan, Capote listens to jazz from the forties, the music of his lost youth. But here, on this Mediterranean island, both will discover that disco music can also be a form of prayer.

________________________________________

Chapter VI: Goya's Gallery Under the Sun

Twenty minutes to Palma Nova. Diego crosses Passeig Mar towards the riverside pavement. He goes down to the coast through the first entrance coming from Palma.

He observes every metre of sand. He looks for his friends camouflaged amongst the beach citizens.

And he finds himself before the most extraordinary gallery in the world.

The horizon had transformed into an open-air museum. An exhibition of flesh and desire under the Mediterranean sun. Seventy-nine. The year Europe discovered that breasts could worship the sun king without shame. Without modesty. Without the moral chains that had imprisoned bodies for centuries.

Diego walks amongst this living gallery. His Fine Arts student'’ eyes immediately recognise the forms. The textures. The volumes that have obsessed masters for millennia.

Goya's Majas, naked under the Balearic sun.

Here are the languid tits. Melancholy. Like Spain itself, which was dying in the last gasp of Francoism. Breasts that guard the sadness of generations of silenced women. Dry breasts, plagued with sorrow. The same desolation that Modigliani imprints on his taciturn faces. Breasts agonised by historical absinthe. By the time it becomes extinct by dictatorships that die.

They carry in their fall the genetic memory of submission. The invisible weight of black mantillas. Of perpetual mourning. Of dark churches where bodies were sin.

Diego stops. Observes. These women have come to liberate themselves under the Mallorcan sun. Their flaccid breasts don't seek beauty. They seek freedom. The right to exist without the masculine gaze that judges. That classifies. That possesses.

A fifty-year-old woman, with silver stretch marks marking the history of pregnancies and breastfeeding, slowly sits up on her towel. Her fallen breasts, veined, beautiful in their devastation, move with the gravity of one who has nursed children during dictatorship and now allows herself the luxury of existing in the sun.

Diego sees in her his mother, all Spanish mothers who raised children between whispers and fears.

But there are other breasts—those of the Nordics.

Fertile women arrived from countries where sexual freedom had been conquered earlier—beautiful volumes, exquisitely sensual through their anatomical excesses. Almost naked in absolute freedom, covered only by minuscule underwear, lost to humanity.

These breasts inspire freshness. Impeccably positioned on the torso as if a Greek sculptor had carved them. Round in their forms, with that pale pink colour that only exists in Raphael's virgins. The striking dark brown nipples, small diamonds embedded in the perfect architecture of young flesh.

They're the breasts of Germans, Swedes, and Dutch women who have invaded Spanish coasts. They bring with them the sexual revolution that Spain is barely beginning to taste. Their bodies are political manifestos—declarations of feminine independence.

A Stockholm blonde, no more than twenty-five, plays volleyball with her liberated breasts bouncing to the game's rhythm. No shame exists. No modesty. Only the animal joy of a young body moving in space without asking permission from any Catholic god.

And there are the ethereal ones—those who seem to emerge from a surrealist canvas.

Long and slender bone structures, covered by a veil of ochre-brown to moss-green skin. The sun has toasted them until they've become a Mediterranean landscape. They denote every joint of the body like a topographic map of desire.

Their tits adopt impossible forms. Hanging pears. Inverted triangles. Small hills in the geography of their elongated bodies. Two enormous aureolas around almost non-existent nipples. Like the long women with happy feline faces that Wilfredo Lam paints in his compositions about the Cuban jungle.

These are the Spanish women. Those who have inherited Moorish blood. African sensuality that hid under centuries of repressive Catholicism. Their breasts aren't European. They're Mediterranean. Ancestral. They carry the memory of Al-Andalus in every curve.

Diego understands he's witnessing a revolution.

Not only aesthetic. Political. Social. Anthropological.

Every pair of breasts exhibited in the sun is an act of rebellion against Franco's Spain. Against Catholic morality. Against the idea that the feminine body exists for reproduction and masculine pleasure.

Here, on this Mallorcan beach, in the summer of seventy-nine, women have declared that their breasts belong to them. That they can show them. Hide them. Offer them. Deny them as an act of their own will.

Breasts as a symbol of the new Spain.

The smell of Coppertone mixes with the saline aroma of the Mediterranean and the sweet perfume of hashish smoked discreetly behind psychedelic-coloured parasols.

A group of Catalans sing "L'Estaca" by Lluís Llach whilst a German woman with monumental breasts applies coconut oil with the parsimony of one performing a sacred ritual.

Diego observes how some women move, how their breasts oscillate as they walk towards the sea. Without haste. Without the urgency to cover themselves that would have existed just a few years before. A new corporeal grammar exists—a new language of skin.

He sees an adolescent with diminutive breasts, almost non-existent, playing frisbee with a freedom that would have been unthinkable for her mother. Her small breasts bounce with each jump. No shame exists. No modesty. Only the joy of a young body inhabited without complexes.

Tits as political resistance.

Because that's what Diego understands whilst walking amongst this human gallery: every naked breast is a vote against the past. A declaration that New Spain will be free. Sensual. Without complexes.

The breasts he sees aren't passive erotic objects. They're active subjects of their representation. Like Goya's majas, who looked directly at the spectator with defiance. Like Fellini's women, who inhabited their sexuality without asking permission.

The technique of observation.

Diego has learnt to look at the Fine Arts Faculty. He knows how to distinguish between voyeuristic gaze and artistic gaze. Between lust and aesthetic analysis.

He observes textures. Bronzed skin against the white skin of recently arrived tourists. The contrast between the pink nipples of Nordics and the brown nipples of Mediterranean women. Different flesh densities. Distinct degrees of firmness.

It's not pornography. It's visual anthropology. It's the study of the feminine body in its natural habitat of newly conquered freedom.

In his head, he takes mental notes that forty years later will become this story because Diego will be a writer. Because this beach is converting him into a writer without his knowledge.

The appearance of marine Venus.

Unconsciously, he peers at the ocean. He glimpses shadows against the light of people bathing in the sea. Marine life reminds him of familiar summer pastime scenes in Sorolla's paintings. The Sorolla who became the painter of light. The portraitist of beach people. The painter of naked children splashing in water, when childhood nudity was innocence, not suspicion.

But now there's something more. A new iconography. That of adult bodies that have chosen their nudity.

Within the blindness produced by being on the opposite side of light, Diego manages to distinguish the silhouette of a young woman emerging from the water. Like Botticelli's Venus emerging from marine foam.

She stops for a few moments to pick up a nightgown thrown on the sand. Her movement is ritual. Sacred. Diego observes how she puts the tunic over her naked breasts. The body's humidity embraces the fabric to her skin like a second birth.

The fabric over the young woman's complexion creates unusual clarity on her breasts. It highlights the perfection of their conformation. The wet tissue becomes transparent, revealing more than concealing. It's the wet-veil technique that Greek sculptors mastered to suggest anatomy without showing it completely.

These breasts are perceived as immaculate. They maintain the support of a newly cut diamond. The firmness that only exists before gravity, pregnancy, and time leave their mark, perhaps due to the lack of bustle that the timeline doesn't yet provide.

The young woman reminds Diego of that beautiful femme that Sorolla masterfully interpreted in "After the Bath". Covered by a transparent tunic, with the sea in the background, emerging from the water like a modern goddess.

Breasts as liberated territory.

Diego understands he's witnessing a historic moment. The conquest of women's right to sun. To air. To corporeal freedom.

Every pair of breasts exhibited without shame is a victory against centuries of Catholic repression. Against the idea that the feminine body is shameful. Sinful. Object of temptation that must be hidden.

Here, on this Mallorcan beach, in the summer marking the end of an era, women have planted their flag in skin territory.

Their tits are their declaration of independence.

And Diego is a witness to that declaration.

________________________________________

Chapter VII: The Foreigners - Ambassadors of New Europe

Three beautiful Scottish women from Edinburgh. Two sisters and a friend. Anne, Paulette and Cindy. Between 18 and 22 years old. Their skins, stripped of northern sun, displayed a faded white that made them look like reddened ghosts under Mediterranean sun.

They'd arrived on the Barcelona ferry, with rucksacks full of bikinis they'd never used and tanning creams bought at Boots. They came from a Scotland where Margaret Thatcher had just come to power, promising a firm hand and where youth unemployment exceeded twenty per cent.

But in Mallorca, they were free. In the biggest of the Balearic Islands, they could be the women that Scottish Presbyterian morality forbade them to be.

They'd met an island friend of Truman's. Capote fuerte, as they called him in Spanish. Capoti in English. That was the name of the American writer's summer lover.

Capote fuerte is twenty-five and has the Mediterranean beauty that drives northern tourists mad. Skin bronzed by generations of Balearic sun, black eyes that seem to guard Arabic secrets, and that smile mixing Mallorcan innocence with newly awakened sexual malice.

His father has a mechanical workshop in Palma. His mother sells ensaimadas to German tourists. He speaks four languages, which he learned on the street, and is an expert at making lonely foreigners feel at home.

Truman has a relationship that neither of them bothers to define. Summer love. Mediterranean sex. A mutual company between an American literary genius and a young Balearic man discovering he can be desired by someone famous.

—Hello Capote! How's it going?

—In full swing, —Truman would reply, with senses more in order after the marine bath.

—Let me introduce some friends.

Capote fuerte bowed like a buffoon when introducing Anne. With Paulette, he engaged in the same melodrama. His gestures are even more dramatic. But with Cindy, it was different. Capote fuerte revered his admiration. Despite the love affair between him and Truman, his face took on a serious look. He joined hands at heart level. Head bowed in emulation of a Buddhist greeting, trying to transmit the emotion he felt for her. For Cindy.

Cindy represents everything Capote fuerte will never be able to have: class, British education, a future extending beyond Mallorca's tourist seasons. She's a Literature student at Edinburgh University. She's read Virginia Woolf. She knows who Truman Capote is before being introduced.

And Capote fuerte falls in love with her with the desperation of one who knows love has an expiry date: the last September ferry.

They responded to Capote Fuerte's theatrical presentation:

—Hello, Truman...

—Hello...

Capote approached and kissed them on each cheek. Sealing a third kiss on his right hand palm. A gesture he'd learnt in Manhattan salons and which here, on this Mallorcan beach, acquires a different meaning. More authentic. Less calculated.

—Ça va? Capote fuerte...

—Ça va? Capote...

—Ça va?

They were Ann-Charlotte and Marie. French friends from Arcachon in Bordeaux. They'd been involved in the group's affairs for some time. Ann-Charlotte studies Philosophy at the Sorbonne and is writing her thesis on Simone de Beauvoir. Marie wants to be a photographer and carries a Leica she never uses because she's too busy living to document life.

They come from a France where François Mitterrand prepares to win elections, promising to "change life". A France that has already had its May '68 and now exports its sexual liberation to the Mediterranean.

Marie said goodbye almost instantly:

—See you tonight...

Ann-Charlotte remained with the tribe, conversing with Capote. She was melancholy because she had to separate from her summer love. In four days, she had to leave for France. Summer was dying, and with it the fleeting loves of that season.

But there was something more. Ann-Charlotte had connected with Truman on an intellectual level that surprised her. She'd read "Music for Chameleons" in French and wanted to talk to him about the technique of "novelised journalism". She tried to understand how one can write truth using fiction techniques.

She didn't know she was talking to a man who had sacrificed his entire social life for doing precisely that.

________________________________________

Chapter VIII: Capote fuerte - The Mediterranean Incarnate.

Whilst Truman floats in the Mediterranean, letting saltwater cure the wounds Manhattan had opened in his soul, Capote fuerte observes from shore with that mixture of adoration and perplexity his American lover produces in him.

For Capote fuerte, Truman is an extraterrestrial. A being coming from a world where people live in skyscrapers, take yellow taxis and publish books read by everyone—a world as distant from his native Mallorca as Mars.

But at the same time, in the bed of the small flat they rent together in Cala Mayor, Truman becomes what he is: a forty-five-year-old man, short, with a high voice that in intimacy becomes a whisper, and a need for affection frightening in its intensity.

Capote fuerte doesn't understand why someone so famous, so successful, so brilliant, needs constant confirmation that he's loved. He doesn't understand why Truman sometimes wakes up screaming names he doesn't recognise: Perry, Babe, Lee.

He doesn't understand why a man who has dined with Jacqueline Kennedy cries when seeing photos of New York parties in American magazines he buys at the port kiosk.

What he does understand is that Truman needs saving. And he, Capote fuerte, with his twenty-five years and limited education, has become the involuntary saviour of one of America's most important writers.

The sentimental education of Capote fuerte

Truman is teaching him things he never knew existed. Not just about sex —though that too— but about life. About how to look at a sunset and see a metaphor in it. About how to listen to people talk and detect the lies they tell themselves about how to convert pain into art.

—Do you think rich people are happier? —he asks one afternoon whilst watching German millionaires' yachts pass by.

—No, —Truman responds without hesitation—. Rich people are more complicated. And complicated isn't the same as profound.

—And are you happy?

—I'm honest. And honesty and happiness are natural enemies.

Capote fuerte doesn't fully understand what that means, but he files it in his memory along with all the other phrases Truman drops like seeds that will someday germinate in his consciousness.

Mediterranean jealousy

But something is consuming him: jealousy. Not sexual jealousy —the relationship with Truman isn't exclusive and both know it— but intellectual jealousy.

When he sees Truman talk to Ann-Charlotte about French literature, when he sees him converse with other writers who sometimes appear in Mallorca, when he realises there are parts of Truman's mind that are forbidden territory for him, Capote fuerte feels a frustration he doesn't know how to express.

He can give Truman his body, his youth, his Mediterranean joy. But he can't give him what Truman needs: an intellectual equal. Someone who understands references, who has read the books, who can follow his thoughts when they become too complex.

And that makes him a perfect lover and an impossible companion.

The future that won't exist

Capote fuerte knows this is temporary. He knows September will come and Truman will return to New York, to his world of skyscrapers and cocktails and literary critics. He knows he'll stay in Mallorca, helping his father in the workshop, living off memories of a summer when he was a genius's lover.

But there are nights when he wakes up and finds Truman writing on the balcony, with that small portable typewriter he always carries, and he wonders if perhaps, just perhaps, love could be stronger than differences of class, culture, and education.

He wonders if perhaps Truman could stay. If they could build something real on this island, where everything seems possible.

He doesn't know that Truman asks himself the same questions. He doesn't know that Truman has seriously considered the possibility of never returning to New York, of staying forever on this island where he can be happy in a simple, Mediterranean way, without complications.

He doesn't know that the only thing separating them isn't the difference of worlds, but the fact that Truman Capote can't live without being Truman Capote, and Truman Capote can't exist in Mallorca.

He can't be a literary genius and a Mediterranean lover at the same time. He has to choose.

And both know what the choice will be, though neither dares verbalise it.

________________________________________

Chapter IX: Alexandra in Magaluf - The Existential Laboratory

Alexandra was an atypical discotheque located in the heart of Magaluf, a beach which had become the epicentre of European liberation on Spanish territory. Different from the ordinary. Instead of being shrouded in darkness and illuminated by those lugubrious ultraviolet lights that highlight white colour, it was illuminated.

As if it were a metaphor for new Spain: transparent, without secrets, without the shadows that had defined the previous forty years.

But also like an existential laboratory where each individual faced the terrible freedom of choosing who to be without the moral chains that previously defined every gesture.

The Sartrean nausea of freedom

For Spanish youth who filled Alexandra every night, the experience was simultaneously liberating and anguishing. For the first time in their lives, they could choose everything: whom to dance with, whom to kiss, how to move their bodies, what to think, what to say.

And that absolute freedom produced what Sartre would call existential nausea.

Diego observed from his corner how many young Spaniards were paralysed on the dance floor, overwhelmed by infinite possibilities. Forty years of dictatorship had prepared them to obey, not to choose.

Freedom was a condemnation they had to learn to bear.

The anguish of being authentic

In Alexandra converged all contradictions of Spain '79: the desire for modernity and fear of change, the need for liberation and nostalgia for lost certainty, the euphoria of democracy and anguish of having to build national identity from scratch.

Every young person entering Alexandra faced the fundamental question: Who am I when I can be anything?

Germans, Swedes, and the French who populated Magaluf came from societies that had already resolved these questions. For them, Alexandra was simply fun. For Spaniards, it was an existential battlefield.

The older woman: The weight of knowledge

Amidst all this explosive youth, Marilyn Zetterlund's presence created a contrast going beyond the generational. She represented the weight of knowledge, the burden of one who has lived enough to know all choices have consequences.

Young people had adopted her as a sort of existential oracle. They came to her not only with their love stories, but with their fundamental doubts about the meaning of existence in a Spain that no longer believed in God, Franco, or any external authority.

—You'll be wondering what this old woman is doing sitting in this bar, alone, every day, stuck here in this young people's discotheque. Incidentally, this old woman is called Marilyn Zetterlund.

But her response was deeper than juvenile curiosity:

—I'm here because I've learnt that shared solitude is less cruel than solitary solitude. I'm here because you still believe your choices matter, and that faith keeps me alive.

The drama of mortality

The discotheque had become a theatre where each night the fundamental human drama was performed: young people pretending to be immortal, adults knowing they weren't, and music as soundtrack to postponed mortality.

Every song that played was a reminder that time passes. Every dance was a desperate attempt to stop the clock. Every kiss was a small victory against death.

And at the centre of everything, acute awareness that Spain itself was mortal. That this newly born democracy could die. That this freedom could be lost. That nothing, absolutely nothing, was guaranteed.

Authenticity as a moral imperative

In Alexandra, being authentic had become the only remaining moral imperative. In a society that had lost all external certainties, the only possible truth was the interior truth.

But being authentic meant accepting one's contradictions. It meant confessing that civil guards could be thieves. That brilliant writers could be profoundly unhappy. Mothers could hate their motherhood. That young people could be terrified by their youth.

That's why Capote's phrase resonated so much: "Have you heard a policeman say he's a good thief?"

Because it was the perfect question for a society learning that authenticity was more critical than respectability.

Around two in the morning, no fewer than twenty girls and boys had gathered around Marilyn. I don't know what magnetism she possessed. Perhaps her fluent pronunciation of Spanish with a traditional accent. Or the deep, harsh voice, typical of abundant cigarette consumption. Or the calm and audacity of her stories. Uncommon. They made youth love sharing with that lady who represented the tragic wisdom of one who has lost everything and continues living.

________________________________________

Chapter X: The Encounter of Broken Souls

Around three in the morning, when other young people had dispersed on their nocturnal hunts, Truman Capote slowly approached the corner where Marilyn Zetterlund remained motionless, like a Nordic sphinx carved in bar marble.

Diego, from his observation table, witnessed what would be the most important conversation of his life. He didn't know it then, but forty years later, he would become a writer solely to tell this story.

—So Marilyn... —said Capote with his characteristic voice, high and theatrical—. Or do you prefer Karin?

The woman raised her deep blue eyes towards him. A melancholy smile drew itself on her lips.

—Call me whatever you want, darling. Names are masks we use to hide from ourselves.

Capote settled on the adjacent stool, ordered a martini with a sign to the barman, and studied the profile of this woman who had captivated all of Alexandra's youth.

—You know who I am, don't you?

—Of course, Truman. I've read "In Cold Blood". I've read "Other Voices, Other Rooms". I know your work. I know your pain.

The writer started slightly. He didn't expect that direct reference to his pain.

—My pain?

—The pain of one who writes about murderers because he understands the darkness of the human soul. The pain of one born different in a world that punishes difference. The pain of one who loves men in a society that condemns him for it.

Marilyn lit another cigarette, smoke forming spirals ascending towards disco lights.

—But tell me about you, Marilyn. About your real pain. Why is a Norwegian woman of your age and your class here, night after night, in a discotheque of young Spaniards?

Marilyn's laugh was harsh, like broken glass.

—My pain? Oh, dear Truman, my pain has a name and surname. It's called cosmic solitude.

—Explain.

—Have you ever felt you're an extraterrestrial on your planet? Do you observe humanity from outside, incapable of really connecting with another human being?

Capote took a sip of his martini, thoughtful.

—All my life.

—Exactly. That's why I'm here. These young people look at me like a curiosity. An ancient woman who tells them stories. They don't see me as a woman. They don't desire me. They don't judge me. They listen. And in that listening, I find something resembling company.

The Oslo of memory

—And in Norway?

—In Norway, I'm the wealthy widow. The woman who lost her husband in a boat accident. The one who lives alone in a mansion facing the fjord. The one neighbour's pity and fear at the same time. Because solitude, dear Truman, becomes contagious after a particular time.

Capote nodded, understanding.

—I'm also fleeing. From New York. But you know what's curious, Marilyn? Our cities are opposite, and yet they've produced the same type of existential emptiness in us.

—Explain.

—Oslo is the city of silence. Of forced introspection. Of winter that obliges you to look inward because there's nothing to see outside.

—Exactly. In Oslo, the cold pushes you towards your interior. The nights are so long you have no choice but to face yourself. There's no escape in light, in frenetic activity. You only have your mind as company.

—New York is the opposite. It's the city of constant noise. Of perpetual movement. Of infinite distractions. But curiously, it produces the same solitude as your silent Oslo.

—How is that possible?

Capote took a sip of his martini and looked towards the dance floor.

—In New York, you can be surrounded by eight million people and feel completely alone. The city's speed is so brutal that nobody has time for real connections. Everything is superficial. Immediate. Disposable.

—In Oslo, it's different. Their solitude is honest. Pure. It doesn't disguise itself as socialisation. In dark months, it's simply you, your house, and the emptiness of the frozen fjord.

—Do you know what I envy about your Oslo?

—What?

—The honesty of its emptiness. In New York, solitude disguises itself. People go to cocktails, galleries, theatres, pretending connection. But they're as isolated as you in your Norwegian mansion. They don't admit it.

Marilyn lit another cigarette, thoughtful.

—But do you know what's most fascinating about all this, Truman?

—What?

—That's where we are. Two castaways from the north. Two souls frozen by our respective urban solitudes. And we've come to take refuge on a Mediterranean island that's practically in Africa.

Capote looked around, as if seeing the discotheque for the first time.

—You're right. Mallorca is a stone's throw from Morocco. From Algeria. From the chocolate continent.

—Exactly. And here we are, immersed in the lust of an island belonging to a country that's just beginning to know freedom. Spain has just awakened from forty years of moral winter. Franco died only two years ago.

—It's as if we'd come to witness a birth. The birth of Spanish sensuality.

—Do you realise? We come from countries already free, already developed, already cynical. But Spain... Spain is discovering freedom like an adolescent discovers her sexuality.

Capote observed the dance floor where young Spaniards mixed with European tourists in an orgy of music, sweat and desire.

—That's why everything here is so intense. So carnal. So desperate.

—Exactly. In Oslo, repression is Protestant. Cold. Contained. In New York, repression is economic. Competitive. Calculated. But here... here repression has been Catholic. Mediterranean. African at the bottom.

—African?

—Of course, darling. The Moors were here for eight hundred years. African blood runs through Spanish veins, though they deny it. When Franco died, he not only liberated Spain from fascism. He liberated Moorish sensuality that had been chained for centuries.

Capote took a long sip of his martini, processing the idea.

—That's why everything here seems so... primitive to me. So authentic. These young people haven't yet learnt to be sophisticated in their freedom.

—Exactly! In New York, sexual freedom is just another accessory. Like a designer handbag. Here, it's emotional survival. It's breathing after having been underwater.

—And we're voyeurs of that newly born freedom.

—We're anthropologists of desire, Truman. We study a society rediscovering its own body.

Elite secrets

—I'm also fleeing, you know? From New York. From my demons. From fame that devours me like cancer. And now... now I'm also fleeing from my former friends.

—What have you done, Truman?

Capote took a long sip of his martini, as if needing liquid courage to continue.

—I've written the truth. The terrible, destructive truth about American high society. About their most intimate secrets. Their adulteries. Their betrayals. Their golden miseries.

—"Answered Prayers"?

Capote's eyes lit up with surprise.

—You know it?

—Darling, in European circles, there's much talk about your book. About how you've destroyed Manhattan's elite with your poisonous pen.

—It wasn't poison, Marilyn. It was honesty. Pure, brutal honesty.

—Tell me.

Capote lit a cigarette with slightly trembling hands.

—For years, I was confident in America's most powerful women. Babe Paley, the CBS magnate's wife. Lee Radziwill, Jackie Kennedy's sister. Slim Keith, C.Z. Guest... They all told me their secrets. Invited me to their parties. Treated me like an exotic pet.

—And you betrayed it all?

—No! —Capote's voice rose, high and defensive—. I documented the truth. I wrote about how Babe discovered her husband was sleeping with her best friend. About how European royalty comes to New York to borrow money. About blackmail, drugs, marriages of convenience...

Marilyn smiled bitterly.

—Ah, monarchy secrets. I know some of those, too.

—Really?

—Darling, when you have money in Norway, you automatically enter certain circles. I've dined with Danish royalty. I've heard nocturnal confessions from alcoholic princes and depressive queens.

—Have you never felt tempted to tell it?

—Of course. But I'm not a writer. You are. And that's your curse.

Capote looked at her intensely.

—Explain.

—Writers are condemned to transform life into literature. They can't live a moment without wondering how it will sound on paper. They can't hear a secret without imagining how they'd write it.

—Exactly! —Capote struck the bar with his small fist. That's precisely what happened to me. For years, I accumulated stories. Observed. Listened. Took mental notes. And when I finally wrote them...

—The world fell apart.

—My friends became my enemies. Doors to the most exclusive salons closed to me. Overnight, I became a social pariah.

Royal genetic patterns

—And what about Spanish royalty? Since we're here...

Marilyn took a long sip of whisky, as if evaluating how much she could reveal.

—Ah, Spanish royalty... You know? In my Nordic circles there's much comment about certain patterns that seem to repeat generation after generation.

—Patterns?

—Genetic, darling. Tendencies are inherited, like eye colour or height. But more... intimate.

Capote moved closer, lowering his voice.

—In "Answered Prayers" I wrote about Pablo Gracia. Do you know him?

—Of course. The one who lives the perfect double life. He's not open like you, Truman. He hides behind marriages of convenience and impeccable public appearances.

—Exactly. Pablo is the master of disguise. He has a wife, children, and a perfect façade of aristocratic respectability. But at night...

—At night, he's completely different.

—And what's fascinating is that this pattern isn't unique to Pablo. It's almost a family tradition. An inheritance passing from fathers to sons, like a recessive gene that occasionally surfaces.

Marilyn lit another cigarette, thoughtful.

—Are you suggesting there's a genetic line of... let's say, unconventional preferences in the Spanish high aristocracy?

—I don't suggest it. I affirm it. And not only Spanish. European in general. But in Spain, it's fascinating because Catholic repression has been so intense that it's created perfectly divided personalities.

—Like Pablo?

—Like Pablo. Like many others. Men who, during the day, are pillars of conservative society, and at night explore their true nature in very, very secret circles.

—Do you think this will continue in future generations?

Capote took a sip of his martini, contemplative.

—Marilyn, genes don't lie. Repression can hide, but can't change fundamental nature. Pablo has children. Those children will have children. And some of them will inevitably inherit not only titles and fortunes, but also... inclinations.

—Even if they reach positions of supreme power?

—Especially if they reach positions of supreme power. Power often amplifies those tendencies. The sensation of being above conventional moral rules.

—It's a fascinating time bomb.

—Exactly. Imagine: within one or two generations, we could have leaders carrying that genetic inheritance to the highest levels of power. And they'll have to choose between authenticity and political survival.

—Like Pablo has had to choose?

—But Pablo doesn't have the pressure of maximum scrutiny. A future king, for example, would have to navigate those waters with much more precision.

Marilyn looked at him intensely.

—Are you talking about someone specific?

—I'm talking about genetic probabilities, dear. About patterns that repeat. About the fascinating possibility that future Spain might have to face truths about its leadership that would be unthinkable in Franco's Spain.

The weight of honesty

—Is it worth it? Is truth worth it?

Capote reflected for a long moment.

—Do you know what hurts me most? It's not having lost my friends. It's been discovered that they were never really my friends. They loved me for my talent to entertain them, for my capacity to make them laugh with my cruel gossip. But the moment I directed that cruelty towards them...

—They abandoned you.

—Like rats fleeing a sinking ship.

Marilyn ordered another whisky and lit a new cigarette.

—Rich people are the same worldwide, darling. I've seen the same patterns in Oslo, Copenhagen, and London. They have a code: you can mock anyone, except them.

—So homophobia doesn't only damage individuals. It damages entire societies.

—Exactly. And whole countries lose their leaders' complete potential because those leaders are spending half their mental energy maintaining secrets.

—It's a Shakespearean tragedy on a national scale.

—And what I wrote about Pablo is only the tip of the iceberg. There are entire families, complete dynasties, where this is a recurring pattern.

—Do you think the whole truth will ever be known?

—Oh, it will be known. Truth always comes to light, Marilyn. Always. The question isn't whether it will be known, but when. And whether it's known, society will be ready to accept it, or it will destroy it.

Ernesto Cardenal and Marilyn Monroe

Marilyn remained thoughtful for a moment, turning her whisky glass between her hands.

—Do you know what's most curious about all this, Truman?

—What?

—That you call me Marilyn. That all these young people call me Marilyn. As if unconsciously, they'd detected something in me connecting with her.

—With whom?

—With the honest Marilyn. With Marilyn Monroe. With that broken girl, the world converted into a sexual symbol without ever asking who she was.

Capote straightened on his stool, suddenly interested.

—Tell me about that.

—Have you read "Prayer for Marilyn Monroe" by Ernesto Cardenal?

—The Nicaraguan poet? Merton's follower?

—Exactly. The Nobel Academy denied the well-deserved prize to him because his poetry is too pure, too honest for European tastes.

—I've heard of him. They say he's extraordinary.

—He's more than extraordinary, Truman. He's a visionary. And he wrote about Marilyn Monroe like no one else. He described her not as Hollywood's dumb blonde, but as what she was: an orphan raped at nine, a shop girl who wanted to kill herself at sixteen.

Capote remained quiet, processing the words.

—Continue.

—Cardenal sees her presenting herself before God "without any makeup, without her Press Agent, without photographers and without signing autographs, alone like an astronaut facing spatial night".

—My God.

—Do you realise the genius of that image? "Alone like an astronaut facing spatial night". That's precisely what Marilyn was. And that's exactly what you and I are.

—Astronauts facing spatial night.

—Exactly. Cardenal understood that Marilyn wasn't a sexual symbol. She was a symbol of cosmic solitude. Of absolute vulnerability disguised as power.

—Like us.

—Like us. That's why I identify so much with her. That's why when these young people call me Marilyn, they're not wrong. Because I'm also an emotional orphan. I've also been raped by life. I've also wanted to die.

—And you've also presented yourself without makeup before the world?

—Tonight, yes. With you. For the first time in years, I've removed all masks.

Capote extended his hand towards hers.

—Do you know what else Cardenal wrote about her?

—Tell me.

—That she dreamt as a child, she was naked in a church before a prostrate multitude, with heads on the ground, and had to walk on tiptoes not to step on heads.

Marilyn visibly shuddered.

—That's... that's exactly how I've felt all my life. Walking on tiptoes not to hurt others with my pain.

—And Cardenal understands that the dream wasn't about exhibitionism. It was about absolute vulnerability. About being exposed before multitudes that didn't see her.

—Like tonight. Like every night, I come here. I am exposed before these young people who don't see me. Who sees me as a curiosity, not as a person.

—But I see you, Marilyn. I see you.

—And I see you. And that's what Cardenal understood about the honest Marilyn: that all she wanted was to be seen. Seen. Not adored, not objectified. Just... understood.

Astrid's confession

—Do you think Cardenal personally knew that solitude?

—Of course. How else could he write like that? Only someone who has been an astronaut facing spatial night can recognise another astronaut.

—Like us tonight.

—Like us tonight. Three cosmic loners: Cardenal in his Nicaraguan monastery, you in your Manhattan flats, me in my Oslo mansion.

—And the honest Marilyn in her Brentwood flat, dying alone with a telephone in hand.

—Do you know what's most terrible?

—What?

—That Cardenal had to write a prayer for her. As if she were a saint. A martyr. Because that's what she was: a martyr of the system that converts vulnerable people into consumer products.

—Like the system that converts writers into salon celebrities.

—Exactly. Marilyn died of being Marilyn Monroe. You're dying of being Truman Capote. I'm dying of being Oslo's respectable widow.

—And what saves us?

—Nights like this. Conversations like this. Moments where we can remove disguises and be simply human.

Marilyn took a long sip of whisky and closed her eyes for a moment.

—I must tell you something, Truman. Something I've never told anyone.

—I'm listening.

—I had a daughter. Her name was Astrid. She died at sixteen. Leukaemia.

Marilyn's voice broke slightly.

—For two years, I watched her die slowly, day by day, cell by cell. And I couldn't do anything. Absolutely nothing.

Capote felt a chill run down his spine.

—I'm sorry.

—I don't want your pity, darling. I want your understanding. Do you understand now why I talk to these young people? I see in them the life my Astrid never could live. The summer love she never had. The dance nights she missed. The silly and meaningful conversations at once.

—Is that why you came to Spain?

—I came to Spain because here death doesn't follow me. In Norway, every corner of my house has its ghost. Every object reminds me of what I lost. Here I can pretend, for a few hours, that I'm just a woman telling stories.

Truman extended his small, pale hand towards Marilyn's. They touched briefly.

—We're two castaways on the same desert island.

—Exactly. Two souls who have seen too much. Who knows too much. Who has lost too much.

—Do you believe in redemption, Marilyn?

—No. But I believe in small moments of grace. Like this. Like this conversation. Like seeing these young people fall in and out of love without knowing that time is the only thing that matters.

—I've also lost faith in almost everything. Except words. In the power of telling stories.

—That's why you write about murderers. Because in the absolute darkness of the human soul, you find some light. A small spark telling you it's worth continuing to live.

—And you? What keeps you alive?

Marilyn looked towards the dance floor, where dozens of young people moved to the music's rhythm.

—Them. Their youth. Their blessed ignorance. Their capacity to believe love will last forever. Their ability to be happy without reason. They're my morphine against existential pain.

—Do you know what's most terrible about knowing the truth about life?

—Tell me.

—That you can't unknow it. Once you've seen behind the veil, you can't be innocent again. We're condemned to lucidity.

—That's why we drink, dear Truman.

—That's why we drink.

Both raised their glasses in a silent toast. A toast for the dead. For lost loves. For illusions that would never return.

The improvised prayer

—Do you know what I like about you, Marilyn?

—What?

—That you don't pretend. Don't pretend life is beautiful. Don't lie about pain.

—And I like that you write about darkness without romanticising it. That you show evil as what it is: banal, stupid, terribly human.

—Let's toast then to honesty.

—To terrible, necessary honesty.

At that moment, "Sad Eyes" began playing through speakers, and both remained silent, listening to the melancholy melody that seemed composed mainly for them.

—Do you know what's the only thing giving me hope? —Marilyn whispered.

—What?

—That we exist. That souls like yours and mine exist in this world. That we're not entirely alone in our lucidity.

—We're truth's custodians, Marilyn. Those who keep the memory of pain alive. So others don't forget. So others know they're not alone.

—Exactly.

Marilyn closed her eyes for a moment, as if channelling the Nicaraguan poet.

—"Lord, receive these two souls known throughout Earth with names that aren't their true names, but You know their true names: that of the different child who grew up in Alabama and that of the girl who lost her daughter in Oslo, and who now present themselves before You without any literary disguise, without their social masks, without their public characters, alone like two astronauts facing Mediterranean spatial night."

Capote remained silent, tears in his eyes.

—You're a poet, Marilyn.

—No. I'm just someone who understands pain. Like Cardenal. Like you. Like the real Marilyn.

—Like all of us who have been converted into symbols when all we wanted was to be human.

________________________________________

Chapter XI: Dawn: The Ritual of Endings Dawn was approaching.

Fever amongst Alexandra's citizens rose in intensity. On the dance floor, Marcus, one of the two Jamaican disc jockeys, perched atop the mixing desk, displayed his intrinsic rhythm to his genetic nomenclature. He contorted like a slow-motion snake to Isaac Hayes' "Shaft" beats. Whilst Winston synchronised turntables with complete concentration to release Dawn's most sentimental song: "Sad Eyes" by Robert John.

Those "Sad Eyes" unleashed feverish states amongst Alexandra's citizens. Moreover, that musical theme helped dispel unknowns about the fortune conquest efforts that would have occurred that night. That's when spirits ignited amongst hundreds of souls infected by Mallorcan dawn lust.

Discotheque citizens rushed, almost running, to the dance floor in an actual sexual hunt.

Diego observed from his table, fascinated by the transformation he'd witnessed during recent hours. The conversation between Capote and Marilyn had been like attending a masterclass in literature, psychology and human pain.

He'd taken mental notes of every phrase, every gesture, every silence. Without knowing it, he was documenting the story he'd write forty years later.

The closure ritual

From couples came fusion aromas of oestrogen and testosterone. They awakened hidden senses by sheltering antonymous sex with touch. They passed with love in unconscious on culmination's verge. Inciting the other erotic self and carnal appetites. Hands accompanied feelings. Undressing prey in the mind's imagination. Bodies contracted by perverse inertia with deliberate intention. Openly seeking the desired slip.

Summer loves also became more endearing. Calling for the innocent youth's climax. "I won't forget you," murmured the lover in another's ear. Leaving breath's imprint.

Cunning efforts were far from ingenious youthful intellectuality. Young men, like broken records, fired obvious nonsense to win over some girl.

—You're sensational...

—You're unique...

—Super nice...

—Your eyes are multicoloured. They look like violets... Or maybe they're emeralds. All I know is they're so cute, —said the inexperienced heartthrob.

Return to youthful reality.

In "Sad Eyes" last stanza, all young people gathered again with the elegant lady to continue hearing her stories in that busy bar corner.

Moods reached by alcohol touched the elegant lady's interior. Her voice had deepened. Her stories were even calmer. Topics are more erotic and interesting. Young people paid even more attention to the story about to begin.

—I'll tell you a story that has much to do with your present state of mind.

That state of mind, what's it called? How?...

Ex... Excid... Excited... ayyy... How difficult... Please help me...

Oops, let's see, better, easier. "Hot." Is that okay? "Hot" is the right word...

Young people's laughter was contagious. In the vicinity, you could hear the sound of glass bottles crashing into wooden crates.

This elderly Norwegian lady's figure, leaning against the bar, with hard binding she'd reached at that hour, created such rapport with discotheque citizens that interest in hearing stories extended to bartenders on the other side of the marble circle.

With a cigarette in her right hand, she wouldn't let go, a mocking smile on her face, examining each youthful face with her eyes, trying to establish the necessary mystery for her next story, Marilyn began.

Munch's Madonna

—I'll tell you, Munch created a second series of five works he called "The Madonna". The series is also known as "Munch's Madonna". It's guessed that with this work Munch tried to describe your sexual states, humans... Its interpretation. As you'll understand, nobody was in Munch's mind. So nobody can assert these reflections are entirely accurate. However, I'm pretty sure they're close to his thoughts because, after all, we're all human.

Munch's Madonna is a rectangular composition. In the centre of the painting, he placed a young woman, more adolescent. You can also distinguish the upper part of her body in the pleasure pose. Or seeking pleasure. Or desiring pleasure...

In the composition's periphery, in contour, surrounding a young woman, equally rectangular, Edvard places a sperm shoal in a race whose objective is interpreted, in the first intimation, as an unbridled pursuit to reach the female belly that always causes so much pleasure to those little fish maddened by reaching the ovum.

—Marilyn, how do women feel? —asked Paulette.

—That's precisely what I was about to tell you now. In a second speculation, we infer a desperate call from the female womb to seize those budding fish that, when they bite into the egg, turn into fertility to preserve our continuity. That is why Munch placed the foetus in the composition where the sperm shoal begins, interpreted by some, especially men, as a diabolical entity women create to make themselves desired by a man.

Astonishment exclamations and wows... Because young people were fascinated with stories, the area around the bar feels it.

—How bad men are, —sighed Paulette.

—You, —responded the men's chorus.

From the other side of the bar, one bartender commented to one patron:

—What a trip this aunt has put us in, with a lack of fluids in the head that doesn't drive us crazy like the court ones.

Imminent farewell

From speakers you could hear: Gloria, Gloria, Gloria, you're missing in air, your presence is missing... Missing warm innocence in my mouth that inadvertently names you, and I'll write my story with the word gloria...

All euphoric, trendy songs provoked amongst hundreds of young people trying to become a fashionable couple: Olivia Newton-John and John Travolta. Song closed that September night's reel. Like chorus lyrics, air and blood oxygenation were needed in the bodies of Alexandra's citizens.

—Marilyn... Marilyn... Marilyn... —Ann-Charlotte called the elegant lady huddled in her bar corner.

—We're leaving, Marilyn...

—We're leaving...

Marilyn, more than ever, couldn't move from her place, despite Ann-Charlotte's insistent call.

Ann-Charlotte decides to search for her. She approaches and takes her arm. Karin, almost collapsing from hard alcohol intake, approaches the exit door to catch up with the group.

First dawn light can be timidly perceived at five in the morning. Leisure fatigue invades the group's bodies. Present sleep invites rest.

________________________________________

Chapter XII: The Seat 500 and Philosopher

Civil Guard Group approaches Capote Fuerte's father's tiny, battered Seat 500. The car is parked near the sea. Capote fuerte hurries to leave and takes a few steps ahead of his friends. He searches for car keys in his pocket and prepares to open the car's left door.

The door opening process is slow, given the hour's ravages and constant consumption of some divinities that had arisen during early morning. Group, very close to Capote fuerte, attentively observes his movements. They, too, are impatient and anxious to be in the vehicle.

Capote fuerte raises right hand. Shows keys to Alexandra's citizens. Then, they place them in a lock. Gives the necessary pull to open the door. Unexpectedly, he's left with a handle in hand. Unable to open it.

This unexpected situation confuses Capote fuerte. He raises his hand high to show friends, who look worried. Provokes the group's laughter to the hilt in such a situation.

Diego, in quick reaction, tells Capote Fuerte:

—Open the car through the other door.

These Seat 500s only have two doors.

Capote Fuerte, opening arms in bewilderment, responds that the other door is broken.

Inherited fear

Concern takes hold of the group. The event goes from comic to tragicomic. Everyone bows their heads trying to find a solution to the mishap on Mallorcan soil.

Diego tries to take control of the situation and prepares to try opening the car. He raises his head and finds himself with a tricorn figure of three civil guards.

Panic invades Diego. He thinks: I don't have a passport. He feels trapped by the police. Locked in jail. Involved in mess he doesn't know how he'll get out of.

It's his generation's genetic fear. Fear of the Civil Guard they've inherited from parents, who inherited it from grandparents. Forty years of dictatorship aren't erased in two years of democracy.

For Diego, tricorns represent everything Spain is trying to leave behind: repression, authoritarianism, uniform fear.

Young people from abroad don't understand that tension. For them, they're simply police. For Diego, they're heirs of those who for decades repressed any expression of freedom.

Historical surprise

Unexpectedly, a civil guard's voice is heard among three policemen.

—Lad, I'm a good thief. Let me open the car.

Alexandra's citizens, incredulous to whom they're listening, don't believe anything. They're frightened by such an unusual event.

But Diego is paralysed for different reasons. The civil guard confessed to being a thief. In public. Naturally. As if it were the most normal thing in the world.

It's a perfect symbol of the new Spain being born. Spain, where even order representatives can confess their imperfections without fear. Spain, where honesty replaces official hypocrisy.

Civil Guard approaches the driver's door and begins manipulating it until he manages to open it with the skill of someone who, effectively, knows what he's doing.

—Come on, get in now... And go sleep...

Spain that confesses

Group members, distrustful, thank the guard and begin trying to accommodate eight bodies within that cubic metre of space, which is tiny, as the Seat 500s are.

Nobody explains how, but finally, everyone finds themselves inside a car. Fright had enhanced alcohol levels in the body. So everyone felt a disconnection between brain impulses and delayed reactions in motor action.

Clumsiness at that hour was prominent among the friend group. With countless hands fighting for the steering wheel, they say good morning to the guards and begin their journey to the hostel area.

Diego drives, thinking about what he's just witnessed. Not only the conversation between Capote and Marilyn, but that surreal moment with the civil guard.

It's as if the entire night had been a metaphor for the Spanish transformation. Body liberation on the beach, sexual freedom in a discotheque, brutal honesty in a conversation between two geniuses, and finally, a civil guard confessing to being a thief.

Spain is learning to tell the truth.

Mediterranean dawn

On the other side of the Mediterranean, the first call to prayer is heard from Tangier's Great Mosque. They remind Felipe González about how, in such a short time, Spanish society had changed so much.

He wonders, from his golden exile in Morocco, whilst preparing an electoral strategy: What will become of those Panama documents arriving decades later?

Felipe doesn't know that in forty years, Spain will have to face corruption scandals that would make the transition secrets seem innocent. He doesn't know that honest Spain they're building will have to deal with even more complex truths about money, power and institutional lies.

Whilst Seat takes the highway towards extinct Duques de Palma avenue.

________________________________________

Chapter XIII: Exodus to Sand

Truth Under Moon At four in the morning, when alcohol had dissolved the last inhibitions and Moroccan chocolate had liberated the final mental bonds, it was inevitable.

Nocturnal migration

Young people began abandoning Magaluf's Alexandra in waves. Not coordinated, but obeying primitive instinct telling them it was time to complete what had begun on the dance floor.

Diego observed the exodus from the bar where Capote and Marilyn continued their existential conversation. He saw how couples and groups headed towards exits, carrying discreetly stolen alcohol bottles from the bar, hashish cigarettes hidden in pockets, and that sexual urgency characterising those who've understood life is finite.

—Do you know where they're going? —Marilyn asked Truman.

—To do what we can no longer do, —he replied—. To believe love is eternal whilst it lasts five hours.

Beach as existential cathedral

Magaluf beach became an open-air cathedral where the only remaining sacrament in disbelieving Spain was celebrated: the encounter of two bodies affirming their existence through pleasure.

Ann-Charlotte and the young Catalan she'd met that night spread a towel on the sand still warm from the day. He whispered to her in Catalan, which she didn't understand, but which excited her precisely for its incomprehensibility. She responded in French, converting seduction into a corporeal translation exercise.

They kissed whilst Mediterranean waves marked the rhythm of their caresses. Their hands explored skin territories day's sun had bronzed and the moon now converted into silvered landscapes.

Free tits under stars

Marie had found Jamaican DJ Winston after he finished his set. Now they lay on sand, she with naked breasts reflecting moonlight, he caressing that white European skin contrasting with his black Caribbean hands.

—In Jamaica, we say when a woman removes clothes under the moon, she's praying, —Winston whispered.

—And what does she ask in her prayer? —asked Marie.

—That time stops. That moon be witness. That someone remembers her exactly as she is in this moment.

Her breasts moved to the rhythm of accelerated breathing. No shame existed. No sin. Only two humans affirming their right to exist entirely in a world that had taught them pleasure was guilt.

Sex as resistance

Cindy and Capote Fuerte had found a more private cove, away from the main couples' bustle. He knew she'd return to Scotland in a week. She knew he'd stay in Mallorca forever. That certainty of imminent separation converted every caress into an act of resistance against time.

They made love with desperation of one knowing they're living something unrepeatable. Capote fuerte spoke to her in Mallorcan, a dialect unique to the island, as if wanting to mark her with sounds she could never hear anywhere else in the world.

—Ets la meva vida, —he told her whilst penetrating slowly, savouring every second.

—I don't understand, but I feel it, —she responded, letting unknown words become music.

Moon as the only god

Dozens of couples populated Magaluf beach that dawn. Spaniards with Germans, French with Catalans, English with Andalusians, Italians with Basques. Europe reconciled with itself on Mediterranean sand.

Full moon observed them like only god they could still believe in. God that didn't judge, didn't condemn, simply illuminated moving bodies as if they were pagan offering to life itself.

Diego had followed couples to the beach, not as a voyeur but as a chronicler. He understood he was witnessing the exact moment when Spain stopped being Catholic and became Mediterranean.

Existential message

Whilst observing those intertwined bodies under the moon, Diego understood the message he'd been seeking all night:

Life is a mental illness that can only be cured with more life.

Marilyn Monroe had died from having too much life for a single body. Truman Capote was dying from having too much lucidity for single mind. Marilyn Zetterlund survived having too much pain for a single heart.

But these young people on the sand had found a temporary cure: sex as affirmation, alcohol as disinhibitor, tits as freedom declaration, theft of forbidden moments, chocolate of bronzed skin under the moon.

Authenticity is the only imperative.

On Magaluf beach, under the summer '79 moon, Spain learnt its most important lesson:

Only authenticity saves. Only confession liberates. Only honesty redeems.

A civil guard confessing to being a thief is more moral than a saint hiding sins.

A writer betraying friends for the truth is more valuable than a courtier protecting elegant lies.

Mother confessing sometimes hating dead daughter is more human than one pretending perfect grief.

Sartrean ending

Couples on the sand weren't making love. They were choosing to exist. They were refusing nothingness. They were shouting at death, it wasn't their time yet.

Because that's what Sartre never said, but '79 Spain discovered: freedom isn't a burden, it's a privilege. Existential anguish isn't a curse, it's the price of being alive.

And being alive, with all its contradictions, lies, betrayals, mental illnesses, moral thefts and forbidden chocolates, is infinitely better than the alternative.

On Magaluf sand, whilst waves whispered secrets in ancestral Arabic and moon-blessed bodies that had decided to be free, Spain finished being born.

Not as a political concept, but as an existential attitude.

As a country that has learnt honesty, however brutal, is always better than hypocrisy, however elegant.

Final message:

Life is a mental illness that can only be cured by living more intensely.

Spain, 1979: The year we learnt that confessing is more revolutionary than hiding.

The year Magaluf's moon witnessed the naked truth.

End

"Alone like astronauts facing spatial night, but together on Mediterranean sand."

_______________________________________

Germán & Co 8/9/25 Germán & Co 8/9/25

Kenya’s Geothermal Ascent: The ‘Iceland of Africa’ Powers a Green Industrial Revolution…

The incredible surge of solar power in Kenya

Key Insights
Kenya stands as a rising powerhouse in the global transition to clean energy, with solar power at the forefront of its green revolution. Blessed with abundant sunlight year-round, the country is increasingly harnessing solar energy to meet its growing demand for electricity. With an average of 5 to 6 hours of sunshine per day across most regions, Kenya’s solar potential is unmatched in Africa, positioning it as a leader in the continent’s renewable energy race.
The government’s commitment to sustainable energy is reflected in ambitious national policies, such as the Least Cost Power Development Plan, which prioritizes renewable sources like solar. Private sector investments in solar farms are rapidly growing, with large-scale projects like the Garissa Solar Power Plant—Africa’s largest solar farm at the time of its completion—leading the way.
Kenya is also making strides in off-grid solar solutions, providing clean, affordable energy to rural areas where traditional power infrastructure is sparse. Solar home systems and mini-grids are lighting up remote communities, lifting people out of energy poverty while reducing reliance on expensive and polluting kerosene.
As the country continues to invest in solar infrastructure, Kenya is poised to not only meet its energy needs but also emerge as a regional hub for renewable energy, driving economic growth and environmental sustainability. With solar power at the heart of its energy transition, Kenya is building a future of resilience, opportunity, and clean energy leadership in Africa.

Not a Single Penny Has Found Its Way into Our Piggy Bank in 2025

“Quarter of a million eyes have now landed on our work at Energy Central—a milestone that still feels electric. I can still see Matt Chester’s message popping up: “Fancy sharing your piece on our platform?” One word—absolutely—set the spark. Today, that spark has become a blazing beacon. Cheers, Matt, for opening the door; here’s to the next 250 k…

Under the clear-eyed wisdom of Aristotle—who in Nicomachean Ethics celebrated generosity as the art of giving just the right amount, to the right cause, at the perfect moment—we declare with steadfast resolve: throughout all of 2025, not one penny of support has graced our coffers.

This is our rallying cry to you:

Hoist our banner—like, repost, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central: it costs nothing but echoes through halls of influence.

Lend your strength—if you can, please fuel the mission that keeps democracy honest and our energy future bright:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611

Swish: 076 423 90 79

Stripe: [Donation Link]

Every gift, no matter the size, fans the spark of independent thought into a roaring blaze. You’re not just donating—you’re empowering a truth-seeker in a world starved for clarity.

Remember, your donations are tax-deductible. Please check with your tax advisor for details.

Join us. Keep the flame burning. Light the way forward—in these darkening times, your support is the beacon guiding us all.

https://www.energycentral.com/energy-biz/post/kenya-s-geothermal-ascent-the-iceland-of-africa-powers-a-green-qJ1HKEVLGRHSc7w

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/germ%C3%A1n-toro-ghio-6b1853242_kenya-stands-as-a-rising-powerhouse-in-the-activity-7359754326178770944-x7-f?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop&rcm=ACoAADxILSUBt02qlesQLQfoPztburmXuxyvJik

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 6, 2025

________________________________________

#RutoEnergyForKenyaTransformation

________________________________________

In the volcanic expanse of Kenya’s Great Rift Valley, where the earth breathes with the pulse of an ancient force, steam rises from deep within the earth. The land itself, a vivid canvas of raw, untamed beauty, hums with the energy of the ages, its power harnessed by turbines that sing the promise of a future born from nature’s heart. The Olkaria geothermal complex, a monument to human ingenuity and the planet’s eternal vitality, stands as a beacon of Africa’s renewable revolution. Here, amid the rugged beauty of this vast expanse, Kenya has achieved what many thought impossible: 90% of its electricity now flows from the clean, unyielding veins of nature.

But Kenya’s story is not only one of geothermal might—it is the story of a nation awakening to the boundless potential of its land and skies. The sun, casting its unrelenting rays across the plains, becomes both the promise and the engine of a new era. Beneath its brilliance, Kenya is transforming into the beating heart of Africa’s solar revolution. This land, kissed by the sun’s eternal glow, has become the promised land for solar farmers, a radiant utopia where fields of solar panels bloom like crops of light, fertile with possibility.

In the embrace of Kenya’s vibrant landscapes—from the rolling savannas to the rugged highlands—the nation is laying the foundation for Africa’s clean energy future. No longer defined by its dependency on fossil fuels, Kenya is rewriting the energy narrative, drawing from the raw forces of the earth and sky. The once distant dream of a sustainable, cleaner tomorrow is now a vivid, living reality. Kenya stands as the shining example of a nation in full bloom, where nature’s energy is harnessed not only for today but also as the guiding light toward a brighter, cleaner future. The country has become the crucible for a revolution—one of hope, resilience, and the promise of an Africa empowered by the brilliance of its sun.

________________________________________

The Geothermal Backbone

With 727 MW of installed geothermal capacity (7th globally), Kenya has exploited its tectonic advantage to develop Africa’s most resilient grid:

- 10,000 MW untapped potential in the Rift Valley—enough to power five Kenyas.

- Baseload costs of $0.07/kWh—less than half the price of diesel generation.

- State-owned KenGen (NSE: KEGN) produces 75% of the national power while attracting private capital through a hybrid ownership model.

“Geothermal isn’t intermittent. It provides 24/7 stability that makes solar integration economical,” says Rebecca Miano, KenGen CEO. “We’ve drilled 300+ wells domestically—no longer reliant on foreign expertise.”

#RutoEnergyForKenyaTransformation

________________________________________

Policy Catalyst: Ruto’s Green Industrial Vision

President William Ruto has positioned energy as the engine of Kenya’s economic transformation:

- 2024 Energy Reforms: Shattered transmission/distribution monopolies (KPLC/KETRACO), enabling private power sales.

- U.S. Partnership: Climate and Clean Energy Industrial Deal (May 2024) unlocking technology transfer.

- COP28 Commitment: Triple renewable capacity by 2030.

“Africa’s resources can catalyze green industrialization,” Ruto declared during his Washington visit. “We’re building export pathways to Ethiopia, Tanzania, and beyond.”

________________________________________

While geothermal anchors the grid, solar is scaling rapidly:

The Malindi Solar project, with a capacity of 40 MW, is operational and features a grid-synced system with geothermal backup. The Radiant Eldoret project, expected to achieve COD in 2025, offers 50 MW and is notable as the first private PPA following monopoly reforms. The Garissa Plant, currently expanding to 55 MW, operates as a UNDP-funded community hybrid model.

“We pay $0 for fuel and $22/MWh for solar—geothermal handles night peaks,” explains EPRA Director-General Daniel Kiptoo. “That’s why our industrial tariffs beat South Africa’s.”

________________________________________

Investment Landscape

Opportunities

- Geothermal Expansion: $4bn needed to reach 3,000 MW by 2030 (JICA, AfDB co-funding).

- Green Hydrogen: KenGen is piloting 5 MW electrolysis at Olkaria.

- Regional Exports: 200 MW Ethiopia link (2026), Oman undersea cable study.

Hurdles

- CAPEX Disparity: Solar costs $869,000/MW (3× European prices).

- Currency Risk: 82% of PPAs are USD-denominated (shilling volatility).

- Grid Constraints: 23% transmission losses in Northern corridors.

________________________________________

The Replicable Model

Kenya’s blueprint—prioritise baseload renewables before scaling variables**—is gaining continental traction:

- Ethiopia: Accelerating Corbetti geothermal (75 MW phase).

- Tanzania: Ngozi geothermal tender (Q1 2026).

- Rwanda: Lake Kivu methane-solar hybrids.

“Countries without oil are leapfrogging to geothermal-solar synergy,” notes IEA Africa Director Fatih Birol. “Kenya proves it’s bankable.”

________________________________________

Market Projections

The key targets for 2030 compared to 2025. Geothermal capacity is set to increase from 950 MW to 3,000 MW, while solar additions are projected to grow from 120 MW to 852 MW. Green hydrogen output aims to progress from the pilot phase to 500,000 tons per year. Additionally, the industrial tariff is expected to decrease from $0.10/kWh to $0.07/kWh.

________________________________________

Investor Takeaways

1. Play the Baseload: Geothermal offers 25-year PPAs with sovereign backing.

2. Hybrid Advantage: Solar + geothermal requires minimal storage CAPEX.

3. Follow Reform Momentum: Open access market cuts offtake risk.

4. Watch Currency Hedges: Partial local-currency PPAs emerging (e.g., Radiant Eldoret).

“Kenya isn’t just African Iceland—it’s a test lab for the Global South’s energy transition,” concludes James Mwangi, CEO of Equity Group. “The returns? As solid as the Rift Valley’s bedrock.”

Germán Toro Ghío leads Karlstad-based Germán Toro Ghío Strategic Energy Consulting, advising on African energy transitions.

Sources: EPRA, KenGen, IEA, AfDB, project developers.

________________________________________

Germán & Co 8/8/25 Germán & Co 8/8/25

The Electric Enigma: Where Light Particles Dance with Philosophy in the Age Beyond Carbon

COVID shutdowns exposed renewables' vulnerabilities—supply chain issues, equipment delays, and grid instability without backup. Limited storage and transmission highlight the need for a pragmatic mix of clean and flexible conventional power for reliable decarbonization.

Key Insights
The planet bakes while three-quarters of it lies behind a curtain of undrinkable seas and unused sunlight. Yet 750 million people still sleep in the half-dark, even as our machines learn to laugh, love and drain the very power we deny ourselves. The real issue is no longer technical but moral: will the next kilowatt illuminate human homes or humming data halls? If we embrace wind, sun and storage—a water-sparing trinity—we postpone the epilogue and write a prologue of hope. Freedom now crackles in the wires; the door is ajar. Either we step through and flood the night with our own light, or leave the future to wonder why we vanished.

Not a Single Penny Has Found Its Way into Our Piggy Bank in 2025

“Quarter of a million eyes have now landed on our work at Energy Central—a milestone that still feels electric. I can still see Matt Chester’s message popping up: “Fancy sharing your piece on our platform?” One word—absolutely—set the spark. Today, that spark has become a blazing beacon. Cheers, Matt, for opening the door; here’s to the next 250 k…

Under the clear-eyed wisdom of Aristotle—who in Nicomachean Ethics celebrated generosity as the art of giving just the right amount, to the right cause, at the perfect moment—we declare with steadfast resolve: throughout all of 2025, not one penny of support has graced our coffers.

This is our rallying cry to you:

Hoist our banner—like, repost, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central: it costs nothing but echoes through halls of influence.

Lend your strength—if you can, please fuel the mission that keeps democracy honest and our energy future bright:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611

Swish: 076 423 90 79

Stripe: [Donation Link]

Every gift, no matter the size, fans the spark of independent thought into a roaring blaze. You’re not just donating—you’re empowering a truth-seeker in a world starved for clarity.

Remember, your donations are tax-deductible. Please check with your tax advisor for details.

Join us. Keep the flame burning. Light the way forward—in these darkening times, your support is the beacon guiding us all.

https://www.energycentral.com/renewables/post/the-electric-enigma-where-light-particles-dance-with-philosophy-in-the-WgQ9ge5sNTZ7Z48

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/electric-enigma-where-light-particles-dance-age-beyond-toro-ghio-ialaf

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 6, 2025

________________________________________

1) Prologue — Thirst, Circuits and Other Upside-Down Dreams

(with literary license from Sartre, Cortázar, and a hearty “chucha la huevada” from Chile)

Here we stand on a planet slowly roasting under the sun, cast adrift without an instruction manual: three-quarters of it sheathed in undrinkable salt water, oceans of photons we barely tap. Yet, seven hundred and fifty million people still fall asleep each night in primitive half-darkness. The right to electricity and water glimmers before us like the sliver of light beneath a locked door: we know a gentle push would open it, yet we freeze, fearing what lies beyond.

Meanwhile our engineers are schooling machines that already write poems, swap smiley faces and—so we're told—manage to fall in love through binary protocols. Is the energy we squabble over destined for them rather than for us? When the last human lamp goes out, will servers continue crackling inside vast concrete citadels—cold, hydrated—wondering why laughter no longer echoes down their corridors?

Cortázar might have called it another “night face up”: we dream of soaring towards bright cities, only to wake among darkened trees while the gods—be they fossil lobbies, greed or mere indifference—sharpen their spears. In the modern version of the myth, the fortunate queue at Cape Canaveral, hoping that one Tuesday Musk’s arrow will fly to Mars with provisions… and a one-way ticket.

Blimey, what a mad world we live in, a Chilean might exclaim at the paradox: sprawling solar farms capable of powering desalination plants to quench desert thirst—yet stranded by politics, pettiness or plain bureaucracy. We risk delivering water and volts to robotic heads that, in our absence, will only pine for the hands that fashioned them.

The question, then, stops being technical and becomes ontological: for whom shall we light the future? Equipping grids with virtual inertia, batteries and millisecond markets is not merely a matter of cost; it is a declaration of love—or abandonment—towards the human condition. If we chose wind, sun and storage—an almost water-free triad—we would buy time, salvage hope, and turn the half-light into a prologue, not an epilogue.

Sartre’s radical freedom crackles here among cables and pipes, waiting for our choice. We can keep dreaming face-up while the gods close in, or open the door and let the light—our light, not the machines’—wash over the desert and the night.

________________________________________

2) When the lights went out: Spain's existential grid moment

28 April 2025 began like any other spring day on the Iberian Peninsula. Solar panels gleamed across Andalusian hillsides, generating 18,068 MW of clean electricity—53% of the peninsula's power. Then, at 12:33 PM, existence met absurdity in a cascade of electrons suddenly absent. Within five seconds, 15 GW of generation vanished, demand plummeted from nearly 27,000 MW to under 13,000 MW, and an entire energy system faced the brutal reality of physical laws.

Spain's blackout was not merely a technical failure but a philosophical awakening. The grid had become too clean, too fast, too divorced from the spinning turbines that once provided electrical inertia through sheer mechanical mass. Inverter-based solar systems, for all their elegance, lack the kinetic energy reserves that synchronous generators naturally provide. When disturbances hit, electrons change direction with digital precision but without the cushioning momentum of steel rotors spinning at 3,000 revolutions per minute.

This is the Rate of Change of Frequency (RoCoF) paradox—the cleaner our grid becomes, the more violently it responds to disruption. Modern power systems can experience frequency changes of 2-5 Hz per second, compared to 0.5 Hz per second in traditional grids. Protection systems, designed for gentler slopes, trigger cascading disconnections as they interpret rapid frequency changes as system threats.

The Spain incident represents a broader existential tension in grid management. Virtual inertia technologies can now replicate the stabilizing effects of spinning mass, with advanced battery systems demonstrating 49% improvements in frequency response and 36% reductions in RoCoF events. Yet deploying these solutions requires admitting that progress creates new vulnerabilities even as it solves old problems.

1: Grid Inertia Requirements vs. Available Resources (2025)

Region Min. Inertia Req. (GVA·s) | Current Synthetic (GVA·s) | Gap | Timeline

UK National Grid 140 → 102 | 36 | -66 | 2026

ERCOT Texas 100-120 | 45 | -55 | 2027

ENTSO-E 450-500 180 -270 2028 | PJM 200-250 | 85 | -115 | 2029

________________________________________

3) The great electrification: progress and its discontents

While engineers grapple with frequency response markets and synthetic inertia, nearly 750 million humans still inhabit pre-electric darkness. The International Energy Agency reports that 92% of humanity now enjoys electricity access—a remarkable achievement—yet the remaining 8% face a profound form of technological alienation. These are not merely statistics but lives unfolding without the electromagnetic foundation of modern existence.

Sub-Saharan Africa bears the heaviest burden, with 565-600 million people—85% of the global access deficit—living beyond the electric grid's embrace. Even more paradoxically, 447 million people don't use electricity despite official electrification status, revealing the gap between connection and genuine access. Rwanda offers hope with its transformation from 6% electricity access in 2009 to 75% in 2024, demonstrating that political will and smart policy can transcend geographical constraints.

The off-grid revolution presents its own philosophical puzzles. Solar home systems served 20 million additional people in 2024, bringing the cumulative total to 138 million who have bypassed centralized grids entirely. This distributed energy democracy challenges traditional utility monopolies while creating new forms of technological dependence. East Africa leads with 6.6 million new solar kit sales, yet West Africa saw a 33% decline due to currency pressures and inflation—proving that even photons remain subject to economic gravity.

Mini-grids require an estimated investment of $50 billion annually to achieve universal access by 2030, yet current funding barely reaches $3 billion. The irony is palpable: humanity possesses the technical knowledge to electrify the world while lacking the financial imagination to make it happen.

________________________________________

4) The economics of electrons: when markets meet molecules

Energy costs in 2025 tell a story of technological triumph shadowed by political paralysis. Solar photovoltaics now average $58 per MWh without subsidies, while onshore wind ranges from $37 to $86 per MWh. These represent the lowest costs in human history for harnessing renewable energy, making them cheaper than fossil alternatives in 91% of new installations globally.

Yet this cost revolution coexists with persistent market failures. Nuclear power costs $141-220 per MWh, with Small Modular Reactors proving even more expensive than anticipated. NuScale's pioneering SMR project collapsed after costs soared from $58 to $89 per MWh—a 53% increase that vaporized Utah's nuclear ambitions. The nuclear renaissance faces a cruel irony: as climate urgency intensifies, atomic energy becomes economically uncompetitive with renewables plus storage.

Battery storage costs plummeted to $104 per MWh in 2024, down 33% in a single year, with projections reaching $53 per MWh by 2035. This represents a 93% cost decline since 2010, enabling grid-scale deployments that would have seemed fantastical a decade ago. Global battery deployment reached 205 GWh in 2024—a 53% increase that signals the dawn of the storage age.

2) Levelized Cost Evolution 2020-2025 ($/MWh)

Technology 2020 2022 2024 2025 % Change

Utility Solar PV 58 52 60 58 ±0%

Onshore Wind 52 45 56 62 +19%

Gas Combined Cycle 45 42 52 79 +76%

Battery Storage 188 132 104 93 -51%

Nuclear 163 167 181 181 +11%

The numbers reveal a fundamental reshaping of energy economics. Gas plants face volatile fuel costs that have nearly doubled their lifetime expenses, while renewables enjoy virtually zero marginal costs once installed. This creates the negative pricing paradox—wholesale electricity prices went negative for 8% of hours in Finland and 15% in Southern California during 2024, signalling oversupply of clean energy that markets struggle to value properly.

________________________________________

5) Climate physics: when thermodynamics becomes theology

The year 2024 carved itself into climate history with existential precision. Global temperatures reached 1.54-1.60°C above pre-industrial levels—the first year to exceed the Paris Agreement's 1.5°C guardrail. On July 22, Earth's daily average temperature hit 17.16°C, a record that would have been unthinkable just decades ago. More ominously, atmospheric CO2 increased by 3.75 parts per million—the largest single-year jump ever recorded—reaching 422.8 ppm globally.

These numbers carry theological weight for the electricity sector. With only 130 billion tonnes of CO2 budget remaining for 1.5°C stabilization, humanity has roughly three to six years of current emissions before crossing into uncharted climate territory. The carbon budget functions like a cosmic credit limit, and we're rapidly approaching insolvency.

The water-energy nexus intensifies these pressures. Thermal power plants consume 1,900-4,540 liters per MWh for closed-cycle cooling, while once-through systems withdraw 75,710-189,270 liters per MWh. As droughts become more severe—Pacific Northwest hydropower fell 23% below average in 2024—the electricity sector confronts its fundamental dependence on water cycles increasingly disrupted by the very emissions it generates.

3) Climate Tipping Points and Energy System Implications

Tipping Element Current Status Energy Impact Timeline

- Atlantic Ocean Circulation: "On route" to collapse

- European cooling demand: +40% by 2030-2080

- Arctic Sea Ice: Record December 2024 low

- Shipping route changes: 2030-2050

- Amazon Rainforest: Approaching dieback

- Carbon sink to source: 2040-2070

- Greenland Ice Sheet: Accelerating melt

- Sea level rise affecting coastal plants: 2050-2200

Paradoxically, renewable energy itself approaches positive tipping points. Solar deployment now doubles every 1-2 years in many regions, with exponential growth curves that appear "unstoppable" according to the International Energy Agency. Electric vehicles captured 15% of global vehicle sales in 2024, with ranges tripling over the past decade. These positive feedbacks suggest technological lock-in toward clean energy systems, even as political resistance intensifies.

________________________________________

6) Markets in motion: when capital discovers consciousness

The year 2024 witnessed an extraordinary awakening of financial consciousness around electricity systems. Utility stocks delivered 27% returns—their best performance since 2000—as investors discovered that artificial intelligence and data centers would drive electricity demand growth from historical 1-2% annually to 6-8% over the next decade. Vistra Corporation surged 252% as markets finally grasped that grid-scale battery storage represents the new electricity infrastructure.

Global energy investment exceeded $3 trillion for the first time in human history, with $2.1 trillion flowing to clean energy technologies. This represents humanity's largest coordinated investment in any technology transformation, yet it's still only 37% of the $5.6 trillion annually required for net-zero by 2050. The gap between what's needed and what's happening reveals the tragic disconnect between financial capability and collective will.

Pension funds increasingly recognize electricity infrastructure as essential portfolio elements. Nearly 97% of UK institutional investors increased renewable energy allocations, while major funds like CalPERS and CPP now dedicate specific allocations to climate infrastructure. The transition from fossil fuel assets to renewable infrastructure represents the largest wealth transfer in human history—from extractive industries to generative technologies.

Carbon pricing revenues exceeded $100 billion globally in 2024, with 80 active carbon pricing instruments covering 28% of global emissions. The European Union's Emissions Trading System generated €43.6 billion, while California's carbon prices averaged $42 per metric ton. Yet less than 1% of global emissions face prices high enough to drive rapid decarbonization, revealing the political economy's failure to price existential risk appropriately.

________________________________________

7) Policy paradoxes: when technocracy meets democracy

The electricity sector's policy landscape in 2025 resembles a Kafkaesque bureaucracy—simultaneously rational and absurd. Fast frequency response markets successfully incentivized battery deployment, with storage systems capturing 87% of ancillary service revenues in Texas. Yet interconnection queues contain 2,600 GW of proposed projects—eight times more capacity than exists today—waiting an average of four years for grid connection approvals.

FERC Order 2023 attempted to address interconnection delays through deposit requirements and withdrawal penalties, yet regional grid operators like PJM suspended new request reviews until 2025. The result is a policy paralysis where regulatory solutions create new bottlenecks faster than they resolve existing ones.

Demand response programs offer similar contradictions. The International Energy Agency's Net Zero Scenario requires 500 GW of demand response capacity by 2030—a tenfold increase from current levels—yet deployment lags dramatically behind requirements. FERC Order 2222 enables distributed energy aggregation but won't achieve full implementation until 2026-2030 across various grid regions.

The European Union's electricity market reforms represent the most ambitious attempt at systemic change. The Market Design Directive maintains marginal pricing while introducing two-way contracts for difference and mandatory long-term contracting for publicly funded renewable projects. Yet implementation depends on national transposition by January 2025, creating regulatory fragmentation across member states.

4) Policy Implementation Scorecard (2024-2025)

Policy Area Success Scores and Key Achievements:

- Carbon Pricing: 7/10, over €100B revenue, coverage under 30% of emissions.

- Interconnection: 3/10, FERC Order 2023, 2,600 GW queue backlog.

- Storage Markets: 8/10, 205 GWh deployed.

- Rural deployment lag.

- Frequency Response: 9/10, battery dominance.

- Limited geographic scope.

- Demand Response: 4/10, progress with Order 2222, 10x gap compared to NZ scenario.

________________________________________

8) Cultural currents: when electrons meet emotions

Beneath technical specifications and policy frameworks flows a deeper cultural current that shapes electricity futures more powerfully than engineering analysis. Republican support for solar panels declined from 84% to 64% between 2020 and 2024, while wind support dropped from 75% to 56%. These numbers reveal how partisan polarization increasingly defines energy technology acceptance, transcending rational cost-benefit calculations.

The populist backlash against technocratic energy policy reflects deeper tensions about democratic participation versus expert authority. Anti-net zero populism combines legitimate grievances about top-down policy imposition with alternative technical expertise that challenges mainstream climate science. Right-wing populists exploit the reality that carbon pricing often impacts working-class communities most directly, while clean energy benefits accrue disproportionately to affluent early adopters.

Energy justice movements respond by advocating for community ownership and democratic control over electricity infrastructure. Community choice aggregation programs now serve millions of Americans, while municipal utilities offer alternatives to investor-owned monopolies. These efforts recognize that electricity systems embody power relationships—both literal and metaphorical—that require democratic legitimacy to sustain long-term transitions.

The narrative dimension proves crucial for public acceptance. Stories about energy independence resonate more powerfully than technical arguments about grid stability. Local job creation narratives overcome abstract climate benefits. Cultural meanings attributed to energy technologies—from solar panels as symbols of self-reliance to wind turbines as landscape intrusions—shape policy outcomes more decisively than economic analysis.

Research reveals that 54% of Americans qualify as energy-burdened, spending excessive portions of income on electricity. Fixed charges disproportionately impact low-income households, while disadvantaged communities face pollution burdens from legacy energy infrastructure. These inequities fuel resistance to transitions perceived as benefiting affluent environmentalists while imposing costs on vulnerable populations.

________________________________________

9) Philosophical foundations: authenticity in the age of algorithms

The electricity sector's transformation raises profound questions about human agency in technological systems. Are we freely choosing renewable energy futures, or does technological determinism drive transitions according to cost curves and physical laws? Sartre's analysis of authentic existence becomes relevant: we remain condemned to be free even within technological constraints, bearing full responsibility for collective energy choices.

The paradox of progress permeates every aspect of electricity modernization. Smart grids enable efficiency and renewable integration while creating new cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Battery storage provides grid flexibility while generating mining impacts for lithium and cobalt. Nuclear power offers carbon-free baseload electricity while producing radioactive waste lasting millennia.

Virtual inertia technologies exemplify this paradox perfectly. Engineers create software algorithms that mimic the stabilizing effects of spinning generators, substituting digital precision for mechanical momentum. These systems work effectively—battery storage systems now provide synthetic inertia equivalent to traditional power plants—yet they represent a fundamental abstraction from physical reality. Electrons follow electromagnetic laws, but their flow increasingly depends on computational algorithms subject to coding errors, cyberattacks, and system failures.

The existential weight of electricity choices becomes apparent through climate statistics. Each kilowatt-hour generated from fossil fuels contributes incrementally to atmospheric CO2 concentrations that will persist for centuries. Individual consumption decisions aggregate into collective outcomes that determine planetary habitability for future generations. The abstract nature of electricity—invisible, instantaneous, seemingly unlimited—obscures these profound consequences.

Technological alienation manifests through increasing dependence on systems beyond individual understanding or control. How many electricity users comprehend the complex coordination required to maintain 60 Hz frequency across continental grids? The growing sophistication of electricity infrastructure—from advanced inverters to machine learning algorithms—creates capabilities that exceed human cognitive capacity while requiring human judgment for ethical deployment.

________________________________________

10) Epilogue — Between Gloom and Authentic Lightning

After pages of figures and dilemmas, everything boils down to a single instant: the click of a switch. That tiny gesture decides whether humankind endures or yields the stage to chilled servers no one will ever hug.

The year 2025 leaves us a double lesson. On the one hand, the plunge in solar‑wind LCOE and the maturation of storage prove that energy abundance is technically feasible. On the other, Spain’s blackout and the race against the carbon‑budget clock expose our institutional fragility. Having the tool without the wisdom is like holding lightning captive in a paper cage.

This calls for what we might term electric authenticity: acknowledging the climatic, social and existential consequences of every kilowatt. It means pricing carbon and water at their real cost, guaranteeing universal access as a human right, and designing grids that strengthen democratic participation. Lucidity, not altruism: it is always cheaper to light than to rebuild after collapse.

If the kilowatt‑hour continues to subsidise the drying of rivers and the gigawatt‑hour to feed machines that send empty hearts, we shall be the first civilisation to dig its digital cave only to crawl back inside it. Another storyline is possible: paying for every millisecond of flexibility, letting sun, wind and batteries sustain the polis without devouring it, and turning the half‑light into a prologue rather than a finale.

There are no spectators left. Every project, every vote, every article is a cog in the machinery of tomorrow. We can bargain with the shadows… or seize the lightning before the thermometer sets the world ablaze.

Open the door. Let the lightning in. And this time, may humanity arrive on time at its feast of light.

________________________________________

Sources and References

Grid Stability and Technical Analysis

Analysis of Spain's April 2025 Blackout: Causes, Low-Inertia Grid Risks, and Protection Solutions. SMC International. https://smcint.com/electrical-testing/analysis-of-spains-april-2025-blackout-causes-low-inertia-grid-risks-and-protection-solutions/
Grid frequency volatility in future low inertia scenarios: Challenges and mitigation options. ScienceDirect.
A new enhanced synthetic inertia system for stability improvement of hybrid AC/DC grids using MMC integrated with batteries. ScienceDirect.
Stability Pathfinders: what they mean for battery energy storage. Modo Energy Research.
Batteries are making the grid more reliable: NERC. Utility Dive.
ERCOT's Ancillary Services: a beginner's guide. Modo Energy Research.

Climate Data and Global Warming

State of the climate: 2024 sets a new record as the first year above 1.5C. Carbon Brief. https://www.carbonbrief.org/state-of-the-climate-2024-sets-a-new-record-as-the-first-year-above-1-5c/
Copernicus: 2024 is the first year to exceed 1.5°C above pre-industrial level. Copernicus Climate Change Service. https://climate.copernicus.eu/copernicus-2024-first-year-exceed-15degc-above-pre-industrial-level
Guest post: Why 2024's global temperatures were unprecedented, but not surprising. Carbon Brief.
Global Climate Highlights 2024. Copernicus Climate Change Service.
Climate change: atmospheric carbon dioxide. NOAA Climate.gov.
6 Years Before Carbon Budget to Limit Warming to 1.5C Runs Out. Earth.Org.
Fossil fuel CO2 emissions increase again in 2024. Global Carbon Budget.

Energy Costs and Technology

Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2024. International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA). https://www.irena.org/Publications/2025/Jun/Renewable-Power-Generation-Costs-in-2024
Global Cost of Renewables to Continue Falling in 2025 as China Extends Manufacturing Lead. BloombergNEF.
Clean power tech costs to fall to record lows in 2025. Power Engineering International.
Eye-popping new cost estimates released for NuScale small modular reactor. IEEFA.
Small Modular Reactors: Still too expensive, too slow and too risky. IEEFA.
Utility-Scale Battery Storage. Annual Technology Baseline 2024, NREL.
A 2025 Update on Utility-Scale Energy Storage Procurements. Morgan Lewis.

Energy Access and Development

Tracking SDG 7 – The Energy Progress Report 2025. World Bank. https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/energy/publication/tracking-sdg-7-the-energy-progress-report-2025
2025 Tracking SDG7 Report. World Health Organization.
Electricity access continues to improve in 2024 – after first global setback in decades. International Energy Agency.
Beyond access: 1.18 billion in energy poverty. UNDP Data Futures Exchange.
GOGLA: Off-grid solar delivers energy access to 20 million people in 2024. PV Tech.
East Africa drove 71% of global off-grid solar kit sales in 2024. Ecofin Agency.
Electricity Prices Drop Steadily Across Africa. News Central TV.

Energy Storage and Battery Markets

Global BESS deployments soared 53% in 2024. Energy-Storage.News.
Grid-scale Battery Market Share, Size and Industry Growth Analysis 2024-2030. IndustryARC.
Energy Storage Rides a Wave of Growth but Uncertainty Looms: A Global Opportunity and Regulatory Roadmap for 2025. Morgan Lewis.
U.S. battery capacity increased 66% in 2024. U.S. Energy Information Administration.
US energy storage deployments jumped 86% year over year to 10.5 GWh in Q2. Utility Dive.

Water-Energy Nexus

Water for Power Plant Cooling. Union of Concerned Scientists. https://www.ucs.org/resources/water-power-plant-cooling
Reducing water consumption for cooling of thermal generation plants. European Environment Agency.
Exploring the Water-Energy Nexus on World Energy Efficiency Day 2024. Smart Water Magazine.
Drought conditions reduce hydropower generation, particularly in the Pacific Northwest. U.S. Energy Information Administration.
U.S. hydropower generation expected to increase by 6% in 2024 following last year's lows. U.S. Energy Information Administration.

Market Analysis and Investment

Utility Outlook - First Quarter 2025 Insights. Gabelli.
Utility Stocks 2025 Outlook: Back to Normal? Morningstar.
3 Utility Stocks Leading the Surge in 2024 - Keep These on Your Radar. Investing.com.
Energy Transition Investment Trends. BloombergNEF.
ESG Investing Market Size to Surpass USD 167.49 Trillion by 2034. Precedence Research.
Pension schemes increasing allocations to renewable energy. Pensions Age Magazine.

Policy and Regulation

Explainer on the Interconnection Final Rule. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. https://www.ferc.gov/explainer-interconnection-final-rule
Key findings – State of Energy Policy 2024. International Energy Agency.
Carbon pricing revenues exceeded $100 billion in 2024. World Bank.
2024 Carbon Market Report: a stable and well-functioning market. European Commission.
Electricity Market Design: Deadline for transposing new rules into national law. European Commission.
FERC Order No. 2222 Explainer: Facilitating Participation in Electricity Markets by Distributed Energy Resources. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

Energy System Analysis

Executive summary – Electricity 2025. International Energy Agency. https://www.iea.org/reports/electricity-2025/executive-summary
Global trends – Global Energy Review 2025. International Energy Agency.
Prices – Electricity 2025. International Energy Agency.
Global Energy Outlook 2025: Headwinds and Tailwinds in the Energy Transition. Resources for the Future.
World Energy Investment 2024. International Energy Agency.

Social and Political Dimensions

How Americans View National, Local and Personal Energy Choices. Pew Research Center.
The Rise of Anti-Net Zero Populism in the UK: Comparing Rhetorical Strategies for Climate Policy Dismantling. Taylor & Francis Online.
The Populist Revolt Against Climate Policy. Foreign Affairs.
The politics of populism and climate action. E3G.
Energy Accessibility. U.S. Department of Energy.
Electricity Regulation with Equity and Justice for All. Berkeley Lab News Center.

Interconnection and Grid Development

Grid connection backlog grows by 30% in 2023, dominated by requests for solar, wind, and energy storage. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Queued Up: 2024 Edition, Characteristics of Power Plants Seeking Transmission Interconnection. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Demand response. International Energy Agency.
Access to electricity – SDG7: Data and Projections. International Energy Agency.

Philosophical and Conceptual Frameworks

Existentialism. Wikipedia.
What Is Existentialism? An Ethics Explainer. The Ethics Centre.
Climate crisis: How 'positive tipping points' could save the planet. World Economic Forum.
When it comes to solar power, we may have already reached a climate transition tipping point. World Economic Forum.

________________________________________

Join us to support independent geopolitical and energy analysis.

In a world overflowing with information, we stand as your trusted source for clarity and truth in geopolitics and energy. Your support powers our mission, and together, we can illuminate the complex forces shaping our global landscape.

We can't do it without you. As inflation rises and platforms evolve, our content battles to be seen and heard. We're committed to delivering top-notch analysis with the best tools and insights, but we need your help to keep our voice strong and independent.

Here's how you can make a difference:

Engage with Us: Like, share, and repost our content on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central. It's a simple click that amplifies our reach and impact.
Be Part of the Conversation: Comment on our posts, share your thoughts, and let us know what topics matter most to you. Your input shapes our content and keeps our community vibrant.
Support Our Mission: If you can, consider contributing to help us continue our work. Every bit helps us keep the flame of independent analysis burning bright.

Ways to Contribute:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com
IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611
Swish: 076 423 90 79

Your support, whether through engagement or contributions, fuels the insights and knowledge we all rely on. Together, we can navigate these turbulent times and shed light on the path forward. Thank you for standing with us. Let's continue to explore, analyze, and understand our world together.

Germán & Co 8/7/25 Germán & Co 8/7/25

USELESS IN THE DARK…

Key Insights
Covid-era shutdowns exposed renewables’ hidden fragilities: single-country supply chains, multi-year equipment delays, and grids that still collapse without gas or other dispatchable backup. Batteries can’t yet bridge multi-day lulls; transmission builds lag demand. Until storage, minerals, and wires scale dramatically, a pragmatic mix—clean power plus flexible conventional capacity—remains the only path to reliable decarbonisation.

Not a Single Penny Has Found Its Way into Our Piggy Bank in 2025

Under the clear-eyed wisdom of Aristotle—who in Nicomachean Ethics celebrated generosity as the art of giving just the right amount, to the right cause, at the perfect moment—we declare with steadfast resolve: throughout all of 2025, not one penny of support has graced our coffers.

This is our rallying cry to you:

Hoist our banner—like, repost, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central: it costs nothing but echoes through halls of influence.

Lend your strength—if you can, please fuel the mission that keeps democracy honest and our energy future bright:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611

Swish: 076 423 90 79

Stripe: [Donation Link]

Every gift, no matter the size, fans the spark of independent thought into a roaring blaze. You’re not just donating—you’re empowering a truth-seeker in a world starved for clarity.

Remember, your donations are tax-deductible. Please check with your tax advisor for details.

Join us. Keep the flame burning. Light the way forward—in these darkening times, your support is the beacon guiding us all.

https://www.energycentral.com/energy-biz/post/useless-in-the-dark-MpR8wUw6Y2nTSnJ

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/useless-dark-germ%25C3%25A1n-toro-ghio-hhlmf

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1953249366585827704

Andrés Gluski, Chief Executive and President of AES Corporation

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 6, 2025

________________________________________

Why gigawatts — not gigaflops — will crown tomorrow’s AI super-powers

Once more, the visionary and wise CEO and President of AES Corporation warns:
“The smartest chips on Earth are useless in the dark.” — Andrés Gluski, Need for Speed: The Key to Winning the AI Race, 4 June 2025

________________________________________

Prologue | Early signals, broader worries

Before kilowatts eclipsed algorithms in his speeches, Andrés Gluski was already arguing that natural gas would remain the critical “safety-valve” fuel while grids scaled renewables and storage.¹ His point was brutally pragmatic: windless nights and cloud-blanketed mornings do not wait for policy targets.

I remember one dawn in 2022 when an unexpected e-mail from Andrés landed in the senior staff inboxes. He urged “preventive measures against an incipient monkey-pox outbreak”, warning that supply-chain and construction crews could be sidelined just as the energy transition was accelerating. At the time, it felt alarmist. Yet, only months later, Wuhan-centred lockdowns and a second global health scare froze ports, delayed turbine gearboxes and reminded us that energy security is inseparable from public-health foresight. Gluski’s instinct for looming risk frames the question we face today: Will we build enough reliable power before the next disruption turns the lights off?

________________________________________

1 │ From classroom recipes to terawatt appetites

A textbook algorithm is “a finite set of steps that yields a result.” Euclid’s divisor fits on a scrap of papyrus; a four-line Python sort runs on a phone. But today’s large-language models sprawl across trillions of parameters. One Nvidia GB200 “Blackwell” rack of 72 GPUs draws roughly 120 kW; a 30-rack pod crosses 3.5 MW, rivalling a utility-scale solar plant at noon. Code has become an industrial appetite measured in terawatt-hours.

Gluski’s June essay reduces the problem to three words: programming, computing, energy. On the first two fronts, parity or U.S. advantage may hold; on the third he fears a strategic shortfall if America cannot “build as much new power as is possible with the technologies we already have.”

________________________________________

2 │ The shock ahead

The International Energy Agency projects that data-centre electricity use will more than double to ≈ 945 TWh by 2030 — about Japan’s entire demand today. Chip generations refresh every 18 months, yet turbines, transformers and 500-kV lines take close to a decade to materialise. The AI race is therefore an engineering marathon, not a coding sprint.

________________________________________

3 │ America’s 2.6-terawatt traffic jam

By December 2024, projects totalling ≈ 2 600 GW — over 95 % solar, wind and storage — languished in U.S. grid-connection queues; the median wait is five years. Two new GPU generations will ship in that span while their promised electrons remain on paper.

________________________________________

4 │ Beijing’s concrete advantage

China erected 268 GW of wind-and-solar capacity in the first half of 2025 — practically a whole U.S. renewables fleet in six months. Simultaneously it began 94.5 GW of new coal plants in 2024, the decade’s peak. The dual-track policy — clean narrative, fossil insurance — means AI campuses seldom wait for kilowatts. Speed beats purity.

________________________________________

5 │ Washington’s nuclear moon-shot

On 31 July 2025, President Trump ordered the Department of Energy to bring three civilian small-modular reactors (SMRs) to “criticality” by 4 July 2026 — a timeline most engineers call “heroic.” If the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can license at silicon speed, on-site nukes may yet anchor the hyperscale grid; if not, the decree risks becoming another paper reactor.

________________________________________

6 │ The wire that wasn’t built

Generation is useless without wires. DOE’s latest Transmission Facilitation tranche backs only ≈ 1 000 mi of new high-voltage line — trivial beside China’s annual 13 000 km of UHV corridors. Meanwhile lead times for large power transformers have stretched to 2.3–4 years, double 2021 levels, with costs up more than 70 %.

________________________________________

7 │ Global cross-winds: war, fuel and dependence

Three years into the Ukraine war, Russian pipeline flows are down but Russian LNG still slips into Europe: imports edged higher in 2024-25 even as U.S. cargoes fell. A leaked EEAS brief warns that continued reliance on Moscow’s molecules could “export the AI electricity dividend eastward.”

________________________________________

8 │ Climate whiplash: heat versus cool chips

Record heat in 2025 forced grids on five continents to run flat-out while generation efficiency sagged. Cooling already accounts for over one-third of U.S. summer demand growth, tightening supply just as AI load accelerates.

________________________________________

9 │ Industry’s mounting anxiety

In Uptime Institute’s 2025 survey 36 % of operators named power availability their top concern, triple the 2023 share. Amazon’s Andy Jassy calls electricity “the single biggest constraint” on AWS’s AI expansion as Big Tech earmarks $350 billion for new server halls this year.

________________________________________

10 │ Ireland, the canary in the server hall

Data centres already consume 21 % of Ireland’s power and could near one-third within the decade, prompting regulators to require new campuses to provide on-site generation or storage. Other small grids are watching closely.

________________________________________

11 │ When AES meets AI

AES pioneered the world’s first hour-by-hour 24/7 carbon-free contract for Google’s Virginia cluster in 2021. Now it pilots AI-driven demand-response tools to “manufacture megawatts” from flexibility. Gluski insists that prefab solar, construction robotics and grid-visualisation AI can “collapse the renewables-load mismatch” — but only if transmission steel wins funding parity with GPUs.

________________________________________

12 │ Five levers before the lights dim

Leveraged required shift pay-off through first-ready, first-served interconnection queue triage by milestones rather than filing date. Removed speculative squatting off the grid. Managed shared cap-ex pools for upgrades. Spread network costs using wheeling fees. Eliminated billion-dollar shocks that can kill early-stage renewables. Established federal HVDC corridors and pre-approved rights-of-way, similar to Eisenhower’s highways. Halved litigation timelines across states. Implemented transparent SMR dashboards and monthly public scorecards. Exposed slippage before it metastasises. Utilised AI-optimised demand-response. Time-shifted non-critical compute, converting flexibility into virtual generation. First-served interconnection Queue triage by milestones, not filing date. Boots speculative squatting off the grid, shared cap-ex pools for upgrades, spreads network costs via wheeling fees, and removes billion-dollar shocks that kill early-stage renewables. Federal HVDC corridors Pre-approve rights-of-way like Eisenhower’s highways, halve litigation timelines across states. Transparent SMR dashboards, Monthly public score-cards, Exposes slippage before it metastasises, AI-optimised demand-response, Time-shift non-critical compute, Turns flexibility into virtual generation.

________________________________________

Epilogue │ : The Flicker Test

Picture the decisive night — 2040, perhaps sooner — when a billion users summon answers and the server halls of Ashburn, Phoenix, Dublin and Shenzhen roar awake. The model forms its first syllable… and the lights dip. Drives gasp, cooling towers stall, and the “intelligence” of an entire civilisation is revealed as hostage to the hum of a turbine and the tensile strength of a transmission span.

That is the question history will grade: Did we build fast enough to keep the future switched on?
Pass, and machine reasoning might illuminate every classroom and clinic on Earth. Fail, and our most brilliant algorithms will join the Library of Alexandria — silicon ashes in the dark — while the nations that never hesitated to pour concrete write the next chapter in their own script.

________________________________________

About the author

Germán Toro Ghio occupies a pivotal role at the intersection of energy transition and geopolitical strategy, bringing over thirty years of executive leadership and analytical expertise to some of the most intricate global challenges. As Chief Executive Officer of Germán & Co., he develops strategic narratives that influence policy discourse in governmental capitals and corporate boardrooms internationally.

His professional foundation is extensive, encompassing more than a decade with the United Nations Development Programme, followed by two critical years serving as Executive Secretary of the Forum of Culture Ministers for Latin America and the Caribbean. These experiences have cultivated his unique capacity to navigate cultural complexities within geopolitical contexts.

In the energy sector, Toro Ghio has employed communications as a strategic tool throughout two decades of leadership. His six-year tenure directing communications at Union Fenosa preceded a transformative fourteen-year period at AES Dominicana, where he advanced to the position of Vice President of Communications and contributed to establishing the company as a regional benchmark. His expertise regarding the nexus of energy and geopolitics has been recognised by EnergyCentral.com, which featured him in its esteemed Power Perspectives™ Interview Series.

Beyond his corporate roles, Toro Ghio has acted as a trusted advisor to the U.S. Department of State and the Organización de Estados Iberoamericanos, while also providing strategic guidance to several Latin American presidents on matters of energy policy and cultural diplomacy. His analytical acumen has proven consistently accurate, with his forecasts concerning energy market dynamics and geopolitical shifts demonstrating the strategic foresight that renders him a highly regarded authority within global energy forums.

Whether engaging with energy ministers or corporate leaders, Toro Ghio excels in distilling complexity into clarity, offering insights that not only inform but also shape the decisions influencing the future of energy.

_______________________________________

Join us to support independent geopolitical and energy analysis.

Here's how you can make a difference:

Engage with Us: Like, share, and repost our content on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central. It's a simple click that amplifies our reach and impact.
Be Part of the Conversation: Comment on our posts, share your thoughts, and let us know what topics matter most to you. Your input shapes our content and keeps our community vibrant.
Support Our Mission: If you can, consider contributing to help us continue our work. Every bit helps us keep the flame of independent analysis burning bright.

Ways to Contribute:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com
IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611
Swish: 076 423 90 79

Germán & Co 8/4/25 Germán & Co 8/4/25

Energy Without Water: The Hidden Power of Renewables in a Thirsty World…

Introduction

The irony in this transactional partnership is striking: while leaders pour billions into fossil fuels, they ignore the resource that truly defines survival — water. With droughts shutting down power grids and rivers vanishing, thermoelectric energy becomes a liability. On the other hand, wind and solar power, which require almost no water, emerge as the only scalable and drought-proof energy options.

Key Insights
The $750 billion U.S.–EU energy pact, signed in 2025 amid growing tensions in the Middle East, represents one of the most significant shifts in European strategy since the Cold War. Presented as a move toward "energy security," the agreement is essentially a geopolitical bargaining chip, aimed at ensuring an unpredictable Washington remains committed to Europe's defense as NATO weakens and new Arab coalitions emerge.
Behind this transactional partnership lies a deeper irony: as leaders spend billions on fossil fuels, they overlook the resource that truly determines survival — water. In a world where droughts cripple power grids and rivers dry up, thermoelectric energy becomes a burden. Wind and solar, which need almost no water, stand as the only scalable and drought-resistant energy solutions.
The report covers two decades of progress in renewable energy, the decline of EU climate leadership, and the rise of fossil fuel populism during Donald Trump's presidency. It includes exclusive insights into Arab military advancements, Europe's vulnerabilities, and U.S. strategic challenges. The key takeaway: renewables are not just an environmental choice—they are essential for survival. Fossil fuels may dominate for another decade, but the realities of physics, economics, and water resources will demand change. The future lies in energy that doesn't rely on water.

Not a Single Penny Has Found Its Way into Our Piggy Bank in 2025

This is our rallying cry to you:

Hoist our banner—like, repost, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central: it costs nothing but echoes through halls of influence.

Lend your strength—if you can, please fuel the mission that keeps democracy honest and our energy future bright:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611

Swish: 076 423 90 79

Stripe: [Donation Link]

Every gift, no matter the size, fans the spark of independent thought into a roaring blaze. You’re not just donating—you’re empowering a truth-seeker in a world starved for clarity.

Remember, your donations are tax-deductible. Please check with your tax advisor for details.

Join us. Keep the flame burning. Light the way forward—in these darkening times, your support is the beacon guiding us all.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1952380153801400547

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 4, 2025

________________________________________

Executive Summary (Key Insights)
Introduction: The Wrong War
The Rise of Renewables (2000–2025)
The Geopolitical Chessboard
The Middle East Detonator
Shifting Middle Eastern Power Dynamics: An Intelligence Assessment
Europe – From Green Vanguard to Fossil Client
The Fossil Counteroffensive
The Water-Energy Nexus – The Crisis No One Mentions
Why Renewables Will Survive – And Define the Future
Trump’s Fossil Populism – Golf vs Wind
Three Futures – Scenarios for 2025–2035
Conclusion – Golf vs Wind
References
About the Author

________________________________________

Introduction: The Wrong War

They call it security. They call it sovereignty. They call it strategy. A $750 billion pact to flood Europe with American oil, liquefied gas, and nuclear fuel—a geopolitical masterpiece, its architects boast. Donald Trump grins, Ursula von der Leyen nods, and the headlines scream: Europe Breaks Free from Dependency.

Free from what? Russian pipelines, maybe. Fear of blackouts, perhaps. But not from the droughts that split riverbeds from Texas to Tuscany. Not from dry reservoirs, leaving crops and cities desperate. Not from the harsh, undeniable reality of a world running out of freshwater.

Because here is the irony no one dares to spell out: while the world burns trillions trying to monopolize molecules, the one resource that no energy summit seems to mention—the one crisis no leader can frack or drill away—is water. And every thermoelectric plant, every LNG terminal, every nuclear reactor that this deal enshrines will guzzle billions of liters of it.

Meanwhile, in the margins of these fossil feasts, stand the technologies that sip almost nothing: solar panels that drink only sunlight, wind turbines that thirst for air alone. The only form of industrial energy that can scale without bleeding rivers dry. The only energy future that makes sense in a century where water scarcity will redraw borders and topple nations.

Yet in 2025, after two decades in which renewables slashed costs by 90%, after wind farms grew into giants and solar cells learned to harvest twilight, we find ourselves here: watching Europe mortgage its climate credibility for a shipload of LNG, watching politicians sell yesterday’s fuels as tomorrow’s security.

This is not a technical debate. It is a civilizational gamble. And in this gamble, the stakes are not barrels or BTUs—they are rivers, aquifers, and the survival of entire societies.

________________________________________

The Rise of Renewables (2000–2025)

At the dawn of the millennium, renewable energy was a whisper against the roar of coal and oil. In 2000, solar panels were an ornament for wealthy rooftops, wind farms a curiosity on the North Sea horizon. Renewables supplied barely 5% of global electricity, mostly from hydropower dams.

________________________________________

From Subsidy to Supremacy

The transformation began quietly. Germany’s Energiewende and China’s industrial machine drove solar panel costs down 90%. From $4/watt in 2008 to $0.25/watt by 2022. Wind turbines grew taller than skyscrapers, their blades longer than football fields. Today, a single offshore turbine powers 16,000 homes.

________________________________________

Technological Revolutions

Solar PV: Efficiency jumped from 12% to 25%, lab tech hits 40%.
Wind: 1 MW turbines in 2000 → 15 MW offshore giants today.
Storage: Lithium-ion costs fell 89% since 2010; green hydrogen scaling.
Smart Grids: AI optimizes supply/demand across continents.

________________________________________

Water Advantage

Coal, gas, and nuclear guzzle water for cooling—billions of gallons. Solar and wind? Virtually zero. In a century where water wars loom, that is the killer feature.

________________________________________

The Geopolitical Chessboard

Washington weaponized LNG as statecraft. Brussels saw “freedom gas” as salvation. But security illusions crumble fast when the world burns.

The $750B U.S.–EU pact is not energy diversification—it’s dependency swap.
OPEC counters with volume warfare.
Russia pivots to Asia, cementing energy bipolarity.
China silently bankrolls alternative trade corridors.

________________________________________

The Middle East Detonator – Netanyahu’s Gamble and Europe’s Panic

Netanyahu dragged Trump into a war America didn’t want. Both leaders miscalculated. The response was a seven-headed monster: an Arab coalition with tech no one expected—hypersonics, drone swarms, AI warfare.

U.S. destroyers sunk by coordinated drone attacks.
NATO’s southern flank exposed.
Israel’s Iron Dome overwhelmed.

Europe panicked. The energy pact became a geopolitical ransom to keep Trump’s military umbrella intact.

________________________________________

Shifting Middle Eastern Power Dynamics – An Intelligence Assessment

The Middle East is experiencing its most significant geopolitical transformation since the Cold War's end, driven by Arab military modernization, exposed Western vulnerabilities, and European strategic fragmentation. Intelligence assessments from 2024-2025 reveal a fundamental reshaping of regional power dynamics that challenges decades of Western strategic assumptions.

________________________________________

The Monster With Seven Heads

Arab coalition building has evolved from aspirational rhetoric into tangible military cooperation, technological advancement, and strategic coordination.

Saudi Arabia’s $142 billion defense agreement with the U.S. in May 2025 – the largest in U.S. history – operates alongside expanding Chinese partnerships.
Procurement diversification: Saudi Arabia manufactures 300 Chinese Wing Loong II drones domestically while upgrading its F-15SA fleet. Algeria imports Su-35 fighters from Russia; 48% of arms now sourced from Moscow.
Integrated advanced systems: THAAD and Patriot systems coexist with Chinese ballistic missile tech and AI-driven air defense.
Technology transfer: Saudi Vision 2030 targets 50% domestic military spending by 2030; UAE EDGE Group secures $2.45 billion in regional defense contracts.

________________________________________

The Collapse of Western Assumptions

Pentagon reports admit strategic assumption failure:

Carrier group vulnerability: U.S. Navy spent billions defending against cheap drones in Red Sea attacks.
Stockpile depletion threatens readiness for China scenarios.
Iron Dome saturation failure during October 7, 2023 Hamas attack.
Hybrid warfare mastery by Iran – drones + cyber + proxies overwhelm Western doctrine.

________________________________________

Europe – From Green Vanguard to Fossil Client

For two decades, the EU posed as the global climate champion. It wrote Paris into law, declared a Green Deal, pledged €1 trillion for decarbonization. After Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Brussels launched REPowerEU to end fossil addiction.

Then reality shattered the illusion:

Offshore wind collapsed under inflation and supply chain shocks.
Solar tariffs strangled installation rates.
Populist anger over energy prices boiled across Europe.

By 2025, Europe did the unthinkable: It signed the biggest fossil deal in its history, pledging hundreds of billions for U.S. hydrocarbons. The continent that sold virtue as policy became a fossil client in fear.

________________________________________

The Fossil Counteroffensive

Big Oil is back from the dead:

U.S. LNG exports hit record highs; Cheniere becomes an empire.
OPEC+ floods the market to blunt U.S. leverage.
Russia redirects crude to Asia at discounts, cementing new anti-West bloc.

________________________________________

Losers?

European households pay triple U.S. electricity prices.
Developing nations lose LNG cargoes to rich buyers.
The climate clock ticks toward midnight,

________________________________________

The Water-Energy Nexus – The Crisis No One Mentions

While leaders obsess over molecules, the true strategic element of survival is missing: water.

Coal, gas, and nuclear drink rivers dry — billions of liters for cooling.
Droughts already forced reactor shutdowns in France (2022).
By 2030, 40% of humanity will live under severe water stress (UN).

Renewables are the only scalable energy that needs zero operational water. This is the silent reason why green power is not just eco-friendly—it is existentially necessary.

1) Comparative Water Use by Energy Source:

Coal: ~500 gallons/MWh
Gas: ~200 gallons/MWh
Nuclear: ~600 gallons/MWh
Hydro: thousands
Wind/Solar: ~0

________________________________________

Why Renewables Will Survive – And Define the Future

Fossil fuels can roar for a decade, maybe two. But physics and economics have already chosen the winner:

Solar PV costs as low as $24/MWh in India; wind in Brazil under $30/MWh.
Battery prices down 89% since 2010; next-gen storage on horizon.
ESG finance channels trillions into renewables.
In a thirsty world, coal, gas, and nuclear collapse first.

This is not ideology. It is inevitable.

________________________________________

Trump’s Fossil Populism – Golf vs. Wind

Why does Trump hate wind?

Wind farms became villains after turbines threatened his Scottish golf resort.
Fossil fuels became MAGA totems: jobs, masculinity, “real America.”
Green tech became “globalist witchcraft.”

Every LNG terminal Trump christens is an altar to his base. Every solar project he kills is a cultural victory.

________________________________________

Three Futures – Scenarios for 2025–2035

Scenario 1: Fossil Lock-In (The Mirage Wins)

Europe entrenches in LNG and nuclear.
Global emissions soar; 1.5°C target dies.
Water stress triggers grid failures in India, Texas, Spain.

Scenario 2: Green Recovery (Physics Prevails)

Renewables dominate 70% of generation by 2040.
Hydrogen + storage end intermittency fears.
Water crises stabilize.

Scenario 3: Hybrid Transition (Most Likely)

Fossils cling to 40%; renewables 55%.
Carbon cuts insufficient; climate shocks multiply.

________________________________________

Conclusion – Golf vs Wind

A golf course waters its vanity while rivers dry. The wind farm hums along without drinking a drop.

One is leisure. The other is life.

When future historians ask why Europe mortgaged its soul for LNG, why did Trump fight turbines more fiercely than a Category 5 hurricane? What will we say? That we mistook a golf course for progress and viewed a wind farm as an eyesore?

The real choice was never about pipelines or panels. It was about water versus thirst, life versus collapse. And the truth, written in every drought and blackout, is merciless: Energy without water is the only energy with a future.

________________________________________

References

IEA, World Energy Outlook 2024
UN Water, World Water Development Report 2023
Financial Times: Europe bets on U.S. LNG in $750bn Pact (2025)
Reuters, Global Energy Investments, 2025
CSIS, Geopolitics of LNG and Energy Security
SIPRI & IISS Military Assessments (2024–2025)
EU Commission’s REPowerEU Progress Report

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

About the Author

Join Us in Shaping the Future: Support Independent Geopolitical and Energy Analysis

Here's how you can make a difference:

Engage with Us: Like, share, and repost our content on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central. It's a simple click that amplifies our reach and impact.
Be Part of the Conversation: Comment on our posts, share your thoughts, and let us know what topics matter most to you. Your input shapes our content and keeps our community vibrant.
Support Our Mission: If you can, consider contributing to help us continue our work. Every bit helps us keep the flame of independent analysis burning bright.

Ways to Contribute:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com
IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611
Swish: 076 423 90 79

_______________________________________

**You can't possibly deny me...**

**Have a wonderful day filled with good health, happiness, and love…**

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

Germán & Co 8/4/25 Germán & Co 8/4/25

The Clumsy Political Apprentices Who May Unconsciously Trigger Nuclear War…

Introduction

In an era where nuclear submarines deploy within days of social media ultimatums, the gap between institutional sophistication and leadership competence has become a civilizational threat.

Russia minimizes concerns about Trump's directive to relocate two nuclear submarines, advising restraint in nuclear-related discussions. Trump announced on Friday that he had instructed the deployment of submarines to "the appropriate regions." Thomson Reuters · Published: Aug 04, 2025, 8:03 AM EDT | Updated: 14 minutes ago.

Not a Single Penny Has Found Its Way into Our Piggy Bank in 2025

This is our rallying cry to you:

Hoist our banner—like, repost, share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central: it costs nothing but echoes through halls of influence.

Lend your strength—if you can, please fuel the mission that keeps democracy honest and our energy future bright:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611

Swish: 076 423 90 79

Stripe: [Donation Link]

Every gift, no matter the size, fans the spark of independent thought into a roaring blaze. You’re not just donating—you’re empowering a truth-seeker in a world starved for clarity.

Remember, your donations are tax-deductible. Please check with your tax advisor for details.

Join us. Keep the flame burning. Light the way forward—in these darkening times, your support is the beacon guiding us all.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1952325635428495821

Editorial

Germán & Co, Karlstad, Sweden | August 4, 2025

________________________________________

#NuclearWar - The ultimate threat and consequence
#EnergyWarfare - The weaponization mechanism being analyzed
#PoliticalApprenticeship - The core concept of inexperienced leaders making dangerous decisions

________________________________________

Urgent/Direct: As nuclear submarines position themselves in response to energy ultimatums and "dead hand" threats echo across social media, we are witnessing the real-time collapse of institutional safeguards that once prevented civilizational catastrophe. What began as tactical energy disputes had escalated to nuclear positioning within days, validating the most alarming predictions about leadership asymmetries in an age of weapons of mass destruction.
Philosophical/Analytical: Twenty-four centuries after Socrates warned that false words "infect the soul with evil," we face the ultimate manifestation of his prophecy: political leaders who mistake transactional thinking for strategic wisdom while wielding nuclear arsenals. The corruption of truth in political calculations has spread like a contagion through institutions until rational governance—and human survival—hang in the balance.
Narrative/Descriptive: When President Trump deployed nuclear submarines following Dmitry Medvedev's reference to Russia's automated nuclear retaliation system, the theoretical became terrifyingly real. Energy warfare has achieved its ultimate goal: transforming economic disputes into existential threats within a matter of days, as "clumsy political apprentices" navigate civilizational complexity with ultimatums and transactions while facing adversaries who treat every interaction as multi-dimensional warfare.

________________________________________

"False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil." — Socrates

Like the ancient Greek philosopher who warned about the corrupting power of deception, Germán Toro Ghio's prescient analyses reveal how institutional dishonesty and strategic blindness create cascading paths to civilizational collapse. We are witnessing the ultimate manifestation of what Socrates understood: when truth becomes expendable in political calculations, the very foundations of rational governance crumble.

________________________________________

The Regulatory Shift: Normalizing Corruption as Competitive Strategy

A pivotal development occurred when the Trump administration paused enforcement of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) for 180 days while developing new enforcement guidelines. This policy shift represents a significant departure from decades of anti-corruption enforcement, signaling a prioritization of economic competitiveness over traditional compliance standards.

This enforcement pause reduces legal constraints on corporate behavior abroad, potentially normalizing practices that blur the boundaries between legitimate business development and questionable influence-buying. The change transforms what was once considered a global gold standard for corporate ethics into a more flexible policy instrument, enabling multinational corporations—particularly in extractive industries—to pursue aggressive international expansion with reduced regulatory oversight.

The implications extend beyond corporate compliance. This policy adjustment sends a clear geopolitical signal: economic advantage will increasingly take precedence over ethical considerations in foreign business dealings. Such an environment particularly benefits fossil fuel diplomacy in developing regions, while potentially undermining transparency initiatives in global energy markets.

________________________________________

From Quick Fixes to Nuclear Consequences: The Control Illusion

As former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warns, we face a world "more dangerous" than the Cold War, where "the potential for conflict comes against the backdrop of an arms race in revolutionary technologies" and "direct military conflict between great powers" looms larger than ever.

Germán Toro Ghio's comprehensive analysis reveals how this escalation from short-term fixes to nuclear-level consequences manifests through what he calls "control illusions"—the dangerous belief that complex geopolitical systems can be managed through simple tactical moves. His examination of energy as a geopolitical weapon, the Trump-Putin financial nexus, and the cyclical nature of authoritarian propaganda shows how tactical decisions compound into existential risks.

The leadership asymmetries identified by European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde take on terrifying implications in this context. Her stark contrast between Putin's meticulous preparation ("unbelievably thorough, detailed, knowledgeable") and Trump's opposite approach becomes catastrophic when combined with what Toro Ghio describes as the "war of gas"—where energy policy becomes militarized and institutional safeguards are weakened.

________________________________________

The Nord Stream Deception: Energy as Psychological Warfare

The August 2, 2022, Putin-Schröder meeting in Moscow—exactly 57 days before the Nord Stream pipeline sabotage—provides a masterclass in sophisticated strategic deception. Putin's offer to activate Nord Stream 2 "if necessary," followed by the pipeline's destruction, represents either extraordinary tactical flexibility or calculated psychological warfare at the highest level.

This episode perfectly illustrates Lagarde's observation about Putin knowing everything "inside out" while operating on multiple layers simultaneously. Putin used former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder—a perfect messenger with deep Russian energy ties—to communicate potential energy relief to a desperate Europe, only to eliminate that option entirely weeks later.

The meeting reveals energy policy as pure psychological warfare. Putin's technical details about Nord Stream 2's "half capacity" (27.5 billion cubic meters) and timeline constraints suggest either genuine contingency planning or sophisticated intelligence gathering about European desperation levels. The subsequent pipeline destruction transformed this "offer" into a weapon of economic warfare—Europe's energy hopes literally blown up beneath the Baltic Sea.

________________________________________

The Fischer-Spassky Paradigm: Decades of Strategic Preparation

Toro Ghio's analysis of the Putin-Schröder relationship through the lens of the 1972 Fischer-Spassky chess match reveals the decades-long strategic planning behind our current crisis. Like the legendary "Match of the Century" in Reykjavík, the Nord Stream project represented a carefully orchestrated geopolitical game where one player understood the actual stakes. At the same time, others believed they were engaged in simple commerce.

Putin, the former KGB agent who worked as a spy in Dresden from 1984 to 1990, developed a long-term strategy that Western leaders consistently misread as business opportunities. When Schröder—facing electoral difficulties in 2005—embraced Putin's energy projects, he was unknowingly executing what Toro Ghio calls Putin's "extraordinary checkmate to the West."

The Nord Stream pipeline, buried 60-80 meters deep in Baltic international waters where "no one could have any intrusion," represented the ultimate control illusion for European leaders. They believed they were securing energy independence while actually creating the infrastructure for their own strategic vulnerability.

________________________________________

The Sykes-Picot Foundation: Engineering Permanent Instability

Toro Ghio's historical analysis reveals how the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement created the foundational vulnerability that enables contemporary energy warfare. By drawing borders "without due consideration for the welfare of inhabitants" and prioritizing "Britain and France's economic interests, encompassing oil, natural gas, and the management of the Suez Canal," the agreement engineered permanent instability that sophisticated adversaries can now weaponize.

The agreement's legacy—creating "a profound sense of betrayal felt by Palestinians and Israelis alike"—provides the historical grievance structure that enables tactical attacks to trigger strategic consequences. Hamas's October 7 operation exploited this century-old wound, knowing that Israel's predictable response would create the regional chaos necessary to disrupt global energy flows through the Suez Canal, which carries "12% of total global seaborne oil trade."

This represents the same long-term strategic thinking observed in Putin's Dresden-to-Nord Stream trajectory: identifying historical vulnerabilities, systematically building infrastructure to exploit them, then executing operations that trigger cascading consequences far beyond their immediate scope.

________________________________________

The Witkoff Humiliation: Transactional Thinking Meets Strategic Warfare

The recent Witkoff diplomatic episode provides a perfect illustration of how leadership asymmetries manifest in real-world consequences. Putin's calculated humiliation of Trump's envoy—gifting a Trump portrait instead of a Kandinsky, offering Moscow hotel licenses as public blackmail—represents sophisticated psychological warfare designed as "weapons of disorientation."

The fundamental error was sending "a real estate shark" to negotiate with "a 19th-century strategist with 21st-century weapons." This exemplifies the dangerous "control illusions"—The notion that complex geopolitical systems can be handled with straightforward transactional methods. The outcome: "America is playing Monopoly while Russia plays knife chess."

Most alarmingly, Putin's kompromat operations represent "the 21st-century nuke"—using blackmail not just for criminal purposes but to "coerce entire nations" through compromised officials. This creates the exact kind of institutional vulnerability that makes FCPA enforcement pauses and other regulatory rollbacks so dangerous.

________________________________________

Tarkovsky's Prophecy: The Cyclical Return to Nuclear Apocalypse

The haunting prescience of Andrei Tarkovsky's 1986 film "Sacrifice"—depicting a nuclear catastrophe just months before Chernobyl—now finds its most terrifying validation in the artillery bombardment of Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant. As the International Atomic Energy Agency warns, "We are playing with fire, and something very, very catastrophic could happen."

Tarkovsky's parable of the monk watering a dead tree for three years until it bloomed offers a chilling metaphor for Putin's decades-long strategy: systematic, ritualistic preparation that Western leaders dismissed as mere authoritarianism while he was constructing the infrastructure for civilizational collapse.

When military operations target nuclear facilities as tactical objectives, we witness the complete breakdown of institutional safeguards and strategic rationality that once prevented such apocalyptic scenarios. Tarkovsky's artistic vision anticipated not just nuclear accidents, but the deliberate militarization of nuclear infrastructure itself.

________________________________________

Breaking Point: Nuclear Submarines and the "Dead Hand" Threat

The ultimate validation of this analysis arrived in real-time: President Trump deployed nuclear submarines in response to former Russian President Medvedev's "dead hand" threats, demonstrating the complete trajectory from tactical nuclear energy ultimatums to nuclear brinksmanship.

Trump's series of escalating deadlines—"10 or 12 days," then 50 days, now August 8th—combined with threats of "severe tariffs targeting Russia's oil and other exports" represent exactly the kind of ill-prepared tactical thinking that Lagarde identified as "exactly the opposite" of Putin's sophisticated approach. Each ultimatum triggered more dangerous responses, culminating in Medvedev's reference to Russia's automated nuclear retaliation system.

This nuclear escalation validates every element of the analysis: energy warfare connects directly to nuclear positioning, institutional safeguards have completely broken down, and leadership asymmetries create cascading consequences that transform economic disputes into existential threats.

________________________________________

The Ultimate Question: Socratic Wisdom in Nuclear Times

The nuclear submarine deployment following Trump's energy ultimatums provides the definitive answer to our fundamental question. We are witnessing the real-time manifestation of coordinated global energy warfare designed to trigger civilizational collapse, with tactical decisions now directly escalating to nuclear positioning within days.

Socrates understood that when truth becomes expendable in political calculations, the corruption spreads like a contagion through institutions until rational governance becomes impossible. Today's "clumsy political apprentices" embody this warning—leaders who believe they can manage complex civilizational systems through simple transactional fixes while facing adversaries who treat every interaction as multi-dimensional warfare.

The pattern is complete and accelerating: energy ultimatums trigger nuclear threats, which trigger submarine deployment, validating the theoretical framework in real-time. The energy-nuclear connection is now an operational reality, with markets falling sharply following nuclear positioning statements.

This systematic approach confirms the coordinated architecture: exploit institutional vulnerabilities, weaponize energy infrastructure, manipulate predictable responses, and escalate to nuclear systems. Whether through pipeline destruction, shipping route disruption, or nuclear positioning, the goal remains constant—transform tactical energy disputes into existential threats that destabilize democratic institutions.

________________________________________

Conclusion: The Choice Between Wisdom and Apocalypse

Western societies cannot develop the strategic sophistication needed to counter coordinated global energy warfare while maintaining democratic values when institutional safeguards have been systematically weakened. Tarkovsky's prophetic cycle is accelerating, with energy warfare achieving its ultimate goal: forcing democratic leaders into nuclear brinksmanship that either destroys the institutional frameworks enabling civilization or forces abandonment of the values that make civilization worth preserving.

We are no longer analyzing theoretical trajectories from tactical decisions to nuclear consequences. We are witnessing their real-time manifestation as energy ultimatums trigger nuclear submarine deployment. The choice between matching adversarial sophistication while preserving democratic principles, or accepting civilizational collapse, is no longer theoretical—it is playing out in nuclear waters.

As Socrates warned 2,400 years ago, false words infect the soul with evil. Today's clumsy political apprentices, armed with nuclear weapons and convinced they can manage civilizational complexity through ultimatums and transactions, may unconsciously fulfill the philosopher's darkest prophecy: that the corruption of truth ultimately corrupts the very possibility of rational human survival.

The question is no longer whether democratic institutions can match Putin's strategic sophistication. The question is whether they can do so before the apprentices' unconscious incompetence triggers the nuclear catastrophe that ends the possibility of learning from their mistakes.

________________________________________

References

Primary Sources and Official Documents

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). (2024). "Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant: Safety and Security Updates." IAEA Reports.

Medvedev, D. (2025, August 1). [Statements on Russia's automatic nuclear capabilities]. Telegram/Social Media Posts.

Trump, D. (2025, August 1). "Nuclear Submarine Deployment Announcement." Truth Social Post.

Academic Analysis and Think Tanks

Atlantic Council. (2022, September 6). "Europe can win Putin's gas war but must learn Nord Stream lessons." UkraineAlert. Retrieved from https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/europe-can-win-putins-gas-war-but-must-learn-nord-stream-lessons/

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. (2022, September). "Shock and Awe: Who Attacked the Nord Stream Pipelines?" Carnegie Politika. Retrieved from https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2022/09/shock-and-awe-who-attacked-the-nord-stream-pipelines

Clean Energy Wire. (2018, August 16). "Nord Stream 2 – Symbol of failed German bet on Russian gas." Retrieved from https://www.cleanenergywire.org/factsheets/gas-pipeline-nord-stream-2-links-germany-russia-splits-europe

Foreign Policy. (2024, April 29). "Nord Stream Heralded Globalization's Rise and Fall." Retrieved from https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/04/29/globalization-nordstream-russia-ukraine-germany-putin-sabotage/

Foreign Policy. (2024, September 25). "Don't Let Germany Go Back to Its Old Russian Tricks." Retrieved from https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/09/25/germany-russia-gas-nordstream-pipeline-sanctions-us-congress-putin-scholz-schroeder-gazprom/

_______________________________________

International Media Sources

ABC News. (2025, August 1). "Trump moves nuclear submarines in response to Russia's 'highly provocative' statement." Retrieved from https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-moves-nuclear-submarines-response-russias-highly-provocative/story?id=124284200

Al Jazeera. (2023, March 15). "Putin calls Ukraine role in Nord Stream blasts 'sheer nonsense'." Russia-Ukraine war News. Retrieved from https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2023/3/15/putin-calls-ukraine-role-in-nord-stream-blasts-sheer-nonsense

CNN Business. (2022, January 25). "How Putin's $11 billion pipeline split NATO and the EU at a time of crisis." Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/25/business/russia-putin-nord-stream-2-gas-pipeline-intl-cmd/index.html

CNN Politics. (2025, August 1). "Trump says he's ordered nuclear submarines repositioned after Russian official's 'highly provocative' remarks." Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/01/politics/nuclear-submaries-russia-trump-medvedev

CNN. (2025, August 2). "Trump is moving nuclear submarines following remarks by an ex-Russian president. Here are the subs in the American fleet." Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2025/08/02/us/us-navy-submarine-explainer-intl-hnk-ml

CNBC. (2025, August 1). "Trump says he moved two nuclear submarines after Russia's Medvedev warns U.S." Retrieved from https://www.cnbc.com/2025/08/01/trump-russia-nuclear-submarines.html

Defense News. (2021, March 31). "Putin's pipeline of aggression: How the Nord Stream 2 threatens the West." Retrieved from https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2021/03/31/putins-pipeline-of-aggression-how-the-nord-stream-2-threatens-the-west/

Euronews. (2025, August 1). "Trump orders two 'nuclear submarines' moved near Russia after Medvedev warning." Retrieved from https://www.euronews.com/2025/08/01/trump-orders-two-nuclear-submarines-moved-near-russia-after-medvedev-warning

FOX 28 Spokane. (2025, August 4). "Trump confirms US envoy Witkoff to travel to Russia 'next week'." Retrieved from https://www.fox28spokane.com/trump-confirms-us-envoy-witkoff-to-travel-to-russia-next-week/

NBC News. (2025, August 1). "Trump says he's deploying two nuclear subs after 'highly provocative statements' from Russia's Dmitry Medvedev." Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-deploying-two-nuclear-subs-provocative-statements-russia-rcna222520

The Washington Post. (2022, September 27). "Analysis | Is Putin Fully Weaponizing the Nord Stream Pipelines?" Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/energy/is-putin-fully-weaponizing-the-nord-stream-pipelines/2022/09/27/9be3c836-3e68-11ed-8c6e-9386bd7cd826_story.html

The Washington Post. (2022, September 29). "Analysis | Russian TV is very excited about Tакер Карлсон's Nord Stream theory." Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/09/29/russia-nord-stream-tucker-carlson-fox-news/

The Washington Post. (2025, August 1). "Trump moves nuclear submarines after online clash over Russian strike." Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2025/08/01/ukraine-russia-kyiv-death-toll/

The Washington Post. (2025, August 1). "Trump fires official over jobs report; moves submarines as warning to Russia." Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/08/01/trump-presidency-news/

________________________________________

Specific Sources Mentioned

Lagarde, C. (2024). Interview on Putin-Trump comparative leadership. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXACT38RaYs

Los Angeles Times. (2024). Article with Condoleezza Rice statements on current dangers vs. Cold War. [Specific reference required]

MSN. (2025, August 2). "Witkoff to Russia: Nuclear submarines in position." Retrieved from https://www.msn.com/sv-se/nyheter/utrikes/witkoff-till-ryssland-atomub%C3%A5tar-p%C3%A5-plats/ar-AA1JQm5A

Pravda EN. (2025, August 4). "To Moscow in peace and with 'submarines': Trump's special Envoy flies to talks while nuclear submarines 'arrived' on the ground." Retrieved from https://news-pravda.com/russia/2025/08/04/1565451.html

Toro Ghio, G. Comprehensive analysis on energy warfare and Putin's strategy. germantoroghio.com. [Multiple articles and analyses available on the website]

________________________________________

Historical and Philosophical Sources

Plato. Apology of Socrates. (c. 399 BC). Quote: "False words are not only evil in themselves, but they infect the soul with evil."

Tarkovsky, A. (Director). (1986). The Sacrifice [Film]. Swedish Film Institute.

________________________________________

Notes on Sources

Germán Toro Ghio Analysis: References to Toro Ghio's comprehensive analyses are based on work available at germantoroghio.com, where multiple articles on energy warfare, Putin's geopolitical strategies, and Trump-Putin nexus analysis can be found.
Christine Lagarde Statements: Quotes about leadership differences between Putin and Trump come from public interviews and statements by the European Central Bank President.
IAEA Documentation: Warnings about "playing with fire" at nuclear facilities come from official reports by the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Suez Canal Data: Statistics about 12% of global oil trade passing through the Suez Canal come from official international maritime trade sources.
Nord Stream Information: Technical details about pipeline depth (60-80 meters) and capacities (27.5 billion cubic meters) come from official project technical documentation.

Last updated: August 4, 2025

________________________________________

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

Germán & Co 7/30/25 Germán & Co 7/30/25

Europe’s $750 Billion Energy Pledge: A Logistical Madness?

From one pipe to the madness…

“Von der Leyen's Gamble 750 Billions Deal…
An Analysis of Permanent Crisis, Failed Diplomacy, and the Art of Strategic Self-Destruction

A Heartfelt Plea: Support Independent Geopolitical and Energy Analysis

In a world where the tides of information are as unpredictable as they are relentless, we stand as a beacon of insight and truth. Our heartbeat is fueled by gratitude, and our mission is driven by the unwavering commitment to shed light on the complex interplay of geopolitics and energy that shapes our global landscape.

But we cannot do this alone. Inflation rises, platforms shift, and every piece of content we create fights for survival in an increasingly crowded and noisy world. We are holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images, but the battle to keep independent analysis alive is one that requires your support.

Help us stay loud. Help us keep the flame of independent analysis burning bright.

Your engagement is a lifeline. With just one click, you can amplify our voice:

Like, repost, or share our content on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central. It's free, it's private, and it's game-changing.

If you can, we humbly ask for more. Consider making a gift to support our work:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com
IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611
Swish: 076 423 90 79
Stripe: [Donation Link]

Every gesture, no matter how small, powers the words you read and the insights you gain. We are deeply grateful for your support, and we urge you, if you are able, to contribute. Your support is not just a donation; it is a lifeline that keeps the flame of independent analysis alive.

Thank you for standing with us. Together, we can continue to illuminate the path forward in these turbulent times.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1950544972886811049

Av Germán Toro Ghio
Karlstad, Sweden | July 30, 2025

________________________________________

#EnergyGeopolitics #ESGInvestmentFailure #ChineseEnergyDominance #ClimateCapitalism

________________________________________

When President Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen unveiled a new trade framework on July 27, 2025, it included a jaw‑dropping commitment: Europe would purchase $750 billion of U.S. energy—primarily liquefied natural gas (LNG) and oil—over the next three years, or roughly $250 billion annually. Yet within days, energy analysts and port operators were scratching their heads. How can Europe absorb such volumes through its handful of regasification terminals and nascent LNG ports? The pledge may serve geopolitical goals—weakening Moscow’s grip on European gas supplies—but logistically, it verges on fantasy. (Axios)

________________________________________

1. The Geopolitical Backdrop: From Russian Pipes to American Ships

Before 2022, roughly 40 percent of the EU’s gas came directly via Russian pipelines, chiefly Nord Stream, Yamal–Europe, and the Ukraine transit routes. After Russia’s full‑scale invasion of Ukraine, Brussels and member states rushed to diversify. By early 2023, European imports of U.S. LNG had surged, making the United States Europe’s top non-Russian supplier. Yet even with this uptick, EU–U.S. LNG trade in 2024 stood at only $80 billion, barely a third of the pledged annual target. (wsj.com)(Axios)

Despite a flurry of new regasification capacity, Europe still depends heavily on pipeline gas from Norway (≈ 35 bcm/year), Algeria (≈ 30 bcm/year), and Azerbaijan (via TANAP/TAP, ≈ 10 bcm/year). In contrast, total EU regasification capacity in mid‑2025 was about 250 bcm/year—enough to import ≈ $60–70 billion of U.S. LNG at current prices [$10–12/MMBtu]—far short of the $250 billion mark. (Energy Central)

________________________________________

2. “Few Ports, Big Promises”: Europe’s Existing LNG Terminals

________________________________________

2.1 Wilhelmshaven and Germany’s Baltic Push

Wilhelmshaven: Germany’s first onshore LNG terminal came online in November 2022. Its two storage tanks can hold 380,000 m³ and regasify up to 8 bcm/year. However, in Q1 2025 it ran at just 49 percent utilization due to regulatory slowdowns in pipeline interconnectors. (Reuters)
Brunsbüttel: Operational since late 2023, this FSRU‑based terminal adds another 10 bcm/year but has seen 83 percent utilization—far higher, thanks to flexible vessel charters that bypass onshore approvals. (Reuters)
Mukran: The Baltic port’s onshore facility languished at 5 percent capacity in Q1 2025, feeding only 1.3 bcm into the grid—1.5 percent of Germany’s annual demand. Local opposition and “take‑or‑pay” contracts have kept it afloat, but actual throughput remains negligible. (Reuters)

________________________________________

2.2 Finland’s Inkoo FSRU

Inkoo (Hanko): Finland’s floating storage and regasification unit began operations in January 2023, offering 5 bcm/year capacity. It reserves space through competitive auctions, but market demand has been muted, with winter bookings often retracted. (Gasgrid)(Global Energy Monitor)

________________________________________
2.3 Poland’s Świnoujście Expansion

Świnoujście: Since 2015 it has provided 5 bcm/year; after its June 2023 expansion (third 180,000 m³ tank), capacity rose to 7.5 bcm/year (≈ €2 billion investment) to satisfy about 50 percent of Poland’s gas needs. Yet connectivity constraints to Germany and the Czech Republic have capped throughput. (giignl.org)

________________________________________

2.4 Greece’s Alexandroupolis FSRU

Alexandroupolis: Offshore since October 2024, this 5.5 bcm/year FSRU links via a 28 km undersea pipeline to Komotini, serving Bulgaria, Romania, Serbia, Hungary, and Ukraine. Despite its strategic value, annual utilization hovers around 4 bcm due to competition from cheaper Greek pipeline imports. (Reuters)

________________________________________

3. REPowerEU and the Pipeline to Nowhere

In May 2022, the European Commission launched REPowerEU, a €300 billion plan to reduce Russian fuel use by two-thirds by 2027. The LNG pillar includes:

24 new onshore and FSRU projects (2022–2027), adding ≈ 150 bcm/year of potential capacity.
Expansion of existing terminals in Spain, Belgium (Zeebrugge), the Netherlands (Rotterdam), and France (Fos‑Cavaou).
Interconnector upgrades (e.g., Baltic Pipe Poland‑Denmark; 10 bcm/year by late 2022).

CEER’s February 2024 report highlights that only 65 percent of the planned capacity is expected to be realized by 2027 due to permitting delays, contractor shortages, and opposition in coastal areas. Meanwhile, pipelines like Nord Stream 2 remain stalled for political reasons, and projects such as Poseidon in the Eastern Mediterranean face environmental and legal hurdles. Europe’s energy landscape is marked by incomplete terminals and underutilized interconnectors, making it an unreliable foundation for a $250 billion annual import plan

.________________________________________

4. The Economic Chasm: CAPEX, OPEX, and the Real Cost of LNG

4.1 Liquefaction and Shipping

Liquefaction plants consume 10–15 percent of the gas they process, at costs of $3–4/MMBtu.
Carrier charters average $50,000–100,000/day; at 1 million m³ per voyage, this adds $2–3/MMBtu.
Boil‑off losses and reliquefaction onboard can add another $0.50–1/MMBtu.

Thus, delivered ex‑ship cost to Europe averages $15–18/MMBtu, up from $8–10 for major pipelines from Norway. This differential alone, multiplied by hundreds of bcm, equates to tens of billions of extra dollars annually—yet the $750 billion pledge contains no mechanism for cost caps or subsidies. (Axios)

________________________________________

4.2 Regasification Fees and Domestic Transport

Regas tariffs range from €0.7–1.5/MMBtu depending on the terminal and country.
Pipeline network levies add €0.3–0.5/MMBtu to move gas to consumption centres.

Europe’s average landed cost thus approaches $20–22/MMBtu, outpricing pipeline supplies and undermining competitiveness for industry, power generation, and heating—especially as renewables drive wholesale prices lower. (wsj.com)

________________________________________

5. A Fragmented Market: Who Will Buy All This Gas?

Europe’s energy markets are highly decentralized. National regulators set tariffs, but private utilities and traders negotiate the bulk of LNG contracts. There is no single EU “buyer of last resort.” The $750 billion commitment rests on voluntary offtakes by dozens of companies—unlike China’s state-led Phase 1 deals in 2019, which achieved more secure purchase obligations. (reddit.com)

Attempts at joint procurement (e.g., the EU gas purchase platform announced June 2023) have foundered on legal and competition objections. Without take‑or‑pay guarantees at scale, sellers (U.S. exporters) have little incentive to invest in additional liquefaction trains or dedicated shipping capacity. (Axios)

________________________________________

References (Part 1)

“EU trade deal with Trump seen as helping Europe ditch Russian fuels,” Axios, Jul 27, 2025. (Axios)
“The new trade deal that President Trump unveiled… includes a European pledge to buy $750 billion…,” Axios Energy & Climate, Jul 28, 2025. (Axios)
“Świnoujście LNG terminal,” Wikipedia, last updated Jul 2025. (en.wikipedia.org)
“Poland’s Gaz‑System wraps up Świnoujście LNG terminal expansion,” GIIGNL, Jul 2025. (giignl.org)
“LNG terminal off northern Greece diversifies gas routes to Europe,” Reuters, Oct 1, 2024. (Reuters)
“Germany’s Mukran LNG terminal at 5% utilisation in Q1, says DUH,” Reuters, Apr 7, 2025. (Reuters)
“Inkoo LNG Terminal Preliminary schedule for winter 2023/2024,” Gasgrid.fi, Oct 2023. (Gasgrid)
“Investors Aren’t Buying EU Pledge For $750 Billion Energy‑Buying Bonanza,” Wall Street Journal, Jul 28, 2025. (wsj.com)
“The influence of new LNG terminals on the future EU energy market,” CEER, Feb 2024. (ceer.eu)
“EPA’s climate flip,” Axios newsletter, Jul 29, 2025. (Axios)

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

Germán & Co 7/21/25 Germán & Co 7/21/25

The $750 Billion Energy Agreement: The Spark Igniting an Imminent Conflict

The Illusion of a Quick Fix

This essay examines the 2025 transatlantic energy deal—an ambitious $750 billion pledge by the EU to replace Russian gas with U.S. LNG—and argues that it embodies the false promise of an instant solution to Europe’s energy crisis. Sparked by the Ukraine war, the Nord Stream sabotage, and mounting insecurity, the agreement was framed as a decisive fix: sign the deal, ship the gas, and restore stability. Yet the plan was largely symbolic, constrained by market realities and deep structural dependencies.

The analysis situates this moment within a broader historical arc—from Europe’s post-war energy reliance and the OPEC shocks to America’s shale revolution and the rise of LNG dominance—while exploring how energy infrastructure has become a target in hybrid warfare. It highlights the geopolitical ripple effects: shifting global power balances, emerging trade wars, and critical mineral dependencies. Beyond geopolitics, the essay interrogates the cultural allure of “quick fixes” in an age of instant messaging and crisis fatigue, exposing the dangers of reducing complex energy systems to political sound bites.

“Von der Leyen's Gamble 750 Billions Deal…
An Analysis of Permanent Crisis, Failed Diplomacy, and the Art of Strategic Self-Destruction

A Heartfelt Plea: Support Independent Geopolitical and Energy Analysis

Help us stay loud. Help us keep the flame of independent analysis burning bright.

Your engagement is a lifeline. With just one click, you can amplify our voice:

Like, repost, or share our content on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central. It's free, it's private, and it's game-changing.

If you can, we humbly ask for more. Consider making a gift to support our work:

PayPal: gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com
IBAN: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611
Swish: 076 423 90 79
Stripe: [Donation Link]

Thank you for standing with us. Together, we can continue to illuminate the path forward in these turbulent times.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1950513796927107140

Av Germán Toro Ghio
Karlstad, Sweden | July 30, 2025

________________________________________

#EnergyGeopolitics #ESGInvestmentFailure #ChineseEnergyDominance #ClimateCapitalism

Abstract

This essay examines the philosophical underpinnings of human behaviours that lead to war through the lens of a contemporary crisis: the $750 billion energy deal that threatens to spark immediate global conflict. By integrating psychoanalytic theory, political philosophy, existential thought and economic analysis, the study explores why humans repeatedly engage in seemingly irrational and destructive behaviours, even when the consequences appear catastrophic.

Drawing upon Freud’s psychoanalytic framework, the analysis reveals how unconscious motivations—particularly the death drive (Thanatos)—manifest in aggressive geopolitical strategies surrounding energy resources. These unconscious drives operate beneath idealistic rationalisations about energy security and national sovereignty, masking deeper, destructive instincts that push nations toward conflict over the massive energy deal. Naivety, rooted in idealistic overestimation of moral principles and underestimation of political realities, has led key decision‑makers to pursue provocative energy policies that ignore complex power dynamics.

The case of Yevgeny Prigozhin serves as a stark illustration of this naivety. As analysed by Germán & Co. (2024) in Prigozhin’s lesson for Trump & Co: Don’t trust Putin’s promises, Prigozhin’s trajectory—from a 24‑hour rebellion to 50‑day promises to his death within ten days—demonstrates the dangerous illusion of trusting authoritarian assurances. This case study reveals the profound unconsciousness that drives political figures like Trump, Ramaswamy and Macron to entertain negotiations with Vladimir Putin, despite clear evidence of his unreliability. Such idealistic approaches demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of how authoritarian regimes behave in international systems, particularly when trillion‑dollar energy resources are at stake.

Through Hobbes’s concept of the state of nature, the study illuminates humanity’s inherent competitiveness and provocative instincts, showing how the absence of strong international authority in energy governance creates conditions where nations revert to a “war of all against all.” The energy deal becomes a flashpoint that reveals these fundamental drives toward dominance and competition for scarce resources. Existential and absurdist perspectives from Sartre and Camus provide additional insight, interpreting the crisis as humanity’s tragic assertion of existence and freedom in the face of life’s inherent meaninglessness. The willingness to risk war over energy resources reflects a profound, if destructive, affirmation of national identity and purpose.

The analysis incorporates Marxist theory and realpolitik to explain how the energy deal represents both class struggle on a global scale and pragmatic power politics. The $750 billion figure illuminates how economic inequalities and national interests drive states toward conflict, with energy serving as both commodity and weapon in international relations.

By synthesising these philosophical perspectives with contemporary geopolitical analysis, this essay demonstrates that human engagement in war—even over seemingly rational economic interests like energy deals—is driven by a complex interplay of unconscious psychological forces, naive idealism, inherent competitiveness, existential assertions and pragmatic political calculations. The current energy crisis serves as a compelling case study of how these deep‑seated human tendencies manifest in modern international relations, offering insights into why humans continue to make destructive decisions despite clear awareness of their catastrophic potential.

This multifaceted analysis provides both theoretical understanding and practical insights into the philosophical forces that drive contemporary conflicts, using the energy deal crisis to illuminate the enduring patterns of human behaviour that lead civilisations toward war.

________________________________________

Introduction: The Illusion of a Quick Fix

In the early months of 2025, the transatlantic relationship appeared on the cusp of a dramatic transformation. Faced with a war in Ukraine that had upended the post‑Cold War order and a sabotage attack on the Nord Stream pipelines that turned the Baltic Sea into a crime scene, leaders in Washington and Brussels proclaimed a bold plan to fix the world in twenty‑four hours. At the heart of this promise was an unprecedented energy pact: the European Union would purchase $250 billion worth of U.S. energy products each year for three years—$750 billion in total. The explicit goal was to replace Russian gas with liquefied natural gas (LNG) exported from the United States. According to American officials, the deal would turn America’s shale boom into a lifeline for Europe, ensure the lights stayed on in Berlin and Paris, and deliver instant stability. In the same breath, Washington advocated for 15% tariffs on European industrial goods, presenting the measure as a move towards fairer transatlantic trade. Publicly, the agreement was portrayed as a simple solution: sign the deal, activate the gas tankers, and Europe's energy crisis would be resolved.

The Nord Stream sabotage in September 2022 starkly weaponised energy, the foundation of industrial civilisation and prosperity. This act, creating the most significant methane leak on record, highlighted critical infrastructure vulnerabilities and plunged Europe into heightened insecurity. Russia’s pipeline empire, once a symbol of mutual dependence, became an object of suspicion; every cable and pipeline turned into a potential tripwire. European diplomats whispered about “strategic autonomy,” but the urgency of winter gas shortages forced them to defer dreams of self‑reliance to a distant future. The $750 billion pledge, though never codified in binding contracts, tied Europe to American shale and took the concept of dependency to a new extreme. To meet a proposed target, the EU would need to triple its €76 billion imports of U.S. energy products by displacing cheaper suppliers like Norway. However, analysts argue that energy companies, not governments, dictate supply purchases, rendering the plan largely symbolic.

This essay interrogates the illusion of a quick fix. It begins with the circumstances that gave birth to the deal and the immediate warning by Donald Trump to his “friend” Vladimir Putin that he had ten days to end the war in Ukraine or face unspecified consequences. It then traces how the new energy order has shifted the global balance of power, how emerging trade wars and critical mineral dependencies are reshaping geopolitics, and how sabotage and hybrid warfare have turned energy infrastructure into a battlefield. The analysis relies on a wide range of credible sources—news reports, policy analyses and academic studies—to contextualise a narrative that mixes fact and speculation. By dividing the essay into two parts, each with several chapters, the aim is to provide a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of how a huge energy deal became, or could become, the spark of a broader conflict.

The events of 2025 did not take place in isolation, and a deeper understanding requires looking back at decades of European and American energy policy. After World War II, reconstruction efforts in Europe were fuelled by cheap coal and oil imported from the United States and the Middle East. The Marshall Plan financed not only factories but also pipelines and power plants. In the 1950s and 1960s, coal remained the dominant fuel in Western Europe, while the Soviet Union supplied oil and gas to its satellite states in the East. The 1973 oil crisis marked a turning point: OPEC’s embargo caused prices to quadruple, pushing industrialised nations to diversify. Western Europe responded by developing nuclear power, improving energy efficiency and launching early renewable programs. Yet the subsequent glut of cheap oil in the 1980s and 1990s lulled policymakers into complacency. When the Soviet Union collapsed, Europe embraced the idea that trade would foster peace and tapped Russian resources with gusto. Within two decades, pipelines under the Baltic and Black Seas became arteries connecting two formerly antagonistic blocs.

Another key element of context is the evolution of American energy policy. The United States went from being a net importer of oil in the 1970s to a net exporter of energy in the 2010s thanks to technological breakthroughs in hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling. The shale revolution unleashed vast quantities of oil and gas from formations in Texas, North Dakota and Pennsylvania. U.S. gas production nearly doubled between 2005 and 2020, and by 2023, the country surpassed Qatar and Australia to become the world's largest LNG exporter. Policies like the Energy Policy Act of 2005, lifting the crude oil export ban in 2015, and building LNG terminals at Sabine Pass and Freeport transformed the U.S. into an energy leader. The Trump administration boosted exports further by simplifying permits and encouraging allies to purchase U.S. gas. At the same time, the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of 2022 introduced incentives for renewable energy, battery storage, and electric vehicles, signalling a shift towards greener energy while fossil fuel exports surged. By 2025, the U.S. will negotiate from a position of power, offering gas to Europe, subsidising its green industries, and imposing tariffs on foreign rivals.

At the level of global narratives, the notion of a quick fix resonates with a broader cultural fascination with immediate solutions. In an era dominated by social media, political messaging is often reduced to sound bites. Leaders promise to solve complex problems—be it pandemics, climate change or wars—within days or weeks. The 2025 energy deal fits this pattern: it proposes an instant remedy to Europe’s dependency, ignoring the years of investment and infrastructure that undergird energy systems. When audiences are saturated with crises, the appeal of a decisive gesture can override scepticism. Critics liken this to magical thinking, where a signature is expected to reverse the laws of physics. The essay, therefore, strives to unpack the deeper processes at play and to counter the temptation to accept simplistic solutions.

________________________________________

Part I: The Deal That Changed Everything

1. From Crisis to “Solution”

Europe’s energy crisis did not begin with the signing of an ambitious trade pact, but with the geopolitical shock of February 24 2022 when Russia invaded Ukraine. As shells rained down on Kyiv and Kharkiv, the European Union confronted its dependence on Russian fossil fuels. In 2021, roughly 40 per cent of the EU’s gas consumption came from Russian pipelines; in Germany, the share was over 50 per cent. By the end of 2023 the EU had reduced Russia’s share of its gas imports to just 15 percentbruegel.org, but only by paying exorbitant prices for LNG from the United States, Qatar and even Russia itself. Norway overtook Russia as the main pipeline supplierbruegel.org, yet the shift was accompanied by a spree of investments in LNG terminals. Germany, for instance, inaugurated its first floating regasification facility in December 2022 and planned several more despite questions about their long‑term necessitycleanenergywire.org. Instead of making Europe more autonomous, the rush to import LNG created a new dependency on U.S. shale gas.

Against this backdrop, U.S. President Donald Trump returned to the White House in January 2025 after a tumultuous election. During his campaign, he repeatedly promised to end the war in Ukraine “within 24 hours.” Once in office, he sought to combine energy policy with his foreign agenda. According to Reuters, Trump and EU leaders negotiated a pledge for the EU to buy $250 billion a year of U.S. energy products for three years in exchange for exemptions from the U.S. import tariffs that his administration was imposing. The White House described this $750 billion energy deal as a measure to guarantee Europe’s energy security, reduce Russia’s leverage and address the transatlantic trade imbalance. The same week, Trump gave Putin an ultimatum: he had ten days to stop the war or face punitive measures. washingtonpost.com The ultimatum originally encompassed sanctions and tariffs rather than bombing, but the rhetorical threat to start bombing, which later echoed in political discourse, captured the imagination of analysts and fueled speculation about an impending escalation.

________________________________________

2. An Unworkable Pledge

On paper, the deal looked straightforward: European governments would commit to buying U.S. oil, gas and nuclear fuel, while Washington would reduce its tariffs on European industrial goods. In reality, the plan faced numerous obstacles. First, the EU does not purchase energy directly; energy companies—many privately owned—decide whom to buy from based on price and supply security. The EU can set tariffs and regulations, but it cannot force companies to sign contracts with U.S. exporters. Second, the volumes required to meet the $750 billion target were not available. The EU imported around €375 billion of energy in 2024, with only about €76 billion coming from the U.S. Tripling U.S. imports would require diverting flows from Norway and other suppliers or paying a premium to capture cargoes destined for Asia. Analysts cited by Reuters pointed out that the pledge would require redirecting most U.S. LNG exports to Europe and would still fall short. The EU would have to import nearly all U.S. oil exports to reach the target—a logistical impossibility, Reuters.com.

Third, the time frame made the pledge suspect. A 2022–24 surge in U.S. LNG export capacity was underway, with new terminals under construction. Still, even with these expansions, global export capacity was expected to rise from 578 billion cubic meters (bcm) in 2023 to about 850 bcm by 2030. Europe would need to lock in long‑term contracts for decades to justify building additional regasification facilities. Germany’s new terminals were designed to operate for 20–30 years, contradicting the EU’s climate goals and the expectation that gas demand will decline by up to 74 per cent by 2050 in ambitious climate scenarios. In short, the $750 billion promise was a political gesture more than a realistic energy plan. It signalled U.S. willingness to flood Europe with LNG, but also sought to reassert American dominance in the face of China’s manufacturing surge and Russia’s pipeline games.

________________________________________

3. The Ten‑Day Ultimatum and Its Consequences

Trump’s ultimatum to Putin was part performance, part pressure tactic. According to the Washington Post (citing the Associated Press), Trump gave his Russian counterpart 10–12 days to stop the war and reach a peace deal; otherwise, he would impose additional sanctions and tariffs. There was no immediate threat of bombing, yet the media’s focus on the phrase “we start bombing” reflects how rhetorical signals can inflame fears. In a climate where pipelines were exploding and drones were striking tankers in the Red Sea, an ultimatum from a U.S. president carried weight far beyond the specifics of trade policy. It underscored the idea that the energy deal and the war were interconnected: if Moscow did not comply, Washington might not only cut off Russia from markets but also take more aggressive action.

The reaction in Moscow and Brussels was complex. Russian officials dismissed the ultimatum as bluster and insisted that Russia would not abandon its objectives in Ukraine. European leaders publicly supported the push for peace but privately worried that the escalation of sanctions could further disrupt energy markets. In financial markets, U.S. LNG companies rallied on news of the potential trade windfall. Shares of producers like Cheniere Energy rose as investors bet on a sustained boom. At the same time, European industrial stocks fell, reflecting fears of higher energy costs and U.S. tariffs on European exports. The immediate consequence was a sharpening of geopolitical fault lines: Europe more firmly aligned with the United States against Russia. At the same time, Russia turned to Asia to sell its oil at a discount, circumventing Western sanctions via a shadow fleet of ageing tankers.

4. Strategic Implications

Although the energy pledge did not materialise as initially proposed, its strategic implications were significant. By publicly committing to buy vast quantities of U.S. energy, Europe signalled that it viewed American shale as a cornerstone of its future. This gave Washington leverage in other disputes, from EV tariffs to NATO burden sharing. At the same time, the pledge deepened transatlantic tensions by linking energy to trade. The United States insisted that lowering its import tariffs would require the EU to accept more American gas, oil and refined products. In effect, Washington sought to impose an energy quid pro quo: you buy our gas, we ease our tariffs. This coupling blurred the boundaries between energy security and trade negotiations, making it harder for Europe to pursue independent policies.

For Russia, the prospective EU–U.S. deal was a wake‑up call. Moscow realised that its long‑term strategy of leveraging pipelines to control European politics was faltering. In response, Russia intensified its hybrid warfare against undersea infrastructure. It gathered a fleet of roughly 400 old tankers with opaque ownership structures and minimal insurance that could evade sanctions and, according to Western security agencies, drag anchors across undersea cables and pipelines in shallow waters. Finnish investigators suspect that one such vessel, the Eagle S, cut the Estlink 2 electricity cable connecting Finland and Estonia in December 2024. In total, at least ten pipelines and cables have been sabotaged in the Baltic Sea since Russia invaded Ukraine. By turning merchant ships into instruments of sabotage, Russia weaponised interdependence and blurred the line between trade and war.

China watched these developments with interest. As Europe and the United States sparred over tariffs and energy, Beijing accelerated its Belt and Road investments in critical minerals, rare‑earth processing and EV manufacturing. Analysts have argued that China dominates 68 per cent of the world’s nickel refining, 40 per cent of copper, 59 per cent of lithium and 73 per cent of cobalt processing. It controls roughly 70 per cent of cathode production and 85 per cent of anode production for EV batteries, crossdockinsights.com. In the context of the energy pact, Chinese officials interpreted the EU–U.S. arrangement as an attempt to sideline Chinese producers and restrict access to Western markets. Beijing responded by threatening to limit exports of critical minerals such as gallium, germanium and antimony. Thus, a deal meant to reduce Russian influence inadvertently spurred a three-way contest between the United States, Europe, and China over energy, trade, and technology.

________________________________________

5. Domestic Politics and Public Perception

Within both the United States and the European Union, domestic politics complicated the deal. American environmentalists decried the expansion of LNG exports, pointing to a 33 per cent higher greenhouse‑gas footprint for LNG compared to coal. They warned that investing billions in gas infrastructure would lock in emissions for decades and jeopardise climate goals. Republicans framed the deal as a triumph of American energy dominance, while Democrats worried that it would alienate climate‑conscious voters. In Europe, the left criticised the plan as a capitulation to U.S. corporate interests, while conservative governments in Poland and Hungary accused Brussels of undermining national sovereignty.

Public perception also shifted. In Germany, protests against LNG terminals erupted as activists highlighted the environmental risks of methane leaks (cleanenergywire.org. The promise of cheaper energy from U.S. shale did not assuage concerns that Germany was trading one form of dependency for another. In France and Italy, inflationary pressures due to high gas prices fuelled resentment toward both Russia and the United States. The narrative of a “quick fix” was replaced by a recognition that energy security is messy, expensive and deeply political. The illusion that stability could be signed into existence dissolved as sabotage, cyber‑attacks and trade disputes escalated.

Domestic debates were further complicated by the diversity of interests within Europe. Germany, with its large industrial base, feared that losing access to cheap pipeline gas would erode its competitiveness in chemicals, steel and automotive manufacturing. Poland and the Baltic states, historically wary of Russian influence, embraced the idea of cutting off Moscow and welcomed U.S. LNG as a geopolitical insurance policy. France, which relies heavily on nuclear power, saw the crisis as an opportunity to promote nuclear energy as a low‑carbon alternative; it pressed for EU funding for new reactors and argued that nuclear should be classified as “green” in the EU taxonomy. Southern European countries like Spain and Portugal were less dependent on Russian gas. They lobbied for more interconnectors across the Pyrenees to export their surplus LNG and renewable electricity to the rest of the continent. These differing priorities made it difficult for the European Commission to craft a unified response. When Brussels negotiated the $750 billion energy pledge, it had to balance the demands of German industry, Polish security concerns, French nuclear lobbying and the environmental movement.

In the United States, the energy pact became entangled with the culture wars. Conservative commentators celebrated the return of American “energy dominance,” citing the deal as proof that the world needed U.S. fossil fuels. They argued that by selling gas to Europe, America could weaken adversaries and create jobs at home. Progressive voices countered that doubling down on fossil fuel exports undermined the Biden administration’s climate commitments and would expose frontline communities in Texas and Louisiana to increased pollution. They demanded that stronger environmental protections and investments in renewables accompany any increase in exports. Labour unions were split: some supported LNG infrastructure for its construction jobs; others feared that overreliance on gas would slow the growth of domestic clean‑energy industries. Meanwhile, state governments in Louisiana and Texas pushed for more export terminals, while coastal communities protested new pipelines crossing wetlands and fisheries.

Public opinion polls in early 2025 showed a complex picture. In Europe, a majority supported reducing dependence on Russia but were divided on whether to increase imports from the United States or accelerate renewables. In the U.S., a majority favoured supporting Ukraine and selling gas to allies but were wary of a trade war that could raise the price of consumer goods. The interplay of these domestic factors meant that the $750 billion energy deal was never solely about economics; it was a mirror reflecting the political and cultural divisions within and between societies. Understanding these divisions is essential to grasping why the deal, though headline‑grabbing, did not proceed as advertised.

________________________________________

Part II: The New Energy Order

1. LNG Ascendant: Europe’s Gas Transformation

A global realignment in gas flows marks the new energy order. The Nord Stream explosion forced Europe to look beyond pipelines for security. Within a year, the EU imported 8.4 million tonnes of LNG in the first quarter of 2025, surpassing the 8.2 million tonnes of pipeline gas for the first time. LNG imports rose 12 per cent compared with the same period in 2024, and spending on LNG increased 45 per cent to €5.3 billion. The United States became the EU’s largest LNG supplier, accounting for 50.7 per cent by value, while Russia still supplied 17 per cent and Qatar 10.8 per cent. Simultaneously, Norway remained the largest pipeline supplier, meaning that Europe’s gas mix diversified but remained vulnerable to seaborne disruptions.bruegel.org.

The shift to LNG did not eliminate environmental concerns. Studies from Cornell University found that the greenhouse-gas footprint of LNG is 33 per cent higher than that of coal. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimated that LNG produces 67 per cent more emissions than pipeline gas. Methane leakage during liquefaction, transport and regasification undermines the perceived climate benefits of gas as a “bridge fuel.” Critics thus argue that building billions of dollars of LNG infrastructure may lock Europe into a high‑emissions path and delay the adoption of renewables.

Nevertheless, geopolitical realities trumped climate considerations. Germany’s government defended its decision to build multiple LNG terminals by citing the need for a safety buffer, cleanenergywire.org. Policymakers emphasised that floating storage and regasification units (FSRUs) can be repurposed or relocated once gas demand declines. Yet environmental NGOs pointed out that the combined capacity of planned terminals far exceeds projected demand, suggesting that Germany might be overspending for infrastructure that could become stranded assets as renewable energy expands. The German case illustrates the tension between energy security and climate policy: in the short term, gas ensures heat and industrial output; in the long term, it may hinder decarbonisation.

2. The Weaponisation of Trade: Tariffs, Subsidies and EV Battles

While Europe turned to American gas, trade relations between the U.S. and its allies deteriorated. In May 2025, the U.S. administration finalised high tariffs on imports of solar cells and modules from Vietnam, Malaysia, Thailand and Cambodia. Reuters.com. China had relocated production to these countries to evade earlier tariffs; the U.S. move aimed to prevent circumvention but raised costs for American solar installers. A few months earlier, in September 2024, the U.S. announced 100 per cent tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles, 50 per cent on solar cells and semiconductors, and 25 per cent on batteries, steel, aluminium and critical minerals. reuters.com. These measures, combined with earlier Trump‑era duties on $300 billion of Chinese goods, signalled a full‑blown trade war. Industry groups warned that the tariffs would disrupt supply chains and raise costs, Reuters.com. Chinese manufacturers responded by shifting production to Indonesia and Laos, Reuters.com.

The European Union followed suit. In October 2024, the EU imposed provisional duties ranging from 17 per cent to 35.3 per cent on Chinese EVs. Brussels accused Beijing of subsidising its EV industry and flooding Europe with cheap cars. Chinese exports to the EU had surged from 33 thousand vehicles in 2020 to 485 thousand between October 2022 and September 2023. The tariff decision triggered immediate backlash. Beijing threatened to impose tariffs on European cars and to restrict exports of critical minerals necessary for EV batteries. The EU and China later opened negotiations to replace tariffs with minimum prices, reflecting a desire to avoid an escalating trade war. Nevertheless, the battle over EVs revealed the fragility of the green transition: subsidies and tariffs intended to promote clean technologies were instead spurring protectionism and retaliation.

Tariffs on critical minerals further complicated the picture. The United States and the European Union both identified minerals such as lithium, cobalt and nickel as strategic assets. In the Crossdock Insights report, analysts noted that China refines 68 per cent of the world’s nickel, 40 per cent of copper, 59 per cent of lithium and 73 per cent of cobalt (crossdockinsights.com. It also accounts for 70 per cent of cathode and 85 per cent of anode production, giving it a dominant position in the battery supply chain, crossdockinsights.com. When Washington raised tariffs on critical mineral imports, Beijing responded by restricting exports of antimony, gallium, germanium, and tungsten. The EU and the U.S. both passed legislation to boost domestic extraction and processing: the EU’s Critical Raw Materials Act aims to mine 10 per cent, refine 40 per cent and recycle 25 per cent of strategic minerals within the bloc by 2030, while the U.S. invoked the Defence Production Act to fund mining projects. Far from smoothing the green transition, these measures highlighted a resource scramble reminiscent of 19th‑century imperialism.

________________________________________

3. Critical Minerals and the New Scramble for Africa

The competition for critical minerals has fostered new geopolitical alliances and conflicts. Africa and Latin America, home to vast deposits of lithium, cobalt and rare earths, have become arenas of economic diplomacy. China’s state‑owned enterprises have secured long‑term leases on mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), Zambia and Zimbabwe. Western governments, alarmed by this dominance, have sought to counterbalance Beijing by financing alternative mining projects and forging Minerals Security Partnerships. For example, the U.S. has invested in lithium extraction in Chile and cobalt processing in Tanzania. The EU has provided aid to Namibia and Morocco in exchange for access to critical minerals.

This scramble is not only economic but also environmental and social. Mining of cobalt and lithium often involves child labour and environmental degradation. When Western firms demand ethical sourcing while Chinese companies continue operations under laxer standards, a competitive tension arises: should governments prioritise supply security or labour rights? The conversation about “lithium wars” echoes earlier conflicts over oil, and though no major military confrontation has erupted, the risk of resource‑driven instability looms large. Coupled with the rise of tariffs and subsidies, the scramble for minerals underscores how the green transition has become as geopolitically charged as the fossil‑fuel era.

4. Environmental Implications and the Green Paradox

The green paradox refers to the phenomenon where policies intended to accelerate the transition to clean energy inadvertently increase emissions in the short term. The rush to build LNG infrastructure is a textbook example. LNG has a higher carbon footprint than coal or pipeline gas due to energy‑intensive liquefaction and leakage. Yet governments justify LNG expansion as a necessary “bridge.” Similarly, the production of EV batteries requires energy‑intensive mining and processing; if the electricity comes from coal, the overall emissions may be high. When the United States or the EU imposes tariffs on solar panels and EVs, it can slow the adoption of clean technologies and raise costs for consumers. Additionally, the fragmentation of supply chains means that manufacturing may shift to countries with weaker environmental regulations, undermining global climate efforts.

A comprehensive climate strategy must address these paradoxes by integrating energy security, industrial policy and emissions reduction. That includes investing in green hydrogen, grid upgrades and storage rather than simply replacing pipeline gas with LNG. It also means diversifying supply chains for critical minerals and establishing ethical standards for extraction. Without such measures, the new energy order may replicate the extractive and exploitative dynamics of the oil age, with new winners and losers but the same underlying logic of domination.

________________________________________

Part III: Global Power Positions

1. Russia: Sabotage, Shadow Fleets and Energy Warfare

Russia’s power in the global energy system has historically rested on its vast reserves of oil and gas and its network of pipelines connecting Siberia to European markets. The collapse of this model after 2022 forced Moscow to innovate in the domain of energy warfare. When the EU drastically reduced imports of Russian gas from about half of its supply to 15 per cent, bruegel.org, Russia pivoted to Asia and started selling at a discount. To circumvent the G7’s price cap on Russian oil exports, Moscow assembled a shadow fleet of around 400 ageing tankers. These vessels, often registered in countries like the Seychelles or the Marshall Islands and lacking proper insurance, have transported Russian, Iranian and Venezuelan oil beyond the reach of Western sanctions. Experts note that fewer than 10 per cent of these ships have proper insurance, but they make up 17 per cent of the global oil tanker fleet. Their operations are not entirely clandestine; they openly load oil at Russian ports like Primorsk and Ust Luga, but they often turn off transponders and ignore coast‑guard instructions.

The shadow fleet’s most troubling role lies in its potential for sabotage. Investigations in 2024–25 linked Russian‑associated tankers to the severing of multiple undersea cables and pipelines in the Baltic Sea. In December 2024, a Russian tanker named Eagle S was impounded in Finland after an EstLink2 cable connecting Finland and Estonia was cut. The ship’s missing anchor was found near the damaged cable, and the vessel was also fitted with surveillance equipment, unusual for a merchant shipfriendsofeurope.org. Earlier, several other cables and the Balticconnector gas pipeline had been damaged by ships dragging anchors. Western officials suspect a deliberate campaign of hybrid warfare designed to increase uncertainty and raise insurance costs for shipping. Although definitive proof of state involvement is elusive, the pattern of incidents—ten pipelines and cables sabotaged since the invasion of Ukraine (friendsofeurope.org )—points to a strategy of weaponised interdependence.

Russia’s cyber operations complement its physical sabotage. While this essay focuses primarily on energy infrastructure, it is essential to note that cyberattacks can disrupt energy markets and funding flows. Russia, along with other states, employs sophisticated malware to target electricity grids, oil refineries and port operations. The synergy between physical sabotage (e.g., dragging anchors) and cyberattacks creates a multi‑domain threat: sabotage at sea can be combined with malware attacks on pipeline control systems, amplifying the impact. The Nord Stream explosions were preceded by Russia’s use of cyber operations against Ukraine’s grid since 2015, demonstrating Moscow’s integrated approach to energy warfare.

2. China: Minerals, Manufacturing and Maritime Choke Points

China’s grand strategy in the 21st century revolves around securing supply chains for energy and technology. While Russia relies on pipelines, China focuses on critical minerals and manufacturing capacity. As previously mentioned, Beijing refines the majority of the world’s nickel, cobalt, lithium and copper and dominates battery production. This gives China leverage over the clean energy transition. In 2010, Beijing temporarily cut rare‑earth exports to Japan, demonstrating its willingness to weaponise mineral supply chains. In 2024–25 China restricted exports of antimony, gallium, germanium, tungsten and bismuth in retaliation for U.S. tariffscrossdockinsights.com. Price spikes following these restrictions underscored the vulnerability of Western industries to Chinese supply decisions.

China is also expanding its influence through infrastructure networks. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) funds ports, railways and pipelines across Asia, Africa and Europe. In the energy realm, Beijing has invested heavily in ports at Gwadar (Pakistan), Hambantota (Sri Lanka), and Piraeus (Greece), creating a string of logistical hubs that can facilitate both trade and naval operations. Chinese companies are building LNG terminals and regasification facilities in Pakistan and Bangladesh, expanding the market for Qatari and U.S. gas but also cementing Chinese control over supply chains. In the South China Sea, Beijing has constructed artificial islands and deployed coast‑guard vessels to assert control over waters that may contain untapped gas reserves. The Taiwan Strait remains a critical choke point; an effective blockade could disrupt global semiconductor and electronics supply chains and hinder the transit of LNG from the United States to Asia.

China’s military strategy includes anti‑access/area denial (A2/AD) capabilities designed to make intervention by the U.S. Navy costly. Long-range anti-ship missiles, submarines, and anti-satellite weapons could threaten commercial shipping. Moreover, Beijing has studied the concept of weaponised interdependence: states can coerce others by exploiting their control over global networks. The network may be financial (as when Washington uses SWIFT to sanction banks) or physical (as when Beijing controls rare‑earth supplies). The interplay between infrastructure control and economic leverage is at the heart of China’s rise.

________________________________________

3. Iran: The Straits of Hormuz and the Spectre of Blockade

Iran holds a unique position in global energy geopolitics because it sits astride the Strait of Hormuz, the world’s most important oil chokepoint. The Strait is only about 34 km wide at its narrowest point, with shipping lanes just 2 km wide in each direction, yet roughly 20 per cent of global petroleum liquids and about one‑fifth of LNG trade pass through the Strait. In 2024, flows through the Strait of Hormuz averaged 20 million barrels per day, equivalent to about 20 per cent of global consumption. While Saudi Arabia and the UAE have pipelines that can bypass Hormuz, they can reroute only about 2.6 million barrels per day. Hence, any blockade of the Strait would cause an immediate shock to oil and gas markets.

In July 2025, Reuters reported that U.S. intelligence had detected Iranian preparations to deploy naval mines in the Persian Gulf. The Iranian military had loaded mines onto vessels as tensions with Israel escalated after U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, Reuters.com. Although Iran has threatened to close the Strait for decades, it has never done so; the mere possibility of closure is used as a deterrent. U.S. officials described the mine deployment as a potential ruse, but acknowledged that mining could have severely hobbled global commerce. Iran has more than 5,000 naval mines and could deploy them quickly, according to Reuters.com. The U.S. Navy maintains mine‑countermeasure vessels in Bahrain, but during the 2025 escalation, these ships were temporarily removed from the region, leaving the Strait more vulnerable. reuters.com. The incident highlights how a regional conflict in the Middle East can threaten global energy flows.

Iran’s energy strategy also involves proxy forces and allies. Tehran supports Yemen’s Houthis, who in 2023–25 targeted tankers in the Red Sea using drones. Iran has built relationships with militias in Iraq and Syria to threaten pipelines and logistics. Meanwhile, its oil production has remained high despite U.S. sanctions, thanks to clandestine sales to China. In July 2025, the EU’s restrictions on Russia encouraged Moscow and Tehran to deepen their partnership, with Russia investing in Iranian oil fields and pipelines to bypass sanctions. Thus, Iran occupies a dual role: both as a potential blockade power and as a partner of convenience for sanctioned states.

________________________________________

4. North Korea: Cyber Larceny and Nuclear Funding

North Korea may be an economic minnow in physical energy markets, but it wields outsized influence through cyber operations. UN sanctions monitors reported in February 2024 that North Korea had carried out 58 cyberattacks on cryptocurrency companies since 2017, stealing about $3 billion. These funds, according to the monitors, may have financed up to half of Pyongyang’s nuclear weapons program or online.org. The cyber thefts targeted defense companies and their supply chains, showcasing the regime’s ability to weaponise digital interdependence. North Korea’s cyber workforce was estimated at 8,400 personnel in 2024, up from 6,800 in 2022. The country’s hacking groups, such as Lazarus, have attacked banks, cryptocurrency exchanges and energy companies across Asia and North America. In effect, Pyongyang converts stolen digital assets into real resources for its missile and nuclear programs.

The implications for the energy order are twofold. First, North Korea demonstrates that cyberattacks can substitute for physical resource extraction. By hacking cryptocurrency exchanges, it finances weapons without exporting oil or gas. Second, the targeting of energy companies—including power grid operators and oil producers—suggests that cyber war is a complement to kinetic warfare. A future crisis in East Asia could involve simultaneous cyber assaults on LNG terminals, pipelines and shipping firms, disrupting energy flows while missiles fly. North Korea’s alliances with Russia and Iran, and its connections with Chinese technology firms, hint at a broader coalition of states using cyber tools to challenge the U.S.‑led order.

________________________________________

5. Turkey: Aspirations and Limitations as an Energy Hub

Turkey, straddling Europe and Asia, has long harboured ambitions to become a gas hub that transits energy from the Caspian and Middle East to Europe. Its geography is ideal: pipelines from Azerbaijan and Iran converge in eastern Turkey, and the Bosphorus connects the Black Sea to the Mediterranean. However, a July 2025 report on Turkey’s gas strategy notes that domestic production covers only 4 per cent of Turkish gas demand; the country imported 52 billion cubic meters (bcm) of gas in 2024. Russia supplied 42 per cent, Azerbaijan 22 per cent, and Iran 14 per cent of these imports. Turkey’s storage capacity is under five bcm, far below that of major hubs like the Netherlands (which has over 12 bcm). Export capacity to EU markets is limited; existing pipelines are already utilised at high rates. Each of Turkey’s suppliers faces constraints: Russia’s gas may be phased out by the EU by 2027, Azerbaijan’s production is plateauing, and Iran faces sanctions and seasonal domestic shortages. Potential new suppliers such as Iraq, Turkmenistan, Egypt and Israel also deal with political turmoil and infrastructure gaps.

As a result, analysts conclude that Turkey’s hub project is more political narrative than commercial reality. To achieve hub status, Ankara would need to invest heavily in LNG import capacity, expand storage facilities and develop reverse‑flow pipelines. It would also have to navigate complex geopolitics: balancing relations with Russia (to import gas), Azerbaijan (to transit gas), Iran (to secure supplies), the EU (to deliver gas) and the United States (to avoid secondary sanctions). Turkey’s relations with the U.S. and NATO are complicated by its purchase of Russian S‑400 air defence systems and its role in the Black Sea. The “dancing on the fault line” metaphor captures how Turkey seeks to court multiple partners without committing to any, turning energy into a tool of statecraft.

________________________________________

6. United States: Shale Hegemony and Tariff Diplomacy

The United States has become the world’s largest LNG exporter, surpassing Qatar and Australia. From 2015 to 2023, the U.S. doubled its natural gas output due to the shale boom. In 2023, the U.S. supplied roughly 45 per cent of Europe’s LNG imports. The rapid expansion of LNG terminals along the Gulf Coast, combined with rising global demand, has turned American gas into a geopolitical instrument. The $750 billion deal thus fits into a broader strategy to use energy exports to reinforce alliances and punish adversaries.

However, U.S. leadership in energy is not unchallenged. The International Energy Outlook 2025 warns that global LNG export capacity may reach 850 bcm by 2030, exceeding demand under ambitious climate scenarios. This raises the risk that new LNG facilities could become stranded assets. At the same time, U.S. industrial policy has taken a confrontational turn. Tariffs on Chinese EVs, solar panels and critical minerals reflect a strategy of tariff diplomacy: by imposing high duties, Washington hopes to protect the domestic industry and gain leverage in negotiations. The risk is that such measures could provoke retaliation and hamper the global energy transition. If the U.S. is seen as using energy to coerce allies (e.g., by conditioning tariff relief on LNG purchases), transatlantic cohesion could weaken.

________________________________________

7. The European Union: Between Dependency and Diversification

The European Union sits at the nexus of these power dynamics. It is the largest customer for both Russian pipeline gas (historically) and U.S. LNG (today). The EU’s long‑term strategy aims to phase out Russian gas by 2027, increase renewables, and create a hydrogen economy. But in the medium term, it must balance price stability with supply security. After the Nord Stream explosions, EU policymakers realised that most gas now arrives by sea; approximately 87 per cent of European gas imports in 2023 came via LNGbruegel.org. This shift exposes Europe to maritime chokepoints like the Suez Canal and the Strait of Hormuz, as well as undersea sabotage. The EU has taken steps to improve monitoring: NATO established the Critical Undersea Infrastructure Coordination Cell, and member states have increased naval patrols. theguardian.com. Yet experts warn that deep-sea cables are hard to defend; they carry 90 per cent of global internet traffic and trade $9 trillion of financial transactions daily. A coordinated attack could cause catastrophic disruption, but such sabotage requires specialised equipment and is thus more likely to be used as a threat than as an overt act.

The EU is also grappling with industrial policy. While it imposes tariffs on Chinese EVs and invests in battery plants, it must avoid alienating China—a significant export market—and ensure that supply chain diversification does not lead to higher costs for consumers. The EU’s Critical Raw Materials Act seeks to reduce dependence on imports and build domestic capacity. But success depends on environmental permits, community acceptance and international partnerships. The EU’s energy strategy thus involves a delicate balancing act: diversify suppliers, build resilience, and maintain open markets while avoiding retaliation from major powers.

________________________________________

8. Weaponised Interdependence: A Conceptual Lens

Throughout this section, a recurring theme is weaponised interdependence—a concept coined by Henry Farrell and Abraham Newman to describe how states use global networks of trade, finance and information to coerce others. Energy is a classic domain of interdependence: pipelines, LNG terminals, undersea cables and shipping lanes create mutual dependencies. When Russia drags anchors over wires, or when Iran threatens to mine the Strait of Hormuz, they are leveraging interdependence to gain strategic advantage. When China restricts exports of critical minerals, it is weaponising its dominance in supply chains. When the U.S. conditions tariff relief on LNG purchases, it is using trade to enforce compliance.

The key insight is that networks are both sources of wealth and tools of coercion. States that control nodes in these networks can threaten to disrupt flows, causing economic pain. At the same time, interdependence can deter conflict by raising the costs of war. The challenge for policymakers is to manage these networks in a way that preserves resilience while reducing vulnerability. This may involve diversifying suppliers, building redundancy, and developing norms against sabotage. In the absence of such measures, interdependence becomes a latent battlefield—a silent war fought below the waterline, in the code of software and the murk of global finance.

________________________________________

Part IV: Scenarios for 2025–2030

Predicting the future is fraught with uncertainty, but scenario analysis can help illuminate possible trajectories. This section outlines three broad scenarios for the period 2025–2030: Managed Rivalry, The Great Fracture, and Grey Zone Instability. Each scenario draws on current trends and known risks; none is predetermined. The probabilities assigned (25 per cent, 20 per cent and 55 per cent) are illustrative and reflect the author’s judgment rather than scientific forecasts.

________________________________________

1. Managing Rivalry (Probability: 25 %)

In the Managed Rivalry scenario, global actors avoid outright war despite hardened blocs. The U.S. and China should continue their technological and trade competition, but set up guardrails to prevent escalation. Europe will gradually reduce its reliance on Russian gas by 2027, while expanding renewables and hydrogen. LNG markets stabilise; Qatar and the U.S. maintain high exports; and new LNG projects in Canada and Mozambique come online, increasing supply. Prices remain relatively stable, though above pre‑2022 levels. The EU’s Critical Raw Materials Act and the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act spur domestic mining, reducing reliance on Chinese minerals. Tariff wars calm as the EU and China agree on minimum prices for EVs, Reuters.com, and the U.S. moderates its tariffs after negotiating climate provisions with Beijing. Iran refrains from closing the Strait of Hormuz; occasional skirmishes occur, but the U.S. Navy and regional allies deter a blockade. Russia continues selling oil via the shadow fleet but avoids large‑scale sabotage, fearing retaliation.

Under this scenario, energy security improves, though not uniformly. Countries invest in grid resilience and monitor undersea cables. NATO’s Critical Undersea Infrastructure Coordination Cell expands its capabilities, and states share intelligence on shadow fleet movements. The risk of catastrophic sabotage diminishes as detection improves and as Russia realises that further attacks could provoke NATO retaliation. Meanwhile, cooperation on climate change resumes; global emissions peak by 2025 and begin to decline. The price of oil stabilises around $80–$90 per barrel, and natural gas contracts are signed on a long‑term basis. Although competition persists, the world avoids major disruptions. This scenario is plausible if leaders prioritise risk management and if domestic politics do not force extreme actions.

________________________________________

2. The Great Fracture (Probability: 20 %)

The Great Fracture scenario imagines a cascading crisis. It begins with a drone attack on a central LNG terminal in Qatar, perhaps orchestrated by a proxy group. Fire engulfs storage tanks; exports drop by several million tonnes for months. Global gas prices spike above $30 per million British thermal units. Meanwhile, tensions in the Middle East ignite: in retaliation for U.S. strikes on nuclear facilities, Iran mines the Strait of Hormuz and fires missiles at tankers. Oil prices surge to $200 per barrel; Western economies tip into recession. Saudi Arabia and the UAE use their pipelines that bypass Hormuz, but the capacity is insufficient to meet global demand. China and India, dependent on Hormuz for 69 per cent of their crude imports, suffer severe energy shortages. In East Asia, a separate crisis erupts when China imposes a quarantine on Taiwan to prevent arms shipments. U.S. and allied navies escort cargo ships through the Taiwan Strait, raising the risk of confrontation. A cyberattack attributed to North Korea turns off an LNG terminal in South Korea, causing a domestic blackout. Russia sees an opportunity and severs several more undersea cables in the Baltic and North Seas, disrupting internet service and electricity for millions.

In this scenario, globalisation fractures. Countries scramble to secure supplies; export restrictions proliferate; energy markets become segmented. The International Energy Agency coordinates emergency stock releases, but prices remain volatile. Inflation soars; governments impose price controls and rationing. Political instability rises: protests sweep through Europe over high energy bills; authoritarian leaders use emergencies to consolidate power—the U.S. and China erect digital firewalls, splitting the internet. Without a functioning global order, climate cooperation collapses. Emissions rise as coal use surges to replace disrupted gas supplies. The Great Fracture is a worst‑case scenario but illustrates how interconnected vulnerabilities—physical chokepoints, cyber networks, and trade ties—can cascade into a systemic crisis. The probability may be lower than in the other scenarios, but policymakers must prepare contingency plans.

________________________________________

3. Grey Zone Instability (Probability: 55 %)

The most likely trajectory, according to this analysis, is Grey Zone Instability—a world of permanent fever that neither descends into world war nor achieves stable rivalry. In this scenario, sabotage, sanctions, cyberattacks, and tariff wars become routine. Russia continues to wage hybrid warfare against Europe, dragging anchors over cables and pipelines. friendsofeurope.org. Finland, Estonia and Sweden invest in cable protection, but accidents and deliberate damage persist. The shadow fleet is expected to expand, with more than 500 vessels by 2027. Western navies impound some ships, but new ones appear under different flags. Russia, Iran and North Korea coordinate cyber campaigns; power grids in Europe and Asia face periodic outages. North Korea’s hacking groups steal billions from cryptocurrency exchanges, reuters.com, funding further nuclear tests. Iran orchestrates sporadic harassment of tankers, keeping the price of oil above $100 per barrel without fully closing Hormuz.

Trade wars intensify in the grey zone scenario. The U.S. imposes additional tariffs on Chinese computer chips and green technologies; China retaliates with export restrictions on rare earths. The EU struggles to maintain unity; some member states—Hungary, Slovakia, Italy—seek deals with Russia to secure cheaper energy. Turkey leverages its geostrategic position to act as a conduit for Russian gas, exploiting loopholes in sanctions instituted by the United States. Meanwhile, the energy transition slows. Investments in renewables continue, but supply chain disruptions and higher input costs delay projects—methane emissions from LNG increase as exporters cut corners to reduce costs. Climate policy becomes politicised with some governments prioritising energy security at the expense of emissions targets. The grey zone becomes the new normal: high tension, frequent incidents, but no decisive break.

Under this scenario, resilience becomes a buzzword. Companies diversify suppliers; governments stockpile critical minerals; ports and pipelines are hardened. Insurance premiums for shipping and undersea cables rise dramatically. The private sector invests in satellite surveillance to monitor the shadow fleet and undersea infrastructure. Public-private partnerships emerge to share intelligence, following recommendations from policy experts for public-private monitoring (kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu). Still, the constant stress exacts a toll: economic growth slows, investment falters, and trust between states erodes. Grey Zone Instability is not as catastrophic as the Great Fracture. Still, it is a world of constant low-grade warfare, making long-term planning difficult and undermining the confidence necessary for large-scale climate action.

________________________________________

Part V: The Coming Decade – A Pre‑War Energy Order?

1. Historical Analogies: 1913 and 2025

Historians often compare today’s geopolitical landscape to Europe in 1913: a world of increasing trade and interdependence teetering on the brink of war. In 1913, telegraph cables and steamships connected continents. Leaders believed that economic integration would make war irrational. A year later, a single assassination triggered a chain reaction. Today, data cables and LNG tankers are the arteries of globalisation. The assumption persists that rational actors will avoid cutting these lifelines because the costs are too high. Yet history warns that miscalculations can happen. Europe’s pre‑World War I trading partners still went to war because alliances and nationalism overrode commercial logic.

In the 2020s, the parallels are striking. States are deeply connected through energy flows and supply chains, but also distrustful and increasingly nationalist. Undersea cables carry more than 90 per cent of the world’s internet traffic (theguardian.com) and facilitate about $9 trillion in trade per day (rand.org. The sabotage of the Nord Stream pipelines and subsequent damage to Baltic cables revealed that these networks are far more vulnerable than previously acknowledged. theguardian.com. The RAND Corporation notes that while attacking deep-sea cables is difficult and requires specialised equipment, such attacks could have catastrophic consequences, necessitating greater investment in surveillance and resilience. Similarly, the Kleinman Centre argues that transatlantic policymakers must treat sabotage threats as seriously as supply security, recommending that NATO invoke Article 4 and build public‑private partnerships to monitor infrastructure.

________________________________________

2. Chokepoints and Tripwires

Geographers speak of maritime chokepoints—narrow passages whose disruption can trigger global crises. The Strait of Hormuz is one such chokepoint. When Iran loaded mines onto vessels in the Persian Gulf in mid-2025, Reuters.com, analysts feared a blockade that could cut off one‑fifth of global oil and LNG flow, seia.gov. The Suez Canal and Bab al‑Mandeb are others: attacks on shipping in these regions by Houthi rebels have already prompted Saudi Arabia to reroute oil through its East‑West pipelineeia.gov. At the same time, new pipelines and export terminals in Saudi Arabia and the UAE provide 2.6 million barrels per day of bypass capacity, which is insufficient to replace flows through Hormuz. A closure of Hormuz would thus create an energy shock reminiscent of the 1973 oil embargo.

On land, the Balticconnector and Nord Stream pipelines illustrate how terrestrial and subsea infrastructure are equally vulnerable. The 2022 Nord Stream explosions not only interrupted gas flows but also released vast amounts of methane. Subsequent incidents—damaged cables in October 2023, November 2024, and December 2024—show that sabotage may be an ongoing strategy rather than a one-off event. As the GMF report notes, most of the vessels suspected of dragging anchors over cables sailed from Russian ports and may belong to Russia’s shadow fleet. Even if accidents cannot be conclusively proven as sabotage, the pattern fosters mistrust and prompts costly security measures. Every undersea cable now resembles a tripwire: its severing may not cause immediate conflict, but it raises the temperature and could justify retaliation.

________________________________________

3. Technological Arms Race: Surveillance and Resilience

In response to rising threats, states and companies are investing in surveillance technologies. NATO and the EU are developing new sensors to monitor underwater activity. Private firms offer satellite imagery and AI‑driven analysis to track ships and detect anomalies. RAND analysts highlight the need for attack submarines and patrol vessels to deter sabotage and to protect cable landings. The UK and Norway have commissioned specialised

surveillance ships to monitor critical infrastructure, theguardian.com. Meanwhile, energy companies deploy drones and remotely operated vehicles to inspect pipelines and cables. These measures represent a technological arms race in the maritime domain. The challenge is that defence costs are high and cannot guarantee complete security; even with sensors, a determined actor can exploit gaps, particularly in remote or contested waters.

Building resilience also involves redundancy. Europe is considering constructing additional gas interconnectors and storage facilities to reduce reliance on any single route. The EU’s plans include the Baltic Pipe connecting Norway to Poland and the South‑East European Gas Corridor bringing Azeri gas to the Balkans. However, new pipelines require years to build and may conflict with climate goals. In the digital realm, companies are laying additional internet cables along diverse routes to ensure that traffic can reroute if one line is cut. Some nations propose to store more data locally to reduce cross‑border dependencies. Whether redundancy will suffice to maintain stability in a crisis remains uncertain.

________________________________________

4. Climate and Conflict: The Feedback Loop

Climate change is both a driver and a casualty of the new energy order. Extreme weather events—heat waves, droughts, floods—can disrupt energy production and transportation. For example, droughts in the Mississippi and Rhine rivers have impeded coal and oil barge movements, while heat waves have strained electricity grids. When energy systems are already under stress due to sabotage or trade wars, climate shocks can tip them into crisis. Conversely, conflict undermines climate mitigation: wars destroy infrastructure, divert investment and generate emissions. The sabotage of Nord Stream released methane equivalent to millions of cars. The burning of oil storage facilities after drone strikes sends plumes of CO₂ into the atmosphere. Thus, there is a feedback loop: geopolitical instability increases emissions, which in turn exacerbates climate impacts that further destabilise societies.

Anticipating this loop, some analysts call for a wartime climate mobilisation akin to the U.S. mobilisation during World War II. They argue that energy security and climate security should be integrated: investment in renewables not only reduces emissions but also lessens dependence on hostile suppliers. Climate adaptation measures—such as flood protections for ports and cooling systems for data centres—are also essential to protect critical energy infrastructure. Yet such integration requires political will and international cooperation. If states continue to weaponise interdependence, the synergy between climate and conflict will likely worsen.

________________________________________

5. The Decade Ahead: Managing Risk and Building Norms

The coming decade will test whether global actors can develop norms and institutions to manage the pre‑war energy order. Some proposals include:

1. International agreements on critical infrastructure protection. Similar to treaties on space or the high seas, states could commit not to sabotage undersea cables and pipelines in peacetime and to cooperate in repairs. Verification would be challenging, but agreements could reduce ambiguity and provide a basis for sanctions.

2. Coordinated sanctions on shadow fleets. The U.S., EU and allies could harmonise sanctions against vessels participating in the covert oil trade. By targeting shipping insurance, financing and docking rights, they could make it harder for shadow tankers to operate. Sharing intelligence on vessel ownership and movement is crucial. The Friends of Europe report suggests that impounding suspect ships and insisting on transparent insurance could reduce the risk of sabotage.

3. Digital and cyber norms. Countries must negotiate norms against cyberattacks on energy infrastructure. The UN’s Group of Governmental Experts has attempted to establish such norms, but enforcement is weak. Given North Korea’s prolific hacking and the potential for states to disguise attacks via proxies, norms must be coupled with deterrence. Public–private partnerships should enhance threat detection and response. kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu.

4. Climate‑energy integration. Investment in renewables, storage and demand management should be prioritised to reduce reliance on vulnerable fossil fuels. International cooperation on critical minerals, including recycling and ethical sourcing, can reduce dependence on any single supplier. Removing trade barriers on clean technologies may accelerate adoption. The EU and the U.S. could create a transatlantic climate fund that ties tariff reductions to emissions targets, aligning trade with climate goals.

The success of these proposals depends on trust and reciprocity. If states believe that others will abide by norms, they are more likely to cooperate. Yet trust is in short supply. Building it will require transparency, confidence‑building measures, and perhaps third‑party verification. Without such efforts, the pre‑war energy order may devolve into open conflict.

________________________________________

Epilogue: The Silence Before the Sirens

On the surface, the world appears orderly. Tankers glide across seas, their cargo worth more than gold. Undersea cables hum with data, carrying the lifeblood of finance and communication. Wind farms spin silently, pumping electrons into the grid. Leaders speak at summits about cooperation and energy security. Yet beneath this calm lies a pulse of fear. Every cable is a potential tripwire; every tanker a target; every software update a vector for malware. The term pre‑war energy order captures this uneasy equilibrium: no formal declaration of war, but a persistent sense that one miscalculation could unleash chaos.

The silence before the sirens is not the absence of noise but the hum of cables on the ocean floor, the whirr of pumps in LNG terminals and the quiet click of computer code executing in a hacker’s den. It is the sound of a world preparing for a conflict it refuses to name. The $750 billion energy deal was one such hum—a diplomatic signal disguised as commerce, a spark that could ignite broader tensions. By tying Europe’s fate to American gas and by threatening Russia with ultimatums, the deal blurred the line between trade and war. The sirens have not yet sounded, but the cautionary tales of Nord Stream, Hormuz, the shadow fleet and cyber thefts remind us that the future may not be decided by dramatic declarations but by the unseen vulnerabilities of our interconnected world.

________________________________________

Latest development and quote

As this essay neared completion, developments continued. On July 28, 2025, Reuters reported a rise in oil prices following the announcement of the U.S.-EU energy-and-trade pact and President Trump's shortened deadline for Russia. Market analyst Phil Flynn noted the geopolitical implications: The pact forces Europe to reduce reliance on Russian energy, boosting U.S. producers while pressuring Putin to negotiate. Flynn's analysis exemplifies this essay's core argument: energy agreements are not neutral transactions but tools of power and potential instigators of conflict.

________________________________________

Sources and References

The discussion in this essay is underpinned by a broad range of contemporary news reports, policy briefs and academic analyses published between 2023 and 2025. Keywords are listed here in Harvard style.

Reuters (2024a) ‘EU’s $750 billion energy pledge faces scepticism’. Reuters, 2024. The report explores the proposed EU‑U.S. energy deal and notes that analysts doubt the feasibility of tripling U.S. energy imports to reach the $750 billion target.

Reuters (2024b) ‘US slaps steep tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles and solar panels’. Reuters, September 2024. This article details Washington’s 100% tariff on Chinese EVs and other trade measures that escalated tensions in clean-tech supply chains.

Reuters (2025a) ‘Oil rises 2% on US‑EU trade deal; Trump shortens deadline for Russia’. Reuters, 28 July 2025. This piece reports on the announcement of the EU‑U.S. trade pact and includes analyst Phil Flynn’s observation that Europe will “have to give up a big percentage of everything they’re getting from Russia”, reuters.com.

The Washington Post/Associated Press (2025) ‘Trump gives Russia 10 days to end Ukraine war. The Washington Post, July 2025. This article recounts the ultimatum delivered by U.S. President Donald Trump to his Russian counterpart and situates it within broader trade‑and‑energy negotiations.

Euronews (2025) reported in April that LNG surpassed pipeline gas as the EU's primary source of gas imports, also discussing its environmental impact (euronews.com).

Bruegel's 2024 analysis, "Europe's changing gas mix," examines Norway's displacement of Russia as the EU's top gas supplier and the increased reliance on seaborne imports (bruegel.org).

Clean Energy Wire (2023) ‘Germany builds LNG terminals to cut Russian dependence’. Clean Energy Wire, May 2023. This factsheet explains Germany’s rapid deployment of floating LNG terminals and debates their necessity given long‑term decarbonisation goals, cleanenergywire.org.

Crossdock Insights (2025) ‘Critical minerals and China’s refining dominance’. Cross-Border Insights, March 2025. The briefing notes that China refines the majority of the world’s nickel, lithium, cobalt and copper and discusses Western efforts to diversify supply chains.

International Institute for Strategic Studies (2024) ‘EU provisional tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles’. IISS Strategic Comment, October 2024. This commentary examines the European Commission’s provisional duties on Chinese EVs and the potential for retaliatory tariffs.

RAND Corporation (2025). Protecting critical undersea infrastructure. RAND Commentary, July 2025. The analysis discusses the vulnerability of undersea cables that transmit approximately $9 trillion of trade per day and recommends increased surveillance and patrols.

The Guardian (2023) ‘Nord Stream blasts expose western vulnerability’—The Guardian, October 2023. The article details how the sabotage of Nord Stream pipelines and subsequent drone sightings around oil rigs spurred NATO countries to protect undersea energy and communications infrastructure. theguardian.com.

German Marshall Fund (2025) ‘Grey‑zone incidents in the Baltic Sea’. GMF Policy Brief, January 2025. This brief catalogues damage to Baltic gas pipelines and telecommunications cables in 2023–24 and explores suspicions that commercial vessels from Russian ports were involved.

U.S. Energy Information Administration (2024) ‘World oil transit chokepoints’. EIA, 2024. The report underscores the strategic significance of the Strait of Hormuz, through which about one‑fifth of global oil and LNG trade flows.

United Nations Panel of Experts (2024) ‘Investigation of North Korean cyberattacks’. UN Security Council, Sanctions Committee, 2024. The panel’s findings, reported by Reuters, reveal that Pyongyang’s hacking of cryptocurrency firms raised around $3 billion to fund its weapons program.

Observer Research Foundation (2024) ‘North Korea’s cyber strategy’. ORF Issue Brief, November 2024. The brief analyzes the growth of North Korea’s cyber workforce and its use of digital theft to finance nuclear development.

Regional Energy Report (2025) ‘Turkey’s gas‑hub ambitions’. Regional Energy Analysis, July 2025. The report notes that Turkey’s domestic production covers only 4 % of its gas consumption, while its storage and export capacities fall short of hub status.

Geopolitical Intelligence Services (2025) ‘Russia’s shrinking gas footprint in Europe’. GIS Dossier, February 2025. The dossier charts the collapse of Russian pipeline exports and the rise of U.S. LNG in Europe’s gas mix.

Kleinman Centre for Energy Policy. (2025, May). Subsea sabotage: Implications for energy security. Kleinman Centre Policy Digest. Argues for treating sabotage threats to pipelines and cables as seriously as supply security issues and advocates public-private monitoring arrangements (kleinmanenergy.upenn.edu).

Germán & Co. (2024) ‘Prigozhin’s lesson for Trump & Co: Don’t trust Putin’s promises’. German Toro Ghio Blog, 26 August 2024. This analysis reflects the naivety of trusting authoritarian leaders and is referenced in the abstract as an illustration of the dangers of idealistic approaches to energy geopolitics.

End…

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

Germán & Co 7/16/25 Germán & Co 7/16/25

Crimson Veins: The Deadly Hunt for Black Gold and Empire…

The Permanence of Crisis: Von der Leyen's Prophetic Insight

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen's observation that crises have become "permanent rather than sporadic" deserves recognition as one of the most important diagnostic insights of our era. The transition from periodic emergency to chronic instability represents a fundamental shift in the nature of international relations—one that Western leadership seems determined to ignore while pretending that traditional crisis management tools remain relevant.

Von der Leyen's statement drew criticism precisely because it forced uncomfortable recognition that the post-Cold War order has collapsed beyond repair. The COVID-19 pandemic, the war in Ukraine, climate disasters, and escalating nuclear tensions with Iran represent not separate crises requiring individual solutions, but symptoms of systemic breakdown demanding entirely new approaches to governance and international cooperation.

The criticism directed at von der Leyen reveals a deeper psychological resistance to acknowledging this new reality. Political leaders and commentators prefer the comfort of assuming that current instability represents a temporary aberration that will eventually return to some imagined normal state. This willful blindness prevents the development of institutions and strategies designed to function effectively under permanent crisis conditions.

Recent diplomatic approaches exemplify this nostalgic thinking. Complex international conflicts are still being approached through deadline diplomacy and economic pressure—tools that might have retained effectiveness during an era of American hegemony but have lost their potency in our multipolar world. Such approaches reflect not strategic thinking but the desperate application of outdated methods to problems requiring entirely new frameworks.

Von der Leyen understood what her critics refused to accept: Europe requires emergency governance capabilities not as temporary measures but as permanent institutional features. Her warning was not alarmism but recognition that the comfortable assumptions of the liberal international order had become dangerous delusions.

“Von der Leyen's Prophetic Warning: How Emergency Governance Became Essential for European Survival…
An Analysis of Permanent Crisis, Failed Diplomacy, and the Art of Strategic Self-Destruction

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1946162669381198178

Av Germán Toro Ghio
Karlstad, Sweden | July 15, 2025

________________________________________

Prologue: The Third Eye and the Nuclear Shadow

In 1956, Cyril Henry Hoskin, a plumber from Devon masquerading as Tibetan monk T. Lobsang Rampa, gifted the world "The Third Eye"—a masterpiece of orientalist fantasy that promised ancient wisdom from the comfort of suburban Weybridge. Sixty-nine years later, in January 2025, Western leadership continues to exhibit the same charming tendency toward grand theatrical announcements backed by knowledge so superficial it wouldn't qualify one to manage a parish fête.

But unlike Hoskin's harmless cultural appropriation, today's geopolitical theater carries the weight of nuclear annihilation. When President Trump announced that Russia had precisely fifty days to reach peace with Ukraine or face "very severe tariffs," the world witnessed more than diplomatic bluster—it observed the dangerous intersection of histrionic personality, strategic incompetence, and weapons capable of ending civilization.

The irony is delicious: threatening sanctions on Russian caviar when both Russia and Iran have endured comprehensive Western sanctions for years is rather like threatening to cancel Christmas for children already told Father Christmas doesn't exist. Yet beneath this absurdist veneer lies a more sinister reality—we are witnessing the systematic collapse of diplomatic norms in an age when such collapse carries existential consequences.

________________________________________

Chapter I: The Montenegro Moment - Anatomy of Histrionic Leadership

To understand how we arrived at the precipice of nuclear catastrophe over Ukrainian territories and Iranian enrichment facilities, one must first examine the personality driving these decisions. In May 2017, at NATO headquarters in Brussels, President Trump provided a perfect crystalline moment of revelation: he physically pushed Montenegro's Prime Minister Dusko Markovic aside to position himself at the front of a group photo.

The incident, captured on camera and broadcast globally, reveals the fundamental psychology at work. Trump placed his hand on Markovic's arm and simply moved him out of the way, then confidently adjusted his suit jacket as he emerged at the front of the group. The body language spoke volumes: here was a man who viewed diplomacy as territorial competition, where physical dominance translated to political victory.

This was no mere breach of protocol—it was a diagnostic moment. The behavior exhibited classic histrionic traits: the compulsive need for attention, the theatrical gestures designed to ensure all cameras captured him in the most prominent position, and most tellingly, the complete disregard for the social norms that govern international relations. When Montenegro's Prime Minister smiled awkwardly and attempted to engage, Trump had already moved on, his attention focused solely on his positioning relative to NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg.

The pattern established in that Brussels moment would replicate itself across every major foreign policy challenge of his presidency: the tendency to treat complex geopolitical relationships as personal dominance contests, the inability to distinguish between showmanship and statecraft, and the dangerous assumption that what works in reality television translates to nuclear diplomacy.

________________________________________

Chapter II: The King of the Party Syndrome - When Histrionics Meet Weapons of Mass Destruction

Individuals who consistently seek to be "the king of the party" often mask deeper psychological vulnerabilities behind their performative confidence. Their need for constant validation, their tendency toward dramatic escalation when attention wanes, and their manipulation of emotional responses in others creates a predictable but dangerous pattern when such personalities gain access to state power.

The histrionic leader views every interaction through the lens of personal performance. They are not seeking optimal outcomes for their constituents or nations—they are seeking maximum dramatic impact. This explains why Trump's foreign policy decisions consistently prioritize spectacle over strategy, announcement over action, and gesture over genuine negotiation.

Consider the trajectory from the Montenegro push to the current nuclear crisis. The same psychological impulse that drove Trump to physically move aside an allied leader now drives him to issue ultimatums to nuclear powers. The scale has changed—from embarrassing a small nation's prime minister to threatening global stability—but the underlying motivation remains constant: the compulsive need to dominate every scenario visually and psychologically.

When such personalities gain control of nuclear arsenals and military alliances, the stakes transform from diplomatic embarrassment to existential threat. The histrionic leader's inability to comprehend consequences beyond their immediate gratification becomes not merely a character flaw but a species-level hazard.

________________________________________

Chapter III: The Crisis Nuclear - When Theatrics Trigger Armageddon

The escalation toward nuclear catastrophe began, as many disasters do, with good intentions poorly executed. Trump's administration, under pressure from Israeli lobbying and domestic political calculations, initially resisted calls for military action against Iranian nuclear facilities. Intelligence suggested Israel was preparing possible strikes, and Trump, displaying his occasionally functional survival instincts, blocked several planned Israeli attacks, preferring to pursue negotiations.

But when diplomatic efforts failed to produce the television-ready breakthroughs Trump required, the pattern reasserted itself. On June 21, 2025, the United States joined Israel in bombing three Iranian nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. Trump described the operation as "totally obliterated," using language more suited to a wrestling match than nuclear diplomacy.

The immediate consequences revealed the vast chasm between histrionic gesture and strategic reality. Iran suspended all cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), expelling inspectors by July 4. Parliament voted to close the Strait of Hormuz—though economic reality prevented implementation. Most critically, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei wrote directly to Vladimir Putin requesting support, triggering emergency meetings in the Kremlin.

Here, according to multiple intelligence sources, the world came closer to nuclear proliferation than at any point since the Cuban Missile Crisis. Iranian officials, facing the destruction of their nuclear program, pressed Russia for immediate transfer of nuclear weapons or rapid acceleration of weapons development. The expression of shock on Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov's face during these emergency consultations—visible in leaked diplomatic photography—reportedly reflected his realization that Trump had crossed a red line even experienced nuclear brinksmanship veterans considered unthinkable.

Russia, for all its authoritarian calculation, possessed what Trump's administration lacked: institutional memory of nuclear near-misses and the sober understanding that nuclear escalation, once begun, follows its own logic independent of political theater. It was likely Russian restraint, not American wisdom, that prevented Iranian nuclear weaponization in the immediate aftermath of the strikes.

________________________________________

Chapter IV: The Israeli Pressure Campaign - Strategic Manipulation of Histrionic Tendencies

Israel's role in escalating the Iranian crisis demonstrates sophisticated understanding of Trump's psychological vulnerabilities. Netanyahu's government recognized that Trump's need for dramatic gesture could be weaponized to serve Israeli strategic interests, even when those interests conflicted with broader American security concerns.

The pressure campaign employed multiple vectors: public flattery designed to appeal to Trump's ego, private warnings about Iranian nuclear capabilities tailored to his fears of appearing weak, and most effectively, the implicit threat that Israel would act unilaterally if America failed to lead. This last element proved particularly effective because it placed Trump in a position where inaction would appear subordinate to a smaller ally's initiatives.

Netanyahu's team understood that Trump could not psychologically tolerate being upstaged by any other leader, particularly on matters relating to military action and decisive leadership. When Israel presented plans for strikes against Iranian facilities, the choice was framed not as a question of strategic wisdom but as a test of American leadership credibility. Would Trump allow Israel to act alone, appearing reactive and secondary, or would he seize the initiative and ensure America led the operation?

The result was entirely predictable to anyone who understood Trump's psychology: he chose the more dramatic option, transforming Israeli pressure into American action, and elevating a regional conflict into a global nuclear crisis. The tragedy is that this outcome was both foreseeable and avoidable, had Trump possessed either the strategic patience to resist manipulation or the institutional support to recognize it.

________________________________________

Chapter V: The Kissinger Paradox - When Chess Masters Watch Checkers Players

Perhaps the most tragic element of current geopolitical dysfunction is the specter of Henry Kissinger's legacy watching over these proceedings. Kissinger, who died in 2023, had been an advisor to Trump for decades while simultaneously maintaining a relationship with Vladimir Putin spanning seventeen meetings over multiple decades. The architect of the greatest diplomatic coup of the 20th century—the separation of China and Russia—had provided both leaders with intimate knowledge of successful great power maneuvering.

Kissinger's original strategy succeeded because it understood a fundamental principle Trump seems incapable of grasping: effective diplomacy requires patience, subtlety, and the willingness to sacrifice immediate gratification for long-term advantage. The Nixon-Kissinger approach to China involved years of careful signaling, backdoor communications, and the gradual construction of mutual benefit scenarios that made cooperation more attractive than continued hostility.

Trump's approach to the same challenge has been the precise inverse: issuing public ultimatums, engaging in economic warfare, and assuming that pressure tactics that might work in real estate negotiations translate effectively to great power politics. The result has been the exact opposite of Kissinger's achievement: rather than separating China and Russia, Trump's policies have driven them into the closest alliance in their modern history.

The irony reaches almost cosmic proportions when one considers that both Putin and Xi Jinping likely understood Kissinger's strategy as well as—if not better than—Trump. They recognized that Trump was attempting a "reverse Nixon" and responded accordingly, deepening their partnership specifically to frustrate American divide-and-conquer tactics. Xi and Putin's declaration that their relationship has reached "the highest level in history" represents not coincidence but calculated response to perceived American manipulation.

________________________________________

Chapter VI: The Permanent Crisis Doctrine - When Emergency Becomes Normality

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen's observation that crises have become "permanent rather than sporadic" deserves recognition as one of the most important diagnostic insights of our era. The transition from periodic emergency to chronic instability represents a fundamental shift in the nature of international relations, yet one that Western leadership seems determined to ignore in favor of pretending that traditional crisis management tools remain relevant.

Von der Leyen's statement drew criticism precisely because it forced uncomfortable recognition that the post-Cold War order has collapsed beyond repair. The COVID pandemic, the Ukrainian war, climate disasters, and now nuclear escalation with Iran represent not separate crises requiring individual solutions but symptoms of systemic breakdown requiring entirely new approaches to governance and international cooperation.

The criticism of von der Leyen reveals the psychological resistance to acknowledging this new reality. Political leaders and commentators prefer the comfort of assuming that current instability represents a temporary aberration that will eventually return to some imagined normal state. This willful blindness prevents the development of institutions and strategies designed to function effectively in permanent crisis conditions.

Trump's fifty-day ultimatum to Russia exemplifies this nostalgic thinking. It assumes that complex international conflicts can be resolved through deadline diplomacy and economic pressure—tools that might have retained some effectiveness in an era of American hegemony but which have lost their potency in our multipolar world. The ultimatum reflects not strategic thinking but the desperate application of outdated methods to problems that require entirely new frameworks.

Von der Leyen understood what her critics refused to accept: Europe required emergency governance capabilities not as temporary measures but as permanent institutional features. Her prophetic warning was not alarmism, but rather a recognition that the comfortable assumptions of the liberal international order had become dangerous delusions.

________________________________________

Chapter VII: The Moscow Offer - Putin's Chess Move and Trump's Susceptibility

Vladimir Putin's apparent offer of Trump Tower Moscow construction rights in exchange for favourable treatment of Russian interests represents perhaps the most sophisticated understanding of Trump's psychology displayed by any foreign leader. The offer demonstrates Putin's recognition that Trump's motivations can be understood and predicted with mathematical precision.

Trump's obsession with building in Moscow dates to 1987—a thirty-eight-year fixation that reveals the depth of his need for validation from global power centres. The fact that he never completed any Russian projects despite decades of effort creates exactly the psychological vulnerability that Putin's offer is designed to exploit: the promise of finally achieving what has always been denied.

The timing of this offer, following the failure of Ukrainian peace negotiations and the increasing Iranian nuclear crisis, suggests careful calculation rather than a spontaneous gesture. Putin understands that Trump's decision-making process prioritises personal gratification over strategic analysis, making him susceptible to offers that combine business opportunity with ego fulfilment.

The broader message implicit in the Moscow offer—"we have more where this came from"—indicates that Russia views Trump not as a strategic adversary but as a manageable asset whose behaviour can be influenced through appeals to his vanity and greed. This represents a devastating assessment of American leadership from one of its primary geopolitical competitors.

________________________________________

Chapter VIII: The Moscow Question - When Curiosity Becomes Catastrophe

The revelation that Trump asked President Zelensky whether Ukraine could bomb Moscow and St. Petersburg if provided with American long-range weapons represents perhaps the most dangerous moment in nuclear diplomacy since the Cuban Missile Crisis. The casual nature of the inquiry—"Volodymyr, can you hit Moscow?... Can you hit St Petersburg too?"—reveals a complete disconnection from the consequences of nuclear escalation.

The White House's response—that Trump was "merely asking a question, not encouraging further killing"—ranks among the most catastrophic failures of crisis communications in diplomatic history. By confirming that the president had indeed inquired about bombing the capitals of a nuclear superpower, spokesperson Karoline Leavitt provided Putin with perfect justification for any future escalation: "The American president was asking about attacking our cities."

This represents far more than a communications error. No professional foreign policy advisor would permit such a question to be asked, and no competent communications team would confirm its occurrence. The fact that both happened suggests either complete institutional breakdown or deliberate strategy to create distraction from some even more damaging domestic revelation.

The timing of this leak—immediately following Trump's fifty-day ultimatum and concurrent with various domestic political pressures—supports the distraction theory. The question itself is so obviously insane that its revelation serves to focus attention on Trump's mental state rather than potentially more damaging information about his compromises with foreign powers or domestic corruption.

________________________________________

Chapter IX: The Danish Debacle - Greenland and the Geography of Absurdity

Trump's renewed obsession with purchasing Greenland provides another window into the psychology driving American foreign policy disasters. While the specific video of Danish parliamentarians laughing at Trump's Greenland comments proved to be doctored, the authentic reactions from Danish officials reveal the genuine international response to American geopolitical theater.

Danish Member of European Parliament Anders Vistisen's suggestion that Trump "f*** off" represents more than diplomatic rudeness—it reflects the breakdown of transatlantic respect that has accompanied Trump's approach to alliance management. When even historically compliant allies respond with public contempt, the erosion of American soft power reaches critical levels.

The broader Greenland episode demonstrates Trump's inability to distinguish between real estate acquisition and territorial sovereignty. His apparent belief that Denmark might be willing to sell a territory larger than Mexico for the right price reveals the same conceptual confusion that leads him to threaten "very severe tariffs" on countries already under comprehensive sanctions.

Most troubling is the pattern these episodes establish: Trump's foreign policy initiatives consistently generate international ridicule rather than respect, weakening American influence precisely when global leadership is most crucial. The Greenland obsession, the caviar sanctions, the fifty-day ultimatum—each represents the application of business logic to problems requiring diplomatic sophistication.

________________________________________

Chapter X: The Nuclear Paradox - Bombing Iran While Building Trump Towers

Perhaps no contradiction in Trump's foreign policy reveals the depth of strategic incoherence more clearly than the simultaneous destruction of Iranian nuclear facilities and the massive expansion of American nuclear power. Within weeks of bombing Iran's nuclear infrastructure in June 2025, Trump signed executive orders designed to "quadruple domestic production of nuclear power within the next 25 years."

The cognitive dissonance is staggering: while justifying attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities as necessary for global security, Trump simultaneously promotes the most aggressive nuclear expansion in American history. The administration has designated AI data centers as "critical defense facilities" and directed the Secretary of Energy to deploy advanced nuclear technology to power AI infrastructure within 30 months.

Most grotesquely symbolic is former Energy Secretary Rick Perry's company Fermi America, which has applied to build "the Donald J. Trump Advanced Energy and Intelligence Campus"—a nuclear complex featuring four one-gigawatt reactors named individually after Trump. The hubris of naming nuclear reactors after oneself while simultaneously bombing other nations' nuclear facilities defies rational explanation.

Trump explicitly rejected any climate targets for AI power generation, stating that power plants "can use whatever fuel they want" and suggesting coal as an emergency backup power source. This represents the complete abandonment of renewable energy initiatives that had gained momentum globally, replaced by a nuclear and fossil fuel strategy designed solely to serve AI development.

The irony deepens when one considers that Microsoft had already announced a 20-year deal to revive the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant to serve AI needs, demonstrating that private companies were already pursuing nuclear solutions without requiring the destruction of international nonproliferation norms.

The administration has identified "winning the global race for AI capabilities as perhaps the most important national security concern," requiring "an unprecedented expansion of energy generation." This justification transforms commercial AI development into a national security imperative requiring emergency powers and regulatory shortcuts.

Westinghouse plans to build 10 large nuclear reactors, with construction set to begin by 2030, representing $75 billion in economic value. Meanwhile, the joint venture Stargate intends to invest $500 billion over four years in AI infrastructure, including data centers co-located with electric generation facilities.

The fundamental contradiction is inescapable: if nuclear technology is so dangerous that Iranian facilities must be bombed to prevent proliferation, how can the same technology be simultaneously promoted as essential for American AI dominance? If nuclear power represents an existential threat requiring military intervention when developed by adversaries, why is it suddenly safe and desirable when serving corporate interests?

As data center energy demand could nearly triple by 2028, accounting for up to 12 percent of total U.S. electricity use, the administration prioritizes corporate energy needs over international stability. The message to the world is clear: nuclear technology is permitted for American corporations but forbidden to sovereign nations that displease Washington.

________________________________________

Chapter XI: The Invisible Oceans - Where Black Gold Meets Nuclear Ambition

Beneath the sands of the Persian Gulf, the Siberian plains, and the beds of the Caspian Sea lie the actual oceans of the 21st century. They are not blue but black, odourless, and dense with strategic weight. These fossil oceans of oil and natural gas shape alliances, trigger wars, and define the hegemony of nations. Iran, with over 208 billion barrels of crude oil and 34 trillion cubic meters of natural gas, is a significant energy colossus. Russia, with 38 trillion cubic meters—the world's largest gas reserves—and over 100 billion barrels of oil, remains a fossil superpower at war.

The failed U.S.-Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities on August 4 was officially aimed at crippling Iran's uranium enrichment infrastructure. But multiple intelligence leaks later revealed the true motivation: satellite imagery had located a vast underground petroleum reservoir beneath the Zagros foothills, newly mapped and estimated to rival some of Saudi Arabia's major fields. The strike, cloaked in nuclear justification, doubled as a strategic energy grab. Washington couldn't find the uranium, but it had found something else—something black, ancient, and far more combustible.

This is the reality behind the theatrical ultimatums and nuclear posturing: this war is fundamentally the war of fuel. Every geopolitical maneuver, every sanction threat, every nuclear escalation ultimately traces back to the control of energy resources. The fifty-day ultimatum to Russia was never about Ukrainian sovereignty—it was about who controls the flow of natural gas to Europe. The Iranian nuclear crisis was never about proliferation—it was about access to untapped petroleum reserves.

________________________________________

Chapter XII: The Phantom Energy - How Sanctions Became Theatre

Since the West imposed sanctions on Russia following its invasion of Ukraine, the dominant narrative has been straightforward: cut off Moscow's energy revenues and isolate its crude from global markets. Yet, the reality of international trade tells a different story: millions of barrels of Russian oil have continued to flow into European and American economies, often disguised, refined, or re-exported through third parties.

India and Turkey are central players in this strategy. They purchase discounted Russian crude, refine it in their industrial complexes, and then export gasoline, diesel, or fuel oil to the United States and Europe without technically violating sanctions. According to multiple investigative reports, over 30 million barrels of petroleum products refined from Russian crude were exported to the United States in 2023, primarily via India.

This practice—technically compliant but ethically dubious—has been dubbed the "energy laundering" of the 21st century. Through this refinery loophole, Western companies are indirectly financing the Russian oil economy, despite formal embargoes on Russian crude. Energy has no flag. It flows where there is demand, transforms where there is capacity, and conceals where there is profit.

Sanctions have obscured the global energy web, but they haven't broken it. If Russian oil reaches consumers through intermediaries, Moscow's energy power continues—fueling not just tanks, but also cars in California and heaters in Berlin. Trump's threats of "very severe tariffs" on Russian caviar represent the perfect metaphor for this absurdist reality: sanctioning luxuries that are already forbidden while the essential commodity—energy—continues to flow through legal gray zones.

________________________________________

Chapter XIII: The Strategic Triangle - China, Iran, Russia and the Architecture of Energy Independence

On the global chessboard, the alliance between China, Iran, and Russia is neither ideological nor formal. It is a strategic interdependence born out of exclusion, necessity, and a shared vision of a less Western-dominated world. Iran, isolated by sanctions, needs capital, technology, and infrastructure to sustain its energy sector. Russia, sanctioned and decoupled from Europe, seeks stable markets for its gas, oil, and coal. China, vulnerable due to its energy dependence, wants suppliers that aren't conditioned by Washington's politics.

The 25-year strategic partnership signed by Iran and China (2021–2046), the Siberia–Manchuria gas pipelines, BRICS+ summits, and collaboration in multilateral forums are tangible expressions of this synergy. China buys Iranian oil despite sanctions. Russia supplies energy to China at discounted prices. Iran serves as an energy, geographic, and ideological bridge between the two.

But Trump's histrionic approach to this challenge has achieved exactly the opposite of Kissinger's original strategy. Rather than separating these powers, his ultimatums and sanctions have driven them into the closest energy alliance in modern history. Xi and Putin's declaration that their relationship has reached "the highest level in history" represents not coincidence but calculated response to American energy warfare.

________________________________________

Chapter XIV: The Earthquake Coincidence - When Nature Provides Editorial Commentary

The geological synchronicity surrounding Trump's fifty-day ultimatum deserves recognition not for any mystical significance but for its perfect metaphorical appropriateness. As New Jersey experienced massive flooding and multiple regions registered seismic activity, the planet appeared to offer its own commentary on human political pretensions.

The simultaneity of natural disaster with diplomatic disaster creates an almost literary irony: while Trump announces instant solutions to intractable conflicts, nature demonstrates the limits of human control through forces that recognize no ultimatums, respect no deadlines, and respond to no sanctions. The floods and earthquakes serve as humbling reminders that some systems operate according to laws immune to political manipulation.

This juxtaposition reveals the fundamental hubris underlying contemporary Western leadership: the assumption that complex systems—whether geological, ecological, or geopolitical—can be controlled through the force of will and dramatic gestures. The reality is that such systems follow their own logic, developing momentum independent of human intention and resisting theatrical intervention.

The earthquake coincidence suggests not cosmic intervention but cosmic indifference—a reminder that while humans create artificial crises through poor decision-making, natural systems continue their processes without regard for political convenience or timeline pressures.

________________________________________

Chapter XV: The Theatre of the Absurd - Spectacle as Substitute for Strategy

What connects T. Lobsang Rampa's fictional Tibet with Trump's foreign policy ultimatums is the triumph of spectacle over substance. Both represent the Western tendency to transform complex realities into emotional entertainment, prioritizing dramatic impact over actual understanding or effective action.

Rampa understood his audience perfectly: Westerners hungry for exotic spirituality but allergic to the actual effort required for genuine spiritual development. Trump demonstrates identical intuition about his domestic audience: Americans who crave international respect and effective leadership but resist the patient work necessary for diplomatic success.

The result in both cases is the same: momentary satisfaction followed by inevitable disappointment as reality reasserts itself against wishful thinking. Rampa's readers eventually discovered that suburban mysticism provides no genuine enlightenment, just as Trump's supporters are discovering that theatrical foreign policy provides no genuine security.

The danger lies not in the individual delusions but in their scaling up to institutional levels. When entire governments begin operating according to reality television logic, the gap between performance and competence becomes a source of systemic vulnerability that adversaries can exploit with devastating effectiveness.

________________________________________

Chapter XVI: Von der Leyen's Vindication - Emergency Governance as European Salvation

The unfolding catastrophe of American foreign policy under Trump validates every aspect of von der Leyen's controversial assessment about permanent crisis. While critics dismissed her observation as defeatist or alarmist, subsequent events have demonstrated that she was not describing a problem but diagnosing a condition that required immediate institutional adaptation.

Von der Leyen understood that Europe faced a fundamental choice: develop emergency governance capabilities designed for permanent instability, or watch traditional institutions crumble under pressures they were never designed to handle. Her critics preferred the comfortable fiction that current crises represented temporary aberrations requiring only patience and traditional responses.

The vindication has been swift and brutal. Trump's nuclear brinksmanship with Iran, his economic warfare against allies, his casual inquiries about bombing Moscow—all demonstrate that America under histrionic leadership has become a source of instability rather than a guarantor of order. Europe can no longer rely on American leadership for security, economic stability, or even basic diplomatic rationality.

Von der Leyen's prophetic warning becomes clearer with each Trump escalation: Europe must develop autonomous capabilities for crisis management, energy security, defense coordination, and economic resilience. The alternative is not temporary discomfort but existential vulnerability to decisions made by leaders who view international relations as personal performance art.

The European Commission's emergency powers, criticized as authoritarian overreach during the pandemic, now appear as essential tools for navigating a world where traditional diplomatic solutions have been replaced by ultimatums, threats, and theatrical gestures. Von der Leyen's institutional innovations were not power grabs but survival mechanisms for a continent caught between American chaos and authoritarian alternatives.

Her brilliance lay not in predicting specific crises, but in recognising that the nature of crises themselves had fundamentally changed. Where previous generations faced periodic emergencies followed by returns to stability, contemporary Europe faces cascading, interconnected crises that require permanent adaptation rather than temporary responses.

________________________________________

Chapter XVII: The Epstein “Revelation - When Domestic Scandals Demand Nuclear Distractions

The most revealing aspect of Trump's casual inquiry about bombing Moscow and St. Petersburg was not the question itself—though it represents perhaps the most dangerous moment in nuclear diplomacy since the Cuban Missile Crisis—but rather its timing. The leak came precisely as the most explosive domestic scandal of Trump's presidency began to unfold: the release of Epstein grand jury testimony.

On July 17, 2025, just days after the "Moscow Question" leak, President Trump authorized Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek the public release of grand jury testimony from Jeffrey Epstein's prosecution. The timing was not coincidental. Hours before Trump's directive, The Wall Street Journal had reported on a sexually suggestive 50th birthday greeting Trump allegedly sent Epstein in 2003, including references to "secrets they shared."

This revelation provides the missing context for understanding why the most strategically dangerous question in modern diplomatic history was deliberately leaked to the press. No professional foreign policy advisor would permit such a question to be asked, and no competent communications team would confirm its occurrence—unless the alternative was something even more politically damaging.

The Epstein files represent what intelligence analysts call a "civilization-ending" intelligence breach—not for national security, but for elite legitimacy. Unlike WikiLeaks or Snowden revelations about state secrets, the Epstein materials contain elite secrets: names, dates, flights, destinations, sealed depositions, whispered crimes. The leak of even a few photos online has already caused disturbances—images of the very people who have shaped, and continue to shape, the future of our lives.

Trump's frantic response to The Wall Street Journal's Epstein reporting revealed the stakes. Referring to himself in the third person, he claimed Rupert Murdoch had agreed to "take care of" the article but lacked authority to overrule the paper's editor. He threatened lawsuits against what he called a "false, malicious and defamatory" report, demonstrating exactly the kind of panic that would drive an administration to leak nuclear secrets as distraction.

Trump's inquiry about bombing Moscow becomes comprehensible when viewed as an algorithmic solution to an impossible political equation. Faced with the imminent release of Epstein materials that could destroy his presidency and potentially trigger constitutional crisis, Trump's team calculated that even the revelation of nuclear recklessness was preferable to sustained focus on elite pedophile networks.

Most tellingly, the Epstein revelation comes as the MAGA movement itself begins to fracture. Speaker Mike Johnson's call for Epstein file release, breaking with Trump, signals that even the president's most loyal allies recognize that some scandals transcend political loyalty. When your political base demands transparency about elite criminal networks, no amount of foreign policy theater can provide sustainable distraction.

The most alarming aspect of this revelation is that it increases the likelihood of nuclear conflict, rather than decreasing it. A president facing potential criminal exposure has diminished incentives for strategic restraint. If the Epstein files threaten to end Trump's political survival anyway, the normal calculations that prevent nuclear escalation—concern for legacy, political future, institutional stability—lose their constraining power.

________________________________________

Epilogue: The Countdown to Irrelevance

As the fifty days tick down toward their inevitable expiration, the world watches a masterclass in strategic self-destruction. Trump's ultimatum will pass unheeded, his threats will prove empty, his gestures will fade into historical footnote status alongside countless other examples of theatrical foreign policy divorced from operational reality.

But the damage extends far beyond any single failed initiative. Each theatrical gesture erodes American credibility, each empty threat weakens future diplomatic leverage, each histrionic display provides adversaries with valuable intelligence about American decision-making processes and psychological vulnerabilities.

The tragedy is not that Trump's foreign policy fails—competent observers predicted such failures from the beginning—but that the failure occurs during a period when effective American leadership could genuinely contribute to global stability. Climate change, nuclear proliferation, economic inequality, technological disruption—all require the kind of patient, sophisticated international cooperation that becomes impossible when one major power's foreign policy operates according to reality television logic.

Von der Leyen's warning about permanent crisis has proved prophetic not because she possessed mystical foresight but because she understood institutional reality better than her critics. Europe needed emergency governance capabilities precisely because the comfortable assumptions of liberal international order had become dangerous delusions.

The earthquake metaphor proves apt: just as seismic activity reflects underlying geological pressures building toward inevitable release, current geopolitical tensions reflect underlying structural changes in the international system that will eventually demand recognition regardless of whether American leadership is prepared to acknowledge them.

The question is not whether the current approach will fail—it has already failed spectacularly. The question is whether American institutions retain sufficient resilience to develop more effective approaches before the consequences of failure become irreversible, and whether European institutions, guided by von der Leyen's emergency governance framework, can provide stability in a world where American leadership has become a source of chaos rather than order.

As New Jersey's floodwaters recede and seismographs around the world return to normal readings, the planet continues its ancient rhythms, indifferent to human deadline diplomacy and theatrical ultimatums. Perhaps there is wisdom in such indifference—a reminder that genuine solutions require the same patience, persistence, and respect for natural limits that characterize geological processes rather than political campaigns.

In the end, the most honest commentary may come not from diplomatic cables or press briefings but from the Earth itself—which responds to political ultimatums with its own seismic reminders that some forces cannot be threatened, cajoled, or sanctioned into submission. The tectonic plates, at least, remain wonderfully immune to fifty-day deadlines.

The countdown to irrelevance proceeds, but perhaps irrelevance is precisely what the world needs: the gentle marginalization of histrionic leadership in favor of the quiet competence that von der Leyen represented—the understanding that true strength lies not in dramatic gesture but in institutional resilience, not in theatrical ultimatums but in patient adaptation to permanent crisis.

As the Epstein materials emerge and international crises escalate simultaneously, the world faces an unprecedented convergence: nuclear weapons controlled by leaders whose primary concern may be avoiding criminal prosecution rather than avoiding nuclear war. This is the darkest possible interpretation of von der Leyen's permanent crisis thesis—not just ongoing emergencies requiring adaptive governance, but the fundamental breakdown of the distinction between personal survival and civilizational survival.

The fifty-day countdown was never about Russian compliance or Iranian nuclear programs. It was about buying time before domestic scandals made foreign policy theater irrelevant. But some revelations cannot be delayed indefinitely, and some scandals cannot be overshadowed by even nuclear brinksmanship.

The clock is ticking toward something far more dangerous than failed ultimatums: the moment when a nuclear-armed leader concludes that personal legal survival requires global chaos. In that moment, von der Leyen's warnings about emergency governance may prove the difference between institutional adaptation and civilizational collapse.

The black oceans beneath the earth will continue to flow according to their logic, indifferent to fifty-day deadlines and immune to nuclear threats. In the end, those who understand energy will control it, and those who merely threaten it will watch their influence evaporate like steam from a broken pipeline.

________________________________________

Written as waters recede in New Jersey and the world holds its breath, waiting to see whether wisdom or catastrophe emerges from the intersection of histrionic leadership, nuclear capability, and elite criminal exposure in the winter of 2025.

________________________________________

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

Germán & Co 7/13/25 Germán & Co 7/13/25

Dream On i ormens rike: Tillbaka till Christian Falk…

Systemet är inte trasigt – det är en lönsam vinstmaskin
byggd på vår förtvivlan.
Vi cyklar över Fallets rand, akrobater utan nät,
när ekon från ”Dream On” blandas med Trumps skratt:
”Världen vinner. Jag vinner.
Era broar ska vara vackra.”

Men i dimman hörs Falks sista refräng:
”Maskineriet har en orm –
drick inte dess gift.”

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1944339565432451091

Av Germán Toro Ghio, inspirerad av Gustaf Tronarps intervju
Karlstad, Sweden | July 13, 2025

________________________________________

I vansinnet som design

Mina sista år hemsöks av syner—egentligen mardrömmar—om en värld som faller samman. En värld där ett fåtal män tjänar miljarder på sekunder, medan pensionärer i de rikaste länderna i norra Europa rotar i sopor efter pantflaskor. Deras magra bidrag försvinner innan månaden ens har börjat.

Vi lever i en epok där egoismen inte längre betraktas som en privat last utan har institutionaliserats—byggts in som bärande princip i vårt ekonomiska och politiska maskineri. Vansinnet är inte slumpmässigt. Det är designat. Och det är lönsamt.

Medan några få festar på kollapsens ruiner paddlar vi andra genom förtvivlan. Vi klamrar oss fast vid livet som akrobater utan skyddsnät, cruzando el Niágara en bicicleta—vi cyklar över Niagarafallen, som Juan Luis Guerra en gång sjöng, i en absurd balansakt på samhällets yttersta rand.

Och där, mitt i dimman, hörs ett annat eko—en röst som förnekar själva kraschen: Folk säger att världen är trasig. Kaos, säger de. Men låt mig berätta något: världen är inte trasig. Den vinner. Jag vinner.

Donald J. Trump, vår samtids groteska parodi, meddelar triumferande att ekonomin går som tåget och börsen står i rekord. Miljardärer tjänar miljarder—för att de förtjänat det! Klagar du? Då gjorde du dåliga affärer. Skyll dig själv. Vi andra borde bygga broar, inte cykla över vattenfall. Vackra broar, säger han, starka broar, ledarskap utan ormar i maskineriet.

I denna omvända verklighet blir framgång detsamma som dominans, och solidaritet reduceras till svaghet. Och ändå—just i denna skrattspegel av cynism—avslöjas kanske den verkliga galenskapen: inte att världen faller isär, utan att så många tror att det är så här seger ser ut.

________________________________________

Christian Falk träffar Ormen

Mitt i denna absurditet klamrar jag mig fast vid ett skratt som skär igenom mörkret—ett minne av Christian.

En lördagmorgon. Christian kom som alltid: svart hatt, runda glasögon, ett stilla bus i blicken.

"Jag måste kopiera några grejer," sa han.

"Självklart," svarade jag och vinkade mot kontoret.

Två minuter senare hördes ett skrik: "Germán! Det är en orm här inne!"

Jag sprang dit, övertygad om att han skämtade. Men där stod han—Christian—balanserande som en förskräckt flamingo på konferensbordet, pekande mot kopiatorn: "Det är en korallorm! Den har byggt bo i pappersmagasinet!"

Och han hade rätt. Inne i maskinens varma mage låg en verklig, randig, väldigt dåsig liten orm. Jag ringde Luis—vår allt-i-allo i det nicaraguanska projektet—som kom som en lantlig helgonfigur med en käpp, lockade försiktigt ut ormen och återställde lugnet. Först då klev Christian ner från sitt panikläge.

Den där ormen sökte bara värme. Den hade inga ideologier. Inga presskonferenser. Den skrev inga algoritmer, blåste inte upp inflationen, startade inga krig. Den ville bara vila.

Och kanske—Gud hjälpe oss—var den, i dessa oärliga tider, det mest oskyldiga väsendet i rummet.

________________________________________

När svensk musik mötte revolutionen i Nicaragua - Just an Illusion and a frustration…

Som så många andra idealister såg de möjligheten att hjälpa till att skapa en bättre värld. Christian Falk anslöt sig, under paraplyet för det svenska Tältprojektet, till detta solidaritetsprojekt med Nicaragua. Tillsammans med honom kom Björn Afzelius, Mikael Wiehe och hans band Imperiet, samt Gnags från Danmark och Åge Aleksandersen från Norge.

Initiativet drevs på högsta politiska nivå av Pierre Schori, då vice utrikesminister och arkitekten bakom Olof Palmes vision av en bättre värld.

Och kanske—Gud hjälpe oss—var den, i dessa oärliga tider, det mest oskyldiga väsendet i rummet.

________________________________________

Managua 1984 – en stad mellan hopp och förfall

Managua andades fortfarande ekon av den sandinistiska revolutionen som fem år tidigare störtat Somoza-dynastin efter att ha varit skådeplatsen för dess blodigaste strider. Huvudstaden, tillfälligt befriad från det kontrarevolutionära kriget som nu förflyttats till bergen och Atlantkusten, förkroppsligade som ingen annan stad detta historiska ögonblick—svävande mellan revolutionärt hopp och begynnande förslitning.

Privilegierad av sin position mellan två oceaner hade Nicaragua placerat sin huvudstad vid Stilla havet. Managua trotsade alla urbana konventioner: dess centrum, redan oigenkännligt före katastrofen, låg i ruiner sedan jordbävningen den 23 december 1972. Den tragiska natten krävde mer än 10 000 liv—en siffra som bara är en uppskattning, eftersom otaliga kroppar för alltid begravdes under rasmassor.

På höjden som dominerar sjön Xolotlán reste sig Hotel Intercontinental som en ensam överlevare: en vit pyramid från en svunnen modernitet. Granne med Somozas bunker på Loma de Tiscapa hyste denna byggnad märkliga historier—från den excentriske Howard Hughes instängdhet, som flydde i panik efter skalvet för att aldrig återvända, till diktatorns sista intervjuer med utländska korrespondenter.

________________________________________

Stadens förvandling under regntiden

Trots sin råhet förvandlades Managua under regnsäsongen (maj–november). De tropiska skyfall förvandlade staden till en smaragdgrön prärie som, bland ruinerna, destillerade en unik trolldom. Denna frodighet smälte samman med glöden hos tusentals unga sandinister—kvinnor och män, många knappt tonåringar—som översvämmade gatorna med sina uniformer och AK-47:or. Alla delade drömmen om att bygga ett rättvist samhälle, inte bara genom att bryta med fyrtio år av Somoza-diktatur, utan också med ett uråldrigt konservativt korsett. Kvinnorna, tidigare osedda aktörer, framträdde som avgörande gestalter i detta transformativa projekt.

________________________________________

Revolutionens globala magnetism

Den sandinistiska revolutionen utövade en global dragningskraft. På den bipolära spelplanen under kalla kriget såg västerlandet ett farligt expansionistiskt "virus" nära USA, medan Sovjetunionen såg en ingång till Latinamerika. Mellan dessa poler erbjöd den europeiska socialdemokratin—förkroppsligad av den karismatiske Olof Palme—en "tredje väg" . Detta nordiska engagemang, där diplomati och kulturell solidaritet konvergerade, förvandlade Schoris vision till en kör av skandinaviska röster som ekade över revolutionens torg.

Det var i denna laddade atmosfär som svenska artister landade med sina gitarrer och drömmar om att musik kunde bygga broar mellan världar. Tältprojektet blev mer än bara konserter—det blev ett vittnesbörd om en tids hopp och en generations övertygelse att kulturen kunde förändra världen. Och det är många i Nicaragua som kommer ihåg den stora insats som svenskarna gjorde i Nicaraguas kultursektor.

________________________________________

Snart hos Zappa: Krossade speglar och den mänskliga existensen

Han började med Zappa. En annan man som också dog vid 52. Det var ingen slump. Det var en kod. En signal från en kropp på väg bort.

Christian Falks röst, postumt sänd i Sommar i P1, bar spår av allt som aldrig sagts—och ändå blev sagt. I tid. För sista gången. Inte med rop. Inte med smicker. Bara sanning, utandad i takt med en själ som packade sin resväska.

— Jag har bara några saker kvar att fixa. Sen drar jag, sa han.

Diagnosen kom i februari. Bukspottkörtelcancer. Fem månader senare var han borta.

Men döden möttes inte tyst. Trotsigt vibrerade orden, som en ensam basgång under en sprucken melodi. I radioprogrammet återvände han till musiken—den eviga vännen som aldrig svek. Frank Zappa öppnade sändningen. Hans dödsålder blev till ett omen.

— Det verkar som jag snart träffar Zappa, sa han.

Men först måste han berätta. Om mörkret. Och ljuset. Om trappuppgången där han grät som barn. Om mormodern som blev hans livlina. Om modern som ringde från Paris och sa att hon ville dö. Om läraren som hörde något i honom—men som han inte vågade följa. Rädslan att bli en börda vägde tyngre än längtan efter framtiden.

— Jag tackade nej till Adolf Fredriks musikskola. Det hade blivit för mycket för mormor. Det räckte att jag blev förkyld.

________________________________________

De spruckna speglarna

I Julio Cortázars litterära arkitektur reflekterar speglar inte trygga sanningar utan brutna fragment av en verklighet för smärtsam att betrakta hel. När Horacio Oliveira sträcker sina plankor ut i det parisiska tomrummet, när kristallen splittras i tusen skärvor, blottas smärtan bortom intellektuella konstruktioner—naken, utan ironi, utan skydd.

Falk rörde sig genom samma spruckna landskap. Moderniteten har lärt oss att ta skydd i formler, i klichéer som bedövar: "Äntligen fredag"—frasen vi rabblar mekaniskt varje vecka—är, som Christian beskrev den, ett eko från en tom helg, ett hål i tiden där ensamheten väntar, tyst men trogen.

Cortázar visste att människan pendlar mellan två poler: försök att bygga rationella, estetiska, sociala försvar—och ögonblicket då dessa kollapsar inför den existentiella tomheten. Den krossade spegeln i Rayuela är inte bara en metafor. Den är medvetandets bristningspunkt—när vi inser att våra broar till andra är plankor över en avgrund.

Christian Falk var aldrig rädd för att visa det. Han talade om droger. Om pendeltågsresor mot förortens skuggor. Om att vilja dö—men också om att fortfarande vilja leva. Han visste hur det var att sitta i trappuppgången och gråta. Att ropa utan att bli hörd. Att förlora en son. Och—trots allt—fortsätta leta efter tonen, ljuset, förbindelsen.

— Om någon har adressen till det där skyddsnätet, så skicka det gärna till mig, sa han i sitt sommarprogram.

Han visste att ord är speglar. Inte hela, men spruckna. Men i deras sprickor kan något verkligt fortfarande anas.

________________________________________

Avskedet som blev ett löfte

Han avslutade med ett budskap till sina barn:

Till döttrarna Vanessa och Vita: — Älskade döttrar, jag är med er.

Till William, sonen som inte längre var där: — Jag är nära nu. Bara några saker kvar att fixa. Sen kommer jag.

Det var mer än ett avsked—det var ett löfte, viskat genom tidens slöja. En far som talar till sin son bortom dödens gräns, inte för att förklara, inte för att förstå, utan för att älska. Hans ord blev en cortázarsk bön—ett förtvivlat men vackert nej till att släppa taget om mänsklig närhet.

Och i dess svall ekar Carlos Fuentes sorg efter sin son: "La muerte de un joven es la injusticia misma… El amor que nos unió sigue vivo en mi vida." Kärleken lever kvar, sade Fuentes, eftersom den aldrig följer de döda in i tystnaden. Den stannar hos de levande. Falks ord bar samma innebörd—en närvaro genom frånvaron, en ton som dröjer sig kvar.

Han visste att tiden inte helar, men att minnet bär. Han visste att det som finns kvar i en garderob, i en röstinspelning, i en gammal låt inte är dött. Det är beviset på ett spår, en gest, en avtryckt existens.

Den sista musiken från en man vars liv klingade som en anslagen pianosträng: bruten, men levande.

________________________________________

Att börja om i sprickorna

Och kanske är det just där vi måste börja om—i sprickorna. I minnena. I de trasiga speglarna där det fortfarande glimmar till av sanning, av skönhet, av kärlek. För i en värld där ord förlorar sin mening, där makt hyllar vansinnet, där broar ersätts med murar, behöver vi fler röster som vågar tala från djupet av mänsklig erfarenhet. Fler som Christian. Fler som vågar vara trasiga och levande på samma gång.

I denna kaotiska värld—hur många Falk behövs för att vända detta contra sentido? Hur många hjärtan måste ropa ut att det finns en annan väg, en annan musik, ett annat sätt att vara människa?

Kanske är svaret inte ett tal. Kanske är svaret: en enda röst som inte tystnar. Ett enda ackord som vägrar klinga ut.

Gracias Christian…

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

Germán & Co 6/21/25 Germán & Co 6/21/25

The emperor's "terrible mathematics" - healing vs. destruction…

The Trump Offer: An Empty Gesture in a Loaded Theatre

In this context, Iran’s dismissal of a Trump-era offer—reportedly $30 billion in sanctions relief in exchange for halting 60% uranium enrichment—was not a surprise. It was inevitable.

From Tehran’s perspective, the offer was not an olive branch—it was a slap:

A Fraction of Justice: The $30 billion represented a mere fraction of Iran’s frozen assets—money Iran sees as unjustly seized.
A Legacy of Betrayal: Trump has unilaterally withdrawn from the JCPOA, inflicted devastating sanctions, and ordered the assassination of Qasem Soleimani. Why trust an arsonist with water?
No Guarantees: Iran knows how easily American administrations change course. Without ironclad guarantees (impossible under the U.S. system), any deal could vanish in four years—or four months.
Too Narrow: The offer addressed only uranium enrichment, ignoring deeper grievances—ballistic missiles, regional influence, and the legitimacy of Iran’s regime.

To accept such a deal would be, in the eyes of hardliners, an act of surrender, not diplomacy. It would echo the Shah’s fatal reliance on the United States. And history has taught them what that brings.

War is not our curse—it is our masterpiece. Forged in the furnace of human nature, it is our oldest addiction: coded in our cells, sanctified in our scriptures, romanticized by history. We do not merely wage war—we crave it. And now, its spectre resurrects in tailored suits and digital banners: neo-Nazi ideologies resurrecting blood hierarchies, racial purity, and the siren song of total control. This is not history repeating—it is history reprogramming.

War is not chaos. It is a cruel algorithm.
Like the gut-brain axis, it loops relentlessly: grievance → propaganda → dehumanization → violence → trauma → grievance. Sartre’s “Hell is other people” curdles into “Hell is expendable people.” His existential truth—that we are “condemned to be free”—haunts us. Overwhelmed by liberty’s burden, we flee into the false solace of ideology. War simplifies. It erases nuance. It demands no inner cultivation—only fields to burn.

Yet we are seduced—not by carnage, but by war’s neurochemical alchemy.
Dopamine floods, tribal chants. Cortisol numbs us to suffering. Oxytocin bonds “us” as we sharpen blades against “them.” War lifts Sartre’s weight of freedom, replacing Epicurus’ hard-won ataraxia (tranquillity) with the frozen ecstasy of a finger on the trigger.

But biology whispers rebellion.
The gut-brain axis reveals: harmony is not a fantasy—it is rewritable code. Microbes like Lactobacillus secrete GABA, which helps calm neural storms. Societies, too, can cultivate peace chemistry: libraries as sanctuaries, friendship as a tribal antidote, music and dialogue as social pacemakers. These are not metaphors—they are psychobiotics for the body politic. The Marshall Plan fed former enemies. South Africa’s Truth Commission rewrote the narrative of trauma. Open-source collaboration replaced hoarding. Peace is cultivated, not found.

Peace is achievable, of course, through such honest people…

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1944569733094777087

**All rights reserved by Germán & Co. Reproduction is strictly prohibited.**

Understanding Iran’s Position: A Legacy of Betrayal, Revolution, and Defiance

________________________________________

To begin to understand Iran today—and by extension, much of the world’s current geopolitical disorder—there are two interviews you must witness.

The first is David Frost’s haunting 1980 conversation with the exiled Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, frail and bitter in Panama, abandoned by the very powers that once elevated him. The other is Oriana Fallaci’s fearless 1979 confrontation with Ayatollah Khomeini, in which she tore off the chador he insisted she wear and stared directly into the core of Iran’s new ideological order.

These two encounters—one with a fallen king, the other with a rising theocrat—bookend the violent transformation of Iran from a Western client state into a revolutionary regime. They do more than narrate a power shift. They expose the psychological architecture of modern Iran: one shaped by betrayal, anchored in resistance, and hostile not by whim, but by conviction.

This is why Iran’s present-day posture—its rejection of U.S. overtures, its nuclear brinkmanship, its regional militancy—is not a mystery. It is the expression of a political theology forged in humiliation and hardened by memory.

________________________________________

The Shah’s Exile: A Parable Etched in Pain

Frost’s interview with the Shah is no mere postscript to the Cold War. It is a study in political death. Once celebrated in Washington and London as a moderniser and bulwark against communism, the Shah was swiftly discarded the moment his rule became inconvenient. As the Islamic Revolution roared into being, not a single Western nation offered him lasting asylum. Even the United States—his great patron—closed its doors under pressure from Iran’s new rulers during the hostage crisis.

To the revolutionaries, this was vindication. It confirmed what Khomeini had long preached: that the Shah’s throne stood not on Persian soil, but on the shifting sands of Western approval. When that support was withdrawn, the Peacock Throne crumbled.

For the Islamic Republic, this abandonment remains a formative myth. It teaches that reliance on the West is suicide—that empires are loyal only to power, and will betray even their most obedient vassals when politically expedient. That lesson continues to animate Iran’s strategic calculus: never again trust an international guarantee; never again allow sovereignty to rest on foreign promises.

________________________________________

Fallaci vs. Khomeini: The Ideology Unmasked

If Frost’s interview reveals the trauma of Iran’s past, Fallaci’s reveals the fire of its future. Her 1979 face-off with Khomeini, published with razor-edged clarity, captures the moral architecture of the Islamic Republic in its rawest form.

Fallaci’s fearless line of questioning—culminating in her symbolic refusal to wear the veil—was not just an act of feminist rebellion. It was a confrontation between two civilisations. Khomeini, draped in black, articulated a worldview rooted in divine authority, permanent resistance, and absolute certainty. The West, in his telling, was arrogant, corrupt, and spiritually bankrupt. The revolution, he insisted, was not just for Iran—it was for the world.

Embedded in that interview are the pillars of the regime’s ideology:

Anti-imperialism rebranded as divine duty,
Israel and the U.S. are metaphysical enemies,
Compromise is apostasy,
Resistance as salvation.

These ideas are not rhetorical ornaments. They are doctrinal mandates. To compromise with the “Great Satan” is not merely risky—it is heretical. Fallaci understood this. Her confrontation remains one of the most incisive portraits of political theology ever captured on tape or page.

________________________________________

The Hostage Crisis: The Scar That Shaped a Generation

Then came November 4, 1979.

The seizure of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and the 444-day hostage ordeal that followed did more than rupture diplomacy—it permanently altered the psychological landscape of both nations. In Washington, it shattered illusions of order and impunity. In Tehran, it became the revolution’s crowning act of defiance.

For the U.S., the hostage crisis was barbaric, a violation of sacred diplomatic norms. For Iran’s new rulers, it was a necessary exorcism—the symbolic expulsion of American control. The embassy was no longer a sovereign compound; it was “the Den of Espionage.”

And when the hostages were only released the moment Ronald Reagan took office—replacing the “weak” Carter with a man who projected force—Iran drew a lasting conclusion: the U.S. does not respond to respect; it responds to power.

Thus was born the mutual pathology: America saw Iran as irrational, lawless, and ideological. Iran saw America as duplicitous, vengeful, and exploitable through calibrated confrontation.

________________________________________

A Nation Divided: The People vs. the State

But Iran is not a monolith.

Its people are far more complex, vibrant, and diverse than its regime. The revolution of 1979 began as a broad uprising—liberals, Islamists, socialists, nationalists—against dictatorship. But it was the clerics who seized the aftermath.

Since then, popular discontent has erupted again and again:

The student protests of 1999,
The Green Movement of 2009,
The economic uprisings of 2017 and 2019,
And the women-led revolution of 2022–23.

Each wave has carried echoes of secularism, nationalism, and a yearning to rejoin the global community. Yet the regime has endured through repression, surveillance, and a shrewd manipulation of foreign threats to consolidate power. Every Israeli missile strike, every American sanction, is spun into a justification for internal control.

That is why diplomatic overtures must be viewed through a double lens: not only can they help the state, but will they empower dissent? Will they erode the regime’s claim to legitimacy?

________________________________________

The Trump Offer: An Empty Gesture in a Loaded Theatre

In this context, Iran’s dismissal of a Trump-era offer—reportedly $30 billion in sanctions relief in exchange for halting 60% uranium enrichment—was not a surprise. It was inevitable.

From Tehran’s perspective, the offer was not an olive branch—it was a slap:

A Fraction of Justice: The $30 billion represented a mere fraction of Iran’s frozen assets—money Iran sees as unjustly seized.
A Legacy of Betrayal: Trump has unilaterally withdrawn from the JCPOA, inflicted devastating sanctions, and ordered the assassination of Qasem Soleimani. Why trust an arsonist with water?
No Guarantees: Iran knows how easily American administrations change course. Without ironclad guarantees (impossible under the U.S. system), any deal could vanish in four years—or four months.
Too Narrow: The offer addressed only uranium enrichment, ignoring deeper grievances—ballistic missiles, regional influence, and the legitimacy of Iran’s regime.

To accept such a deal would be, in the eyes of hardliners, an act of surrender—not diplomacy. It would echo the Shah’s fatal reliance on Washington. And history has taught them what that brings.

________________________________________

Power, Dignity, and the Politics of Memory

Iranian leaders do not merely negotiate—they remember.

They remember the Shah’s exile.
They remember the Embassy siege.
They remember sanctions, sabotage, assassinations, and betrayals.
They remember Fallaci’s defiance and Frost’s melancholy.
They remember being cast as pariahs, even when they complied.

And so they demand not just deals, but dignity.
Not just money, but memory restored.
Not just leverage, but recognition—as a regional power, as a sovereign actor, as a state that will not kneel.

This is why understanding Iran’s position is not about agreeing with it. It is about understanding that beneath every rejection lies a scar, and behind every negotiation, a ghost.

Even the fiercest of allies know this.
Even Benjamin Netanyahu—long the architect of pressure campaigns against Iran—knows betrayal is possible.
He has seen empires change course.
He knows that in this region, trust is never permanent, and memory never dies.

By Germán & Co.
Karlstad, Sweden | July 14, 2025

________________________________________

Introduction: The Terrible Mathematics Fulfilled

In January 2024, when sirens had yet to wail and algorithms had yet to calculate ballistic trajectories, Germán Toro Ghio—recognized by the North American platform Energy Central as a 2023 Top Voice in energy and political analysis—wrote on www.germantoroghio.com:

"The intention to trigger a worldwide conflict should be readily apparent..."

We warned about surprise attacks that reshape history: from the Trojan Horse to Pearl Harbor, from 9/11 to COVID-19. We predicted Hamas understood the repercussions of its actions; that ultra-fundamentalist groups were secretly planning to "ignite an unprecedented regional or global conflict".

(Somewhere in Gaza, a child who drew planes on a wall now hears real planes. The difference is these are not drawings.)

Today, as the world teeters on the edge of the nuclear abyss, those predictions materialize with nightmare precision. The Emperor chose not to heal—he chose the "terrible mathematics" of power: that sinister equation where healing takes generations, but destruction takes minutes.

This essay, written when hope was still possible, now reads like an autopsy of the future. Because the terrible mathematics of power always adds up to the same result: ZERO.

[Original article: "The intention to trigger a worldwide conflict should be readily apparent..." — Germán & Co, January 28, 2024]

________________________________________

Abstract

The Emperor Without a Throne, or The Empire No Longer Imposes Silence, but listen—listen, because summaries are lies we tell ourselves at diplomatic cocktail parties—this essay is about the precise moment the emperor realises his voice echoes in an empty cathedral. It’s about Trump’s fevered monologues, Putin’s chess moves played in slow motion, and China’s silence that speaks louder than artillery. We are witnessing the collapse of the imperial theatre, and the audience has learned to laugh at the wrong moments.

These reflections interrogate the transformation of global power in the era of ubiquitous communication, disinformation wars, and the collapse of imperial mythologies. It analyses the decline of American exceptionalism, the performative nature of modern geopolitics, and the psychological algorithms of war, drawing connections from Trump’s vanity diplomacy to Lavrov’s veiled nuclear threats. The essay also reflects on President Vladimir Putin’s extended meeting with international journalists in Moscow, where he outlined a post-Western vision for global governance, rejecting U.S.-centric narratives and promoting a multipolar order based on state sovereignty, cultural autonomy, and geopolitical reciprocity. His multi-hour dialogue, unprecedented in transparency and tone, was not just an assertion of power but a deliberate recalibration of narrative authority. While Western media remains obsessed with spectacle, the Kremlin courts foreign correspondents as architects of a new ideological map, seeking to recast Russia not as aggressor but as bulwark against Western hegemony.

At the heart of this essay lies a crucial claim: the central crisis of our time stems from a catastrophic miscalculation by President Donald Trump, whose erratic trade wars, tactical provocations, and impulsive diplomacy failed to recognise the new configuration of world power. The clash between Iran, Israel, the U.S., Russia, and China is no longer about conventional war but about control of global legitimacy, energy routes, and technological supremacy. Trump’s approach not only destabilised traditional alliances—especially in Europe—but also catalysed authoritarian convergence among his supposed adversaries. His tariffs alienated allies while North Korea quietly armed Russia, and today, according to Swedish press reports, 30 million grenades are en route to Ukraine’s border.

Amid these changes, the betrayed hopes of the Venezuelan exile—especially after Trump’s election—serve as a tragic reminder of how fossil fuel reserves and ambitions over rare earth elements override human dignity. The suffering of millions displaced has become a footnote in a demented war for electric supremacy. As Juan Luis Guerra once sang, “crossing Niagara on a bicycle”—a metaphor for fragile hope in the face of the impossible. His lyrics evoke not only the surreal balance of survival but also the exhaustion of populations trapped in systemic crises: medicine shortages, bureaucratic cruelty, the absurd dance of exile. The song resonates today as entire nations teeter on the brink of collapse, invisible to those waging wars over lithium and cobalt.

With references ranging from Epicurus to Sartre, and from Gandhi to Snowden, this text critiques the algorithmic allure of conflict and proposes an alternative grounded in radical empathy. It aims to contribute to ongoing conversations about the post-imperial global order, the digital fragmentation of diplomacy, and the moral limitations of transactional leadership.

________________________________________

I. The Last Monologue

"I could fix the world in 24 hours."

(The emperor adjusts his tie. Somewhere in Caracas, a child draws planes on a concrete wall. In Buenos Aires, someone reads this and wonders if it matters.)

Twenty-four hours to fix all illness of the world—or create a rain of nuclear inferno.

Twenty-four hours. As if the world were a broken refrigerator, as if geopolitics were a plumbing problem solvable with the right wrench and enough arrogance. But here's the emperor's terrible math: healing takes generations, destruction takes minutes. You can't cure cancer in 24 hours, but you can turn children into shadows on walls in 24 seconds. But empires don’t collapse in 24 hours—they take centuries to die, like enormous whales beaching themselves on the shores of their contradictions.

The emperor speaks to the cameras, but the cameras now belong to everyone. Every phone is a rebellion. Every live stream is a witness. The monologue shatters against ten billion screens, each one asking: Who permitted you to speak for us?

(What if the emperor, in the end, is asking himself the same question?)

________________________________________

II. The Birth of Imperial Sound: From Gunboats to Radio

Once upon a time (but when was that time, really?), The empire travelled by ship. Heavy, slow, inevitable. Colonisers brought brass bands, bureaucrats, Bibles and bullets. They erected radio towers like crosses on conquered hills.

Gandhi understood it first: power is performance. So he performed differently—silence where they expected speeches, spinning wheels where they expected submission. The Salt March wasn’t just a protest; it was a counter-programming effort. While the British Empire broadcast authority, Gandhi broadcast dignity.

(In the café where I write this, a woman argues with her ex-husband on WhatsApp. Her thumb moves like a weapon. Now everything is transmission.)

But Gandhi knew something we have forgotten: that silence is also a language. That resistance can be as simple as refusing to participate in the conversation that power wants to impose.

________________________________________

III. The White Elephant: A Dying Spectacle

The American empire has become what Thais call a white elephant—too sacred to abandon, too expensive to maintain. It stumbles through the world like a drunken millionaire, throwing money at problems it helped create, demanding gratitude for solutions that solve nothing.

Trump’s "24-hour" fantasy isn’t strategy—it’s the last gasp of a dying theatrical tradition. However, the audience has learned to read between the lines. They know the emperor’s promises are written in disappearing ink.

(My grandmother used to say: "Never trust a man who hugs you while looking over your shoulder.")

The white elephant walks, but each step sinks it deeper into the mud of its own impossibility.

________________________________________

IV. Modi’s Embrace: Irony as Strategy

Imagine this: Modi and Trump embracing at some gilded summit, cameras clicking like insects. But Modi’s smile carries the weight of history—the colonised man who learned to play the coloniser’s game better than the coloniser himself.

Today’s India is not America’s disciple. It is its ironic friend, the kind that laughs at your jokes while secretly pitying your delusions. Modi speaks with BRICS in the morning, courts Washington in the afternoon, and invests in yuan diplomacy at midnight. He isn’t choosing sides—he’s choosing to survive.

There’s something beautiful in this silent betrayal. Modi uses the words the empire wants to hear while building a world the empire cannot control.

________________________________________

V. Internet vs. Empire: A Chorus of Witnesses

The emperor no longer speaks alone. He cannot speak alone. He will not be allowed to speak alone.

Gaza live-streams its own siege. TikTok teens mock every presidential blunder with surgical precision. Displaced voices find each other across oceans, weaving solidarity networks that mock the old geography of power.

Mass communication doesn’t just fragment authority—it vaporizes it. Every citizen is now a correspondent, every phone a newsroom, every tweet a potential revolution. The imperial monologue dissolves into a planetary conversation the emperor cannot control.

(But what happens when the conversation becomes so noisy no one can hear the truth?)

________________________________________

VI. AI and Surveillance: The Algorithmic Crown

But wait—the plot thickens, as plots always thicken.

Power adapts. If it cannot control the conversation, it learns to predict it. If it cannot silence voices, it learns to manipulate them. The throne is now digital, invisible, and algorithmic.

Snowden showed us the truth: the empire doesn’t just command—it listens. To everything. Your searches, your purchases, your 3 AM googled anxieties. The surveillance state doesn’t wear military boots; it wears the friendly face of a search engine asking, Did you mean...?

The crown is now made of code. And it’s heavier than gold.

But here’s the trick: algorithms learn from us. We are the ones teaching the machines to control us. Every click is a vote for our own enslavement.

________________________________________

VII. Russia’s Reframing: The Kremlin’s Narrative Renaissance

Putin’s live dialogue with foreign journalists—did you see it? Did you see it? Not the headlines, not the clips, but the actual performance?

He sat there, almost grandfatherly, dismantling the American world order with the patience of a chess master who knows the game is already won. No shouting, no theatrics. Just the quiet confidence of someone who has realised empires don’t die from external attacks but from internal exhaustion.

Lavrov’s nuclear warnings weren’t threats—they were stage directions. Putin’s whispered certainty was the real weapon. They aren’t just challenging American power; they’re rewriting the entire script.

Putin speaks like someone who has already seen the movie’s ending. And perhaps he has.

But here's where the plot becomes truly Borgesian—the Kremlin’s sublime blackmail, whispered through diplomatic channels like a fever dream: *A Trump Tower in Moscow. Miss Russia herself. All yours, Donald. Just give us Ukraine.*

The emperor’s weakness isn’t ideology—it’s vanity. Putin understands this with the precision of a psychoanalyst who's spent decades studying his patient's dreams. The offer isn't political; it's pornographic. Not conquest, but seduction. Not war, but the promise of golden toilets and beauty queens in a city where winter never ends.

(Somewhere in Kyiv, a child draws different planes on different walls. The difference is that these planes are real, and they're coming.)

________________________________________

VIII. China: The Strategic Shadow

China plays an active and silent role, like a Chinese shadow.

Beijing watches from the sidelines as America and Russia perform their noisy drama centre stage. But the real action happens in the shadows—infrastructure deals in Africa, currency swaps in the Gulf, satellite networks spreading across Asia like digital silk roads.

China’s strength lies not in spectacle but in strategic opacity. While empires shout, China edits the subtitles. While others make threats, China makes itself indispensable.

The masterstroke: letting everyone else exhaust themselves with performance while you silently rearrange the furniture.

China doesn’t want to be the next empire. It aims to be the last capitalist in a world where capitalism is no longer viable.

________________________________________

IX. Venezuelan Exiles: Footnotes in a Lithium War

Somewhere in this great geopolitical chess game, millions of Venezuelans exist as footnotes. Not people—footnotes. Their displacement is reduced to logistical problems, their suffering measured in rare earth minerals and cobalt reserves.

Juan Luis Guerra sang about crossing Niagara Falls on a bicycle—impossible, absurd, desperate. That is the Venezuelan tragedy: forced to attempt the impossible while the world argues over who owns the water.

(I know a woman from Caracas who carries photos of her country on her phone like relics. "Venezuela," she says, "now only exists in memory.")

These crises aren’t natural disasters. They are the engineers of a power that has forgotten its humanity.

________________________________________

X. Radical Empathy: Beyond Transactional Leadership

Power must evolve or dissolve—there is no middle ground left.

From Epicurus to Sartre, philosophy has warned us that domination as a virtue is the beginning of all tragedy. Trump’s 24-hour peace fantasy proves the point—speed without care produces collapse, and solutions without empathy create new problems.

Genuine leadership must slow down, listen, remember its duty is not glory but to protect. The emperor must learn to serve, or abdicate.

But here’s the question no one wants to ask: What if power, by its very nature, corrupts empathy? What if the only way to change the system is to destroy it?

________________________________________

XI. The Throne Crumbles into Echoes

The emperor remains, but the throne—once elevated above the crowd—is now surrounded by ten billion witnesses, each with a camera, each with a voice, each with the power to say: *"We saw what you did."*

Today’s audiences don’t applaud blindly. They watch, challenge, remix, and resist. They fact-check in real time. They remember what you said yesterday, last year, last decade.

The monologue is broken. The future will be co-written by voices once silenced, now amplified by the very technology meant to control them.

The empire still performs, but no longer alone. The conversation has become planetary, and the emperor’s voice is just one among billions.

The throne crumbles not from external attack, but from the weight of its contradictions, echoing in chambers that no longer listen.

(And perhaps, somewhere, a child in Caracas finishes drawing his plane on the wall and wonders if one day he might fly.)

________________________________________

Epilogue: The Clock Strikes Zero

...The throne crumbles not from external attack, but under the atomic weight of its own contradictions. And in this very hour—as Lavrov stands frozen in Phnom Penh under the hypnotic observation of Maria Zakharova (Kremlin’s Medusa, her gaze turning hope to stone)—the terrible mathematics achieve their final sum.

Tonight’s Epilogue:
40,000 North Korean shells slither toward Kursk.
Tehran’s envoys leak Mar-a-Lago’s coordinates to dark-web auctioneers.
Micro-drones map the golf course’s 18th hole.
Yet Trump—sweating through his makeup, afraid—still believes he can flip Tehran with a threat. Truly believes. As if the Islamic Republic were an Atlantic City casino deed to seize. He is totally prepared to betray Israel to get it.
The same illusion which Putin sold him:
"Power is not duty—
It is a golden toilet.
Alliances? Flush it away."
Meanwhile, in Rome:
Meloni’s voice cuts through the static: "Words will never fix this conflict." She builds walls where bridges burned. Kissinger labels it "the belligerent job"—but the bunkers are sold out.
Final Frame:
The emperor without a throne
stares at his palm
and finds it
stained
with the ink of betrayed covenants.
We chose minutes over generations.
Trump chose toilets over treaties.
Zero...
...is the only deal he closed.

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

Germán & Co 5/23/25 Germán & Co 5/23/25

America’s Clean-Energy Abdication — A Critical Investigation…

JP Morgan has issued a warning about the risk of stagflation in the U.S. economy. Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, recently expressed his concerns regarding this potential issue. Stagflation is marked by stagnant economic growth alongside high inflation. Dimon emphasized several significant risks contributing to this concern, including geopolitical tensions, large deficits, and ongoing price pressures.

Additionally, concerns over political instability in the energy sector have now become a reality. In the spring of 2025, after returning to the Oval Office, President Donald J. Trump dismantled the fragile consensus that had been guiding the U.S. toward a cleaner energy future.

Life is beautiful…

Simultaneously, JP Morgan issues a warning about stagflation in the U.S. today. Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, has recently expressed concerns about the potential risk of stagflation in the U.S. economy. Stagflation is characterized by a combination of stagnant demand and high inflation. Dimon highlighted several significant risks contributing to this concern, including geopolitical tensions, substantial deficits, and persistent price pressures.

Yesterday's concerns about political turmoil for energy companies have now materialized. In the spring of 2025, upon reclaiming the Oval Office, President Donald J. Trump dismantled the delicate consensus that had guided America toward a cleaner future. Through sweeping executive orders and confidential memoranda, he reversed decades of progress, re-embracing oil, coal, and gas while dismissing renewable energy as unviable.

Dimon's warnings come at a time when the U.S. is facing considerable economic challenges. Despite a temporary reduction in tariffs between the U.S. and China, which had led some institutions, including JPMorgan, to lower their forecasts for a recession in 2025, anxieties about inflation and economic stagnation persist. The Federal Reserve has maintained interest rates steady, adopting a "wait-and-see" approach to future adjustments, which reflects the cautious economic outlook.

Drilling rigs roar back into operation, and smokestacks pierce the twilight, marking a national retreat from wind turbines and solar farms. Once a leader in green innovation, the U.S. now relinquishes its moral authority and competitive advantage, undermining manufacturing, empowering adversaries, and accelerating global warming. The repercussions are felt in the Texas shale fields, the Arctic ice, Detroit factories, and Beijing boardrooms.

The complexity of stagflation lies in its resistance to conventional economic measures. Efforts to combat inflation can exacerbate economic slowdowns, while attempts to stimulate growth can further fuel inflation. Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell underscored this dilemma, warning that sweeping import tariffs could potentially lead to stagflation.

This reckoning is measured in barrels of oil and tons of carbon, shattered trust, and abandoned ideals. America’s strategic gamble places the nation and our planet on a precarious edge. In summary, Dimon's warnings reflect broader concerns about the U.S.'s economic trajectory, emphasizing the need for careful navigation of the current economic landscape to mitigate the risks of stagflation.

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1925648579575636326

By Germán & Co.
Karlstad, Sweden | May 23, 2025

________________________________________

Prologue

Yesterday, we wrote about how politicians create a nightmare of uncertainty for energy corporations. Today, that nightmare has taken physical form. In the spring of 2025, President Donald J. Trump—having stormed back into the Oval Office—tore asunder the fragile consensus that once bound the nation to a cleaner, greener future. With sweeping executive orders and midnight memoranda, he shattered decades of progress and declared America’s devotion to oil, coal, and gas unassailable.

Gone were the lofty pledges to harness the wind, chase the sun, and heal a wounded planet; instead, he proclaimed the clean-energy race unwinnable, its finish line forfeited to foreign rivals. As drilling rigs roared back to life and smokestacks belched their defiance into twilight skies, the earth trembled at this reversal's echo. The United States, once the vanguard of renewable innovation, has willingly abdicated its moral authority and strategic advantage on the global stage.

These reflections plunge into the heart of that fateful choice, mapping the shockwaves that ripple from the shale fields of Texas to the assembly lines of Detroit, from the melting ice of the Arctic to the corridors of power in Beijing and Moscow. It reveals how this abandonment of climate ambition has hollowed out America’s manufacturing base, emboldened adversaries to tighten their grip on future energy markets, and accelerated the march toward catastrophic warming. Perhaps this bad decision is extravagant enough to be considered a formidable luxury jet as a gift. Well, that’s life…

Here is a reckoning of strategy and consequence, where the fallout is measured not only in barrels of oil or tons of carbon, but in shattered trust, forsaken innovation, and the unravelling of the ideals that once defined the American promise. The stakes have never been higher, for in this crucible of policy and power, the fate of a nation and a fragile Earth hangs in the balance.

________________________________________

I. The Moment of Reckoning: From All-You-Can-Eat Buffet to All-In on Fossil Fuels

Policy Pivot

Beneath the facade of a broad "all-of-the-above" energy strategy during Trump's first term was a clear hierarchy of priorities. While the administration presented every energy source—from mountaintop-removing coal to emerging floating offshore wind—equally welcome, the reality was different. Its sharply focused deregulatory agenda and the symbolic withdrawal from the Paris Agreement made it clear: fossil fuels would always take precedence. We have documented this issue with concrete and undeniable facts, demonstrating that the results have been the opposite of what was intended.

Yet that half-hearted plurality now gives way to zealotry. Within days of his return to the presidency, Trump dispatched a flurry of executive orders designed not merely to slow the momentum of clean energy but to arrest it entirely. Where Biden had leaned on federal purchasing power—directing agencies to buy electric vehicles, heat pumps, and domestically manufactured solar panels—the new administration saw only “market distortion.” Those mandates were revoked, replaced by blanket waivers that drove procurement back toward diesel-guzzling trucks and gas-fired boilers.

Perhaps most telling is the fate of the Department of Energy’s Loan Programs Office. Once the unsung engine of America’s cleantech revolution, the LPO funnelled billions into fledgling innovators—companies turning carbon into stone, startups perfecting next-generation battery chemistries, and pioneers of small modular reactors. By suspending new grants, the administration effectively slammed the door on a pipeline of ideas that might have matured into global champions. Hundreds of engineers, investors, and entrepreneurs now watch their timetables unravel, their business models rendered untenable without patient, mission-driven capital.

Even more draconian was the shuttering of the Office of Clean Energy Demonstrations. Established only months earlier to shepherd high-risk, high-reward pilots—from grid-scale storage arrays to hydrogen-fuel-cell hubs—this office embodied the conviction that government could catalyze breakthroughs too hard to finance purely on private balance sheets. Its closure strands dozens of projects in bureaucratic purgatory: community microgrids awaiting approval, pilot plants awaiting permits, research collaborations awaiting final funding agreements. Without a champion in Washington, they will wither or be repurposed into conventional fossil-fuel facilities by more sympathetic state or local actors.

The cumulative message is crystal clear: renewables are not merely downgraded but disavowed. Once the United States teetered on a path toward balanced energy diversification, it has strayed back into the heart of the carbon economy. In practical terms, this means:

Capital flight from innovation. Venture funds and corporate R&D budgets will skew decisively toward enhanced oil recovery, unconventional gas extraction, and next-generation fracking technologies—areas where regulatory walls are being torn down rather than built up.
Supply-chain bifurcation. American manufacturers of solar panels, wind-turbine components, and battery cells face a market with no domestic anchor; overseas competitors in Asia and Europe will fill the void, securing contracts that might once have been “Buy American” staples.
Geostrategic retrenchment. By retreating from the clean-tech frontier, the U.S. cedes leadership in critical minerals processing, electric-vehicle infrastructure, and advanced nuclear, and with it the alliances forged around shared decarbonization goals. Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative now marches unopposed into the markets of Africa and Latin America, pitching gas-to-power as the bridge fuel and exporting Chinese wind and solar solutions with subsidies that American firms can no longer match.
Regulatory signalling. International investors take heed: if the world’s biggest market can be flipped on a whim, why accept risk in any other jurisdiction? Credit spreads on renewable-energy bonds will widen, the cost of capital will climb, and only the most risk-averse portfolios—ironically, those still tied to coal or gas royalties—will remain functional.

What was once a symbolic tilt toward hydrocarbons has hardened into a full-blown retreat from the energy future. The keystone agencies that once lent structure and support to America’s clean-energy ecosystem have been hollowed out, their staffs demoralised, their budgets slashed. The message to innovators is inescapable: build your tomorrow elsewhere, or build nothing at all. And while global competitors stride forward—banking billions in green investments, ratcheting down emissions, and weaving decarbonization into the fabric of their foreign-policy agendas—Washington’s halls grow quiet, the machinery of innovation rusts, and the world wonders whether the United States has forfeited not just a few years, but an entire generation of climate leadership.

________________________________________

Budgetary Cuts

Federal R&D funding for solar and battery research was slashed by over 40% in the FY 2026 budget, while fossil-fuel research—from carbon-capture prototypes to unconventional drilling—received historic boosts.

________________________________________

Regulatory Rollbacks

The Clean Power Plan, already struck down by the courts in 2022, was replaced by watered-down rules that permit existing coal plants to operate indefinitely without carbon controls.

This transformation is not mere bureaucratic tinkering but a declaration that the United States will no longer compete in markets where it does not already hold sway.

________________________________________

II. The Geopolitical Bet: Why Foreign Winners Multiply

China’s Supply-Chain Supremacy

Over the past decade, Beijing invested an estimated $200 billion in clean-energy manufacturing, cultivating a fully integrated chain from polysilicon to end-of-life recycling. Today, Chinese firms control 80–90% of global solar module capacity, accounting for nearly two-thirds of lithium-ion battery production.

Trump’s withdrawal from green incentives leaves U.S. consumers reliant on imports: EU customs data show that solar panels entering the bloc are over 70% Chinese-made, a number set to rise further in the U.S. market.

________________________________________

European Green Industrial Strategy

Brussels has countered China’s ascent with the European Green Deal and Critical Raw Materials Act, making multi-billion-euro investments in onshore battery gigafactories and strategic mineral processing. With Washington abdicating, Europe emerges as the West’s cleantech champion.

________________________________________

South Asia and Latin America as New Frontiers

Indian and Brazilian governments, seizing the opportunity, have rolled out tax holidays and land-at-cost policies for solar and wind developers, attracting project commitments totalling over $60 billion since 2024. Absent U.S. competition, these regions will host the next generation of green infrastructure.

________________________________________

III. Economic Fallout: Jobs, Exports, and Innovation at Risk

Manufacturing Exodus

In 2024, the U.S. had 75 operational battery facilities under construction or planned, nearly half in states that swung for Trump in 2020. With IRA credits at risk, dozens of projects have been paused or relocated to Mexico, Poland, and South Korea.

________________________________________

Intellectual Property Flight

Dozens of pioneering startups—once backed by ARPA-E grants—are now flirting with acquisition by foreign corporations seeking U.S. technology at fire-sale prices. This patent haemorrhage could cost the American economy $15 billion in future licensing revenues.

________________________________________

Trade Deficits Worsen

The U.S. clean-energy trade deficit ballooned to $30 billion in 2024 alone. Without a domestic production base to offset imports, Washington’s strategy amounts to writing a blank check to Beijing’s state-backed industrial champions.

________________________________________

IV. Environmental and Security Risks: Betting on a Sinking Boat

Climate Acceleration

By prolonging coal and gas reliance, U.S. emissions—already up 8% since 2020—will rebound sharply, jeopardizing global targets for limiting warming to 1.5°C. The administration’s Department of Energy projects that U.S. CO₂ output will exceed 6 billion tonnes under current policies by 2030.

________________________________________

National Security Implications

Dependence on foreign clean-energy hardware exposes U.S. critical infrastructure to supply-chain disruptions and potential sabotage. Grid upgrades, slated to integrate smart inverters and battery storage, will instead rely on components designed and manufactured under Beijing’s regulatory reach.

________________________________________

Energy Access and Diplomacy

By alienating allies who view decarbonization as strategic, the U.S. forfeits moral leadership at key forums—COP summits, G7, APEC—undermining broader coalitions to sanction Russia and Iran or to stabilize fragile states through low-carbon development aid.

________________________________________

V. The Intra-GOP Divide: Carbon Conservatives vs. Pragmatists

While the administration rails against clean-energy subsidies as a gift to China, a pragmatic wing of the Republican Party presses for targeted reforms:

Content Restrictions vs. Market Signals

Some GOP senators have proposed tightening foreign-content rules on the IRA credits rather than repealing them. This would preserve U.S. mining, refining, and manufacturing incentives while blocking China-dominated inputs.

________________________________________

Rural and Rust-Belt Resilience

Ohio, Georgia, and Texas communities have staked their municipal fortunes on clean-energy parks. Local leaders warn that slashing credits will trigger bankruptcies, pension shortfalls, and revenue collapses in jurisdictions already reeling from post-industrial decline.

________________________________________

Defense-Energy Nexus

Figures like former Secretary of Defense James Mattis have argued that energy independence requires advanced batteries and microgrids—technologies the U.S. can only master by sustaining its domestic industrial base.

The political tension risks fracturing the GOP’s narrow congressional majority, threatening a policy logjam that benefits no one.

________________________________________

VI. Paths to Redemption: Reimagining U.S. Strategy

Selective Reinvestment

Reauthorizing the tax credits with stricter regional and domestic-content requirements could rebuild U.S. capacity while minimizing China’s market share.

________________________________________

Public–Private Partnerships

Expand ARPA-E and DOE’s Loan Programs Office to underwrite pilot clean-energy hubs in the Heartland, with mission-driven goals akin to the Manhattan and Apollo projects.

________________________________________

Strategic Tariffs 2.0

Calibrated, temporary tariffs on solar panels and batteries from non-Tariff-Alliance countries, coupled with import quotas that phase out over a defined ramp-up period.

________________________________________

Allied Industrial Initiatives

Partnering with the EU, Japan, and Australia on cross-border critical-mineral processing, shared R&D platforms, and joint manufacturing ventures to diversify dependencies away from China.

________________________________________

Civil-Military Synergies

Leveraging defense procurement to guarantee offtake for nascent energy-storage and microgrid firms, creating anchor customers that drive scale economies.

________________________________________

Epilogue

The Trump administration’s retreat from the clean-energy frontier was more than a policy pivot; it was a watershed moment that reshaped the global balance of power, economic trajectories, and the planet’s climatic destiny. By abandoning ambitious renewable-energy goals, withdrawing from international climate agreements, and rolling back domestic environmental regulations, the administration effectively ceded America’s role as a technological vanguard and strategic innovator to rising competitors in Beijing and a reinvigorated European Union.

At its core, the decision to deprioritize clean energy was a profound strategic miscalculation. In the 21st century, energy policy is national security policy. Renewable-energy technologies—from advanced battery storage to next-generation solar photovoltaics—are dual-use platforms with both civilian and military applications. By retreating, the United States forfeited critical ground in sectors that will define economic and military power in the decades ahead. China, leveraging state-directed capital and manufacturing scale, surged ahead in solar panel production, lithium-ion battery manufacturing, and the deployment of electric vehicles (EVs). Meanwhile, Brussels, armed with the European Green Deal, marshaled public and private investment to create a pan-continental energy transition roadmap. The relative retrenchment of U.S. policy has left American firms scrambling to catch up, undermining supply-chain resilience and exposing strategic vulnerabilities in critical minerals and clean-tech components.

The industrial fallout has been no less severe. Clean-energy industries are among the fastest-growing segments of the global economy, offering high-wage manufacturing jobs, export opportunities, and ancillary innovation in materials science and robotics. U.S. states that had begun cultivating clean-tech clusters—particularly California, Texas, and those in the Rust Belt—saw investment shift to regions with more stable policy signals. The hiatus in federal support for research and development (R&D) eroded the once-thriving collaboration between national laboratories, universities, and private-sector innovators. Meanwhile, tariffs and trade disputes further distorted markets, raising costs for solar modules and wind-turbine components while provoking retaliatory measures that threatened U.S. exports.

Perhaps the most profound cost is human. Climate change is a crisis of unprecedented scale, and every year of delayed action deepens the cumulative emissions that drive planetary warming. Rolling back vehicle-emissions standards and freezing fuel-efficiency targets have locked in higher pollution levels, disproportionately burdening low-income and marginalized communities near highways, refineries, and power plants. The administration’s focus on short-term gains in fossil-fuel extraction overlooked the accelerating frequency of extreme weather, wildfires, and sea-level rise—events that carry staggering economic and humanitarian tolls. The moral dimension of climate leadership hinges on intergenerational equity; in relinquishing its mantle, the United States also abdicated moral authority in global forums and negotiations.

History seldom offers graceful verdicts, but the record will be stark. Was this retrenchment a fleeting detour, corrected by subsequent administrations, or the opening chapter of a protracted decline in American industrial preeminence? The answer will depend on the country’s capacity to rebuild, recommit to innovation, and reestablish partnerships both at home and abroad. Promising signs—such as bipartisan support for infrastructure bills that include clean-energy funding, and a resurgence of state and municipal climate pledges—suggest that the ambition void may be filled.

Yet ambition alone is not enough. Restoring leadership demands a coherent strategy that aligns federal incentives, regulatory frameworks, and diplomatic engagement. It requires a renewed emphasis on workforce training, domestic supply chains for critical minerals, and direct investment in emerging technologies like green hydrogen, carbon capture, and next-generation nuclear. The coming decade will test America’s resolve: to seize the opportunities of the clean-energy revolution or to concede further ground to those who see climate action not as a burden, but as the greatest industrial and security imperative of our time.

In the end, the Trump administration’s retreat will be judged not only for what was undone but also for what it galvanized. If it spurred a deeper reckoning—with the limits of partisan divides, the urgency of climate justice, and the strategic stakes of innovation—then history may yet view this era as the crucible from which a more determined, united, and forward-looking America emerged. If not, it risks marking the prelude to America’s long twilight as an energy and industrial superpower.

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

Germán & Co 5/9/25 Germán & Co 5/9/25

Eclipse of the Forgotten: "The Resurgent Legacy of the Blackout Bestiary – Part II

Part 2 explores the mystery fueled by viral momentum and audience demand. We compare two case studies: the Nord Stream pipeline explosions and the Enigmatic Bestiary of the Blackout.

Hypothesis 1: If the Nord Stream blasts in September 2022 are seen as a test of Europe’s dependence on Russian gas rather than isolated sabotage, then the various narratives—ranging from Kremlin false flags to rogue Ukrainian divers—serve as strategic misdirection. By amplifying monstrous "beasts" in public perception, state actors can divert attention from their energy policies and shield classified evidence from scrutiny. Here, the "beast" is the hidden hand obscuring the real motives.

Hypothesis 2: If the Iberian Blackout of April 2025 is treated as a software-centric counterpart to Nord Stream’s hardware attack, then framing it around animal scapegoats or coincidences conceals structural grid weaknesses like low inertia and regulatory delays. Both events suggest that flashy culprits—whether divers or mythical creatures—are used to mask systemic vulnerabilities, allowing stakeholders to delay necessary reforms. Again, the "beast" is the hidden hand evading accountability.

"The Energy Transition: A Critical Analysis of Power"

1. "Plays: The Political Engineering of Energy Sector Chaos"

2. "Nord Stream: From Baltic Lifeline to Geopolitical Flashpoint"

3. "President Donald Trump's Deadly Uppercut to Nord Stream (2019)"

4. "Who Bears Responsibility in the Current Green Energy Crisis?"

5. "Energy Storage: The Holy Grail of Renewable Energy"

6. "Conclusion to The Fables of Blackout"

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1925648579575636326

By Germán & Co.
Karlstad, Sweden | May 22, 2025

________________________________________

a. Introduction

The Energy Transition: A Critical Analysis

Germán & Co. has become a transformative voice in today’s rapidly evolving energy landscape. Our industry-shaping insights have garnered over 250,000 engagements across Energy Central’s platforms. With an industry-leading Reputation Score of 339,812—exceeding 99% of our sector peers—we demonstrate the authority and trust that our analyses command. We are ranked 15th among Energy Central’s global influencers, consistently advancing the energy conversation.

The viral success of publications such as “Greta Thunberg: Decoding the Icon Shaping Climate Discourse” (over 2 million views on X) and “Fluence Energy in the Amazing Voyage of India's Metamorphosis” (3,818 views on LinkedIn in one day and 49,000 views on X) highlights our ability to anticipate trends and translate complex information into actionable insights. Unlike conventional analysts, we combine data-driven precision with strategic vision, positioning Germán & Co. as the preferred partner for decision-makers navigating critical energy challenges. Global leaders rely on our insights to drive measurable progress when clarity is essential.

Our analysis series, “The Enigmatic Bestiary of the Blackout,” has become a cultural touchpoint, achieving over 1,000 views in just 24 hours on LinkedIn and sparking significant discussion with its bold examination of systemic decay. Part 2 of the saga reinforces its sharp argument that animal interference is a convenient scapegoat, a deliberate distraction from collapsing infrastructure and willful political negligence.

This piece is no mere commentary—it’s a myth-busting manifesto. With scalpel-sharp analysis, we expose how certain politicians weaponise ideology as slick marketing, bending facts to suit their agendas. Few sectors suffer more from this distortion than energy. The convenient trope of “nature’s chaos” deflects responsibility, but the uncomfortable truth remains: blackouts aren’t triggered by rogue raccoons—they result from systemic rot.

Part 2 delves deeper into the mystery, driven by viral momentum and audience demand. Join the reckoning and dare to confront the truths that "they" attribute to beasts. We have compared two case studies: Nord Stream and The Enigmatic Bestiary of the Blackout.

Hypothesis 1: If the Nord Stream pipeline blasts of September 2022 are interpreted not merely as isolated acts of sabotage but as a deliberate test of Europe’s dependency on Russian gas, then the subsequent fog of competing narratives—blaming everything from Kremlin false-flags to rogue Ukrainian divers—serves as strategic misdirection. By amplifying monstrous "beasts" in the public imagination, state actors can divert scrutiny from their energy policies, shield classified forensics from independent review, and renegotiate geopolitical leverage. At the same time, the actual technical evidence remains locked beneath official secrecy. In this case, the beast is the hidden hand, manipulating perceptions to obscure the real players and motives.

Hypothesis 2: If the Iberian Blackout of April 2025 is treated as the software-centered analogue to Nord Stream’s hardware attack, then framing the outage around animal scapegoats or freak coincidences similarly conceals structural grid fragilities: low inertia, vulnerable inverter firmware, and regulatory lag behind rapid renewable adoption. Together, the pipeline explosions and the blackout support a broader hypothesis that spectacular culprits—whether divers or mythical lynxes—are routinely deployed to mask systemic vulnerabilities, allowing political and industrial stakeholders to postpone costly reforms until the subsequent failure forces another cycle of blame. Here, too, the beast is the hidden hand, using misdirection to avoid accountability and reform.

________________________________________

On May 24, 2023, Matt Chester, Senior Editor at Energy Central, interviewed us and opened the discussion with a key observation:

"Energy news is no longer a niche topic reserved for industry professionals. Today, major developments in utilities, oil, and gas routinely make mainstream headlines—and for good reason. The energy sector now plays a pivotal role in shaping the global economy, international geopolitics, and even our everyday lives."

This shift underscores just how critical energy has become in today’s world.

In today’s fast-moving energy landscape, following the conversations that shape the industry is more essential—and more time-consuming—than ever. That’s why it helps to have community experts who comb through the headlines and surface the items that are most timely, impactful, and worth your attention. Germán Toro Ghio has been doing that before joining our Energy Central Network of Experts.

When we asked Germán how to navigate the extraordinary geopolitical turbulence facing oil and gas, from Russia’s war in Ukraine to OPEC’s market sway and the counter-moves of the United States and its allies, he offered this reflection:

“That’s a profoundly challenging question. It takes me back to those marathon corporate strategy sessions where we would dutifully model even the most improbable, seemingly absurd scenarios. Tragically, some of those scenarios have now come true, with dire consequences for the global economy and for humanity. As we look back, we must be both transparent and unsparing in our analysis. One crisis stemmed from a grave political miscalculation involving critical energy infrastructure; another lingering health crisis remains cloaked in uncertainty and speculation. Together they serve as a stark reminder of how quickly our world can unravel—and of the imperative to make wise decisions that place everyone’s safety and well-being first.”

On pressing concerns and reasons for optimism in the energy sector:

"I’m deeply concerned by the current trajectory and the reflexive, unexamined decisions it’s producing—though I’ll leave specific technologies out of this discussion for now.. While innovation should always be encouraged, we must never lose sight of the sector’s non-negotiables: dependable power generation and secure fuel supplies. If there’s cause for optimism, it’s that policymakers seem to be learning from past failures. Europe’s overreliance on a single pipeline and supplier stands as a stark lesson—one we cannot afford to repeat." Never forget this picture:

The Anatomy of Political Uncertainty in Energy Markets: A Multidimensional Crisis

The transition to low-carbon energy systems hinges on predictable policy frameworks that allow investors to price risk and allocate capital efficiently. Yet political actors frequently undermine this stability in liberalised markets, weaponizing uncertainty through mechanisms that distort market signals, inflate financing costs, and delay decarbonization. This phenomenon is not incidental but systemic, rooted in electoral cycles, geopolitical posturing, and reactive policymaking. Below, we dissect the five channels politicians amplify uncertainty, revealing how short-term political calculus jeopardizes long-term energy security and climate goals.

________________________________________

b. How Politicians Create Uncertainty in the Energy Sector

1. Rhetorical Signalling: The Power of Words Over Markets

Political rhetoric is rarely idle. Campaign promises, ideological statements, and even casual remarks can trigger significant shifts in energy markets before any legislation is enacted. For example, campaign speeches and spontaneous tweets can influence futures markets months before legal changes. A notable case is President Trump’s 2017 promise to revive “beautiful, clean coal,” which momentarily boosted Appalachian coal indices despite the absence of any supporting legislation (Plumer, 2017; Newell et al., 2019).

When candidates propose radical reforms—such as nationalizing utilities or banning fossil fuels—investors adjust their risk assessments quickly. Newell et al. (2019) illustrate how futures markets for oil, gas, and renewables respond to electoral debates, with price volatility increasing due to populist rhetoric. This “governance by soundbite” phenomenon creates a feedback loop: media amplification of political statements heightens perceived risk, distorting capital flows.

A tweet from a U.S. president about "ending fossil fuels" or a vow from a European leader to "phase out nuclear overnight" could lead to stranded assets or frozen investments, even if such policies encounter legislative blockages.

2. Regulatory Oscillation: The High Cost of Policy Whiplash

Given the sector's capital-intensive, long-term horizons, regulatory stability is the bedrock of energy investment. But abrupt policy reversals—driven by shifting political coalitions or public opinion—impose catastrophic costs. Germany’s nuclear saga epitomizes this: Chancellor Merkel’s 2010 decision to extend reactor lifespans (a pro-nuclear stance) was overturned in 2011 post-Fukushima, mandating a full phase-out by 2022. Overnight, utilities like RWE and E.ON faced €40 billion in stranded assets, while gas plants were hastily approved to fill the gap, raising emissions (Traber & Kemfert, 2012). Similarly, the UK’s 2015 retroactive cuts to solar subsidies bankrupted installers and eroded investor trust for years. Such oscillations force firms to hedge against political, rather than market, risk, raising capital costs and deterring innovation.

3. Strategic Sanctions: Geopolitics as Market Sabotage

Energy infrastructure has become a battleground for geopolitical coercion, with sanctions weaponised to destabilise competitors. The U.S. PEESA sanctions on Nord Stream 2, targeting firms involved in the pipeline’s construction, exemplify how extraterritorial measures override market logic. Despite EU regulatory approvals, the threat of secondary sanctions froze financing and delayed completion by years, raising the project’s cost by €10 billion (de Jong, 2022). These actions signal that even commercially viable projects are subject to political whims, compelling investors to price in "geopolitical risk premiums." The chilling effect extends beyond targeted projects: firms now scrutinise supply chains and partnerships for exposure to rival blocs, fragmenting global energy markets.

4. Politicized Permitting: When Red Tape Becomes a Political Tool

Permitting processes, ostensibly technical, are often hijacked for ideological or electoral ends. Spain’s 2012 suspension of renewable feed-in tariffs—retroactively slashing subsidies—paralyzed its wind and solar sectors, erasing €20 billion in investments and triggering over 50 international lawsuits (del Río & Mir-Artigues, 2012). More subtly, permitting delays for pipelines or grid upgrades can starve projects of capital. In the U.S., partisan battles over federal lands for drilling or renewables create bottlenecks, with permit approvals swinging dramatically between administrations. This politicization transforms bureaucracy into a lever for stifling disfavored technologies, chilling investment even in regions with abundant resources.

5. Security Shocks: The Unquantifiable Risk of Sabotage

Whether state-sponsored or opportunistic, physical attacks on energy infrastructure inject existential risk into markets. The 2022 Nord Stream pipeline explosion severed Europe’s gas supply, forcing insurers to reassess subsea cables, LNG terminals, and offshore wind farms globally. Premiums for such assets surged by 30–50% overnight, with insurers demanding unaffordable war-risk clauses (Kalm, 2024). Unlike market risks, sabotage threats defy actuarial modelling, creating "unknown unknowns" that deter long-term commitments. Politicians exacerbate this by failing to secure cross-border infrastructure or invest in grid resilience, exposing markets to cascading disruptions.

6. The Cumulative Toll: Financing Costs and Delayed Transitions

The IEA estimates that policy uncertainty adds 100–300 basis points to renewable energy financing in emerging markets—equivalent to a 20–30% increase in levelized costs (IEA, 2021). For context, this premium could render a viable solar project in India or Nigeria unbankable. In advanced economies, regulatory whiplash has slowed offshore wind deployment, with developers demanding higher power purchase agreements to hedge against retroactive policy changes. Fossil fuel interests often benefit from this chaos, as investors retreat to incumbent technologies with shorter payback periods, perpetuating carbon lock-in.

7. Toward Stability: Cross-Party Frameworks as Antidotes

Durable decarbonization requires insulating energy policy from electoral cycles. Denmark’s 2012 Energy Agreement, ratified by 95% of parliament, locked in 2050 net-zero targets, spurring consistent offshore wind investment. Similarly, Chile’s 2022 Green Hydrogen Strategy, backed by all major parties, has attracted $20 billion in commitments. Such frameworks prioritize incremental, consensus-driven reforms over grandstanding—a recognition that markets reward predictability, not political theater.

The energy transition is a technological or economic challenge and a test of political maturity. Until leaders cease treating energy policy as a tool for short-term gain, the world will pay a steep price: slower decarbonization, higher consumer costs, and a destabilized climate.

**November 8, 2011 | Lubmin, Germany / Zug, Switzerland** — European and Russian leaders gathered today on Germany’s Baltic coast to inaugurate the Nord Stream Pipeline.

c. Nord Stream: From Baltic Lifeline to Geopolitical Flashpoint

________________________________________

1. Baltic Lifeline (2011)

On Tuesday, November 8, 2011, the quiet Baltic harbour of Lubmin in Germany briefly became the centre of Europe’s energy hopes. Surrounded by a forest of camera cranes, German Chancellor Angela Merkel stood alongside Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, French Prime Minister François Fillon, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte (now NATO’s secretary general), and EU Energy Commissioner Günther Oettinger to inaugurate Nord Stream 1. This 1,224-kilometre twin gas pipeline runs from Vyborg to Germany. The day's rhetoric overflowed with superlatives: the pipeline was described as a "strategic lifeline," destined to provide half a century of reliable supply and free Europe from the unreliable overland routes that passed through Ukraine and Belarus.

Privately, Merkel had reservations. Unlike her predecessor, Gerhard Schröder, whose post-chancellorship role at Gazprom made him Moscow’s favoured German, Merkel does not trust the Kremlin nor view infrastructure as a reliable safeguard. She believed that cooperation was preferable to confrontation, and that the occasion called for optimism.

“Today we bridge not just nations but futures,” she declared, casting Nord Stream as both an engine of prosperity and a bulwark against energy insecurity.

By late 2012, the line was to deliver 55 billion cubic metres of Siberian gas each year—enough to heat 26 million households—while supposedly insulating Europe from the vagaries of transit politics. Yet critics warned that funnelling nearly one-third of the EU’s imports through a single supplier merely traded one vulnerability for another, echoing the continent’s Cold War dependence on Soviet pipelines.

A decade later, those warnings would prove prophetic; the “divine pipeline” would be revealed less as a celestial gift than as a geopolitical fault line.

________________________________________

Image licensed from Shutterstock, rights held by Germán & Co.

_______________________

2. President Donald Trump’s Deadly Uppercut to Nord Stream (2019)

Washington’s decision to sanction Nord Stream 2 in December 2019 marked a dramatic inflection point in the long-running tug-of-war over Europe’s energy future. For most of the 2010s, the twin-pipeline project under the Baltic Sea advanced steadily, promising to double Russia’s direct gas-export capacity to Germany while bypassing Ukraine and other Eastern European transit states. Yet that very promise—of deeper Russian leverage over Europe’s critical energy arteries—also crystallized Washington’s deepest strategic anxieties. When President Donald Trump signed the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act on 20 December 2019, he activated the Protecting Europe’s Energy Security Act (PEESA) and, with it, an unprecedented tool kit of sanctions aimed squarely at the vessels, insurers, financiers, and service providers enabling Nord Stream 2’s final kilometers of pipe-laying.

The immediate fallout was striking. Within twenty-four hours, the Swiss-Dutch contractor Allseas halted operations and withdrew its specialised pipe-laying ship, bringing construction to an abrupt standstill just 160 kilometres from the German coast. European capitals, already divided over the pipeline’s merits, were thrust into an awkward diplomatic triangle: Berlin condemned the U.S. move as extraterritorial overreach, Warsaw and Kyiv applauded it as overdue protection against Kremlin coercion, and Brussels tried—largely in vain—to broker a face-saving compromise. Meanwhile, Moscow vowed to finish the project with its assets, casting the sanctions as proof that American LNG exporters cared less about European security than about grabbing market share.

Yet the drama did more than freeze a single infrastructure project; it signalled a broader shift in U.S. foreign-policy doctrine. For the first time, Washington was willing to weaponize financial sanctions not merely to punish adversaries but to reshape allied countries’ commercial decisions in a sector as sensitive as energy. Over the following year the State Department repeatedly widened the net—issuing interpretive guidance in July and October 2020 that threatened penalties against any entity providing even “non-covered services,” Congress broadened the statutory mandate again with PEESCA in January 2021. When the outgoing Trump administration designated the Russian barge Fortuna and its owner KVT-RUS on 19 January 2021, a blueprint had been laid for using sanctions as an instrument of great-power competition in Europe’s gas markets.

Facing mounting pressure, the Kremlin and the state government of Mecklenburg‑Vorpommern—home to Nord Stream’s German landfall—devised a workaround. In January 2021 Premier Manuela Schwesig (SPD) set up the publicly chartered “Climate and Environmental Protection Foundation – MV” (Stiftung Klima‑ und Umweltschutz MV). Ostensibly green‑minded, the foundation received a €20 million endowment from Nord Stream 2 AG and was empowered to procure vessels, equipment, and services that private firms now shunned for fear of PEESA penalties. Critics labelled it a “sanctions‑evasion vehicle” operated with Moscow’s blessing; supporters argued it preserved local jobs and safeguarded energy security. Berlin watched warily, while Washington warned that laundering transactions through a foundation would not shield participants from future sanctions.

Framed against the cascading crises that followed—COVID-19’s demand shock, the 2021–22 energy-price spike, and Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine—the 2019 sanctions now read like the opening chapter of a longer struggle to define Europe’s energy sovereignty. They exposed rifts within NATO, foreshadowed the Biden administration’s own hard choices (and temporary waiver) on Nord Stream 2, and demonstrated how infrastructure once considered a purely economic undertaking could be recast overnight as a strategic vulnerability. Understanding the origins, mechanics, and consequences of the Trump-era sanctions is essential, not merely to recount a policy skirmish, but to grasp the evolving playbook of energy statecraft in an age when pipelines and tankers matter as much as tanks and missiles.

________________________________________

3. Sabotage in the Baltic (2022)

At dawn on 26 September 2022, two powerful underwater explosions ripped open three of the four Nord Stream strings near Denmark’s Bornholm Island. Seismic stations recorded shocks equivalent to small earthquakes; methane plumes boiled to the surface.

Germany, Sweden, and Denmark quickly labelled the incident "deliberate sabotage." Military‑grade explosive residue was later found on recovered pipe sections, and investigators traced a rented yacht, Andromeda, to a still‑unconfirmed team of covert divers. Whether the culprits were state actors, freelancers, or proxies remains unresolved, but the strategic impact was clear:

Capacity lost: Nord Stream 1—already running at reduced flow—became inoperable; one of Nord Stream 2’s two lines was crippled before it ever shipped a molecule.
Risk repriced: Global insurers and operators reassessed the vulnerability of every subsea pipeline, telecom cable and power link.
NATO alarmed: The Alliance has created a Critical Undersea Infrastructure Coordination Cell, acknowledging that undersea assets are now frontline targets.

________________________________________

4. Strategic Lessons

Energy as Statecraft. Trump‑era sanctions highlighted how financial instruments can halt a multibillion‑euro project without a single soldier crossing a border.
Escalation Ladder. The 2022 blasts showed that sabotage can follow sanctions, turning valves into targets and turning them into bargaining chips.
Alliance Fault Lines. Nord Stream consistently exposed divergent threat perceptions: Berlin versus Washington, Warsaw and Kyiv; Brussels versus Moscow.
Accelerated Diversification. Each blow—sanctions, pandemic, invasion, explosions—pushed Europe to pivot away from Russian gas faster than any policy blueprint.

________________________________________

5. The Road Ahead

Nord Stream’s journey from celebrated lifeline to fractured liability mirrors Europe’s broader quest to marry affordable energy with strategic autonomy. Whether the following molecules arrive as green hydrogen through North‑Sea corridors or as LNG across the Atlantic, one constant endures: molecules and electrons travel only as securely as the politics that protect them.

Europe’s task is to craft an energy system resilient enough that no single sanction, blast, or bargaining chip can again darken its lights—or divide its alliance.

Nord Stream’s arc—from a symbol of post‑Cold‑War optimism to a ruptured monument of realpolitik—captures a larger truth: energy infrastructure is never just about molecules and megawatts; it is about power, trust, and the stories nations tell themselves. The pipeline’s rise and fall reveal three imperatives for the decades ahead:

Diversify or Depend? Europe cannot outsource its security to a single supplier or technology. Gas, renewables, hydrogen, efficiency—all must share the load so that failure anywhere is a catastrophe elsewhere.
Make Policy Boring Again. Markets crave predictability more than subsidies. Durable, bipartisan frameworks beat headline‑driven pivots, lowering capital costs and accelerating the clean‑energy transition.
Securing the Unseen. Cables, pipes, data links—what lies on the seabed underwrites prosperity on land. Protecting this critical undersea web is now as vital as defending airspace.

If leaders absorb these lessons, Nord Stream’s fractured steel may yet serve a purpose: a cautionary landmark pointing toward an energy system that is cleaner, cheaper, and—above all—harder to hold hostage.

________________________________________

References

1. BMWK (Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action) (2022) ‘Extension of nuclear power plant operation for grid stability’, Press release, 17 October. Berlin: BMWK.

2. del Río, P. and Mir‑Artigues, P. (2012) ‘Support for solar PV deployment in Spain: Some policy lessons’, Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 16(8), pp. 5557‑5566.

3. de Jong, M. (2022) ‘Too little, too late? US sanctions against Nord Stream 2 and the transatlantic relationship’, Journal of Transatlantic Studies, 20(2), pp. 213‑229.

4. Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) (2022) Seasonal Assessment of Resource Adequacy (SARA) for Summer 2022. Austin: ERCOT.

5. International Energy Agency (IEA) (2021) World Energy Investment 2021. Paris: IEA.

6. Kalm, H. (2024) ‘NATO’s path to securing undersea infrastructure in the Baltic Sea’, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 29 May. Available at: https://carnegieendowment.org (Accessed: 22 May 2025).

7. Lockwood, M., Mitchell, C. and Hoggett, R. (2016) ‘Competing paradigms of governance in UK energy policy: Calculating for, and governing through, markets’, Energy Policy, 95, pp. 632‑644.

8. Newell, R.G., Raimi, D. and Aldana, G. (2019) Global Energy Outlook 2019: The Next Generation of Energy. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future.

9. North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) (2022) Texas February 2021 Cold Weather Event and Reliability Impacts. Atlanta: NERC.

10. Plumer, B. (2017) ‘Trump Signs Executive Order Unwinding Obama Climate Policies’, The New York Times, 28 March. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com (Accessed: 22 May 2025).

11. Traber, T. and Kemfert, C. (2012) ‘German nuclear phase‑out policy: Effects on European electricity wholesale prices, emission prices, conventional power plant investments and electricity trade’, DIW Berlin Discussion Paper 1219.

12. Wiser, R., Bolinger, M. and Barbose, G. (2017) ‘Wind energy boom‑bust cycles, variability and price drivers in the United States’, Energy Economics, 65, pp. 305‑315.

_______________________________________

d. Who Bears Responsibility in the Current Green Energy Crisis?

An analysis of today's green energy landscape reveals divergent yet critical responsibilities among key stakeholders - from policymakers and financial institutions to well-funded environmental groups with sophisticated advocacy campaigns. The power industry is perhaps the weakest part of this complex chain. Many may wonder why this is the case. Politicians have played a crucial role in shaping the renewable energy landscape by setting ambitious targets and implementing generous subsidies to accelerate the transition from fossil fuels. However, this enthusiasm has sometimes lacked foresight, leading to oversights in critical areas such as energy security and supply diversification. Policymakers have dangerously underestimated the oil industry's enduring influence while failing to address growing security threats. In recent years, cyberattacks, terrorist sabotage, and attacks on critical infrastructure—including the repeated targeting of undersea power cables serving North Sea offshore wind farms—have exposed these vulnerabilities. Europe's over-reliance on a single energy supplier and pipeline network has demonstrated the consequences of such oversight. This crisis underscores a fundamental truth: effective energy policy must marry environmental ambition with operational realism, prioritising security and diversified supply chains. (10)

Indeed, financial institutions, too, have substantially influenced the trajectory of the energy sector, often driven by immediate profitability and compliance with emerging environmental, social, and governance (ESG) criteria. While crucial for long-term sustainability, the banking sector's enthusiastic embrace of renewable projects has occasionally overshadowed essential investments in complementary technologies and infrastructure, such as energy storage and grid modernisation (IEA, 2020; World Economic Forum, 2021). President Donald Trump has been a vocal critic of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) mandates, arguing that they impose burdensome regulations on the energy sector and hinder economic growth. He has taken steps to roll back such policies, including issuing executive orders to halt the enforcement of state laws targeting energy companies over climate change and ESG initiatives. Moreover, the rapid divestment from fossil fuel projects—partly driven by ESG mandates—has unintentionally led to shortfalls in energy supply. This has contributed to market volatility and heightened short-term risks. These developments underscore the importance of financial strategies that support urgent climate action and ensure a stable and managed energy transition. (11)

Center for Sustainability & Excellence+4esgdive.com+4hklaw.com+4 Independent Women's Forum

________________________________________

e. Sustainable Energy: The Paradox of Balancing Idealism and Pragmatism in a Polluted World.

For more than a century, industrial activity has saturated Earth’s ecosystems with pollutants, from microplastics choking marine life to heavy metals leaching into groundwater. The oceans, often romanticised as pristine frontiers, are archives of human negligence: discarded fishing gear smothers coral reefs, agricultural runoff fuels dead zones, and traces of mid-twentieth-century nuclear tests lie even in the Mariana Trench. Beyond Earth, the exosphere has become a junkyard of ambition, cluttered with over 9,000 tons of derelict satellites and rocket debris—a monument to humanity’s habit of externalizing costs. Set against this backdrop, the intense scrutiny of transitional energy technologies sometimes appears disproportionate. Nuclear power, for instance, contributes less than 1 % of the ocean’s radioactivity (naturally occurring potassium-40 dominates), yet fears of contaminated coolant water often eclipse its capacity to avert gigatonnes of carbon emissions.

This is not to dismiss environmental concerns, but to insist on calibration. Climate scientist James Hansen, an early voice on global warming, argues that nuclear energy’s dense, reliable output is indispensable while renewables scale. Modern reactor designs—small modular reactors (SMRs), molten-salt systems, and advanced fuel recycling (pioneered for decades in France)—promise higher safety margins and lower waste volumes. Although a fossil fuel, natural gas can also serve as a tactical reprieve: replacing coal (still 35 % of global electricity) can roughly halve CO₂ per kilowatt-hour and sharply cut particulate pollution. The International Energy Agency emphasises that if paired with strict methane controls and explicit sunset clauses, gas infrastructure can buy time for wind, solar, and grid storage to mature (IEA 2019).

1. National snapshots

France launched its civilian nuclear programme in the 1950s, accelerating after the oil shocks of the 1970s. Today, 56 pressurised-water reactors across 18 sites generate about 70 % of France's electricity, giving the country low-carbon power and energy security. French expertise extends to the European Pressurised Reactor (EPR) and next-generation concepts such as SMRs.
Under Energy Minister Ebba Busch, Sweden has pivoted back to nuclear energy. Legislation enacted in 2023 streamlines licensing, classifies nuclear energy as “green” under the EU taxonomy, and envisages up to ten new reactors—including SMRs—by 2045. Six existing reactors already supply roughly 30 % of Sweden's electricity.
After decades of oscillating policy, Germany shut its final three reactors in April 2023. A 2025 poll showed 55 % public support for revisiting nuclear, and the new conservative government has softened its stance. Yet technical, economic, and political barriers make a near-term restart unlikely; the focus remains on accelerating renewables and securing diversified energy imports.
Spain experienced a nationwide blackout on 28 April 2025, during which all seven reactors shut down automatically yet cooled safely on backup power. The incident reignited debate over Madrid’s roadmap to phase out nuclear power between 2027 and 2035, highlighting the resilience challenges of grids dominated by variable renewables.

2. Activism, politics, and pragmatism

Environmental movements have been pivotal in raising climate awareness, from multilateral milestones like the Paris Agreement to grassroots campaigns like Fridays for Future. Nevertheless, critics note a perceived elitism: policies championed by well-educated urban activists can appear disconnected from working-class realities, a gap exploited by populist parties that blame green measures for higher living costs (Malm 2021; Lockwood 2018). Ultra-conservative factions frame aggressive environmental regulation as an economic burden on younger generations already priced out of housing and stable employment (Spash 2021).

Opponents of transitional technologies warn of moral hazard—investments today might entrench carbon-intensive infrastructure tomorrow. Yet climate models show the cost of delay is steeper. Solar and wind, while transformative, remain intermittent, geographically constrained, and land-intensive; even bullish forecasts suggest they cannot carry global demand alone before mid-century. Outright rejection of nuclear and gas risks prolonging coal’s dominance—a far deadlier adversary. Nuanced policy is essential: prioritise renewables, allow transitional technologies under strict time limits, and embed sunset mechanisms.

In the end, environmentalists must confront uncomfortable trade-offs. Perfect solutions suit a planet changing slowly; ours, warming rapidly, demands pragmatic triage. As Hansen et al. (2013) note, “Opposition to nuclear power threatens humanity’s ability to avoid dangerous climate change.” The same logic applies to the judicious use of gas: to fixate solely on the bridge’s risk is to ignore the precipice on either side.

3. Towards a balanced transition

Constructive convergence is already visible. European policymakers, chastened by recent energy-security shocks, now favour diversified low-carbon portfolios; financial institutions increasingly tie capital to credible transition plans; and some environmental groups are adopting more inclusive, strategically flexible positions. Successful energy transitions will depend on integrating ecological ambition, economic prudence, and robust security, while maintaining public trust through relatable, evidence-based advocacy.

________________________________________

References

1. Hansen, J., et al. (2013). "Preventing Dangerous Climate Change." *Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics.*

2. International Energy Agency (IEA). (2019). "The Role of Gas in Today’s Energy Transitions."

3. Malm, A. (2021). "How to Blow Up a Pipeline." Verso Books.

4. North, D. (2011). "The Environmental Movement and the Politics of Class." Environmental Politics.

5. Lockwood, M. (2018). "Right-Wing Populism and the Climate Change Agenda." Environmental Politics.

6. Spash, C. (2021). "The Political Economy of the Paris Agreement on Human Induced Climate Change." Globalizations.

7. Stokes, L., & Warshaw, C. (2017). "The Politics of Energy and Climate Change in the United States." Energy Policy.

8. United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). (2015). "Paris Agreement."

________________________________________

f. Conclusion of The Fables of Blackout

1. The Anatomy of Infrastructure Failure and Political Deflection

Spain's energy blackouts represent more than isolated technical failures—they constitute a revealing lens through which to examine the complex interplay between infrastructure vulnerability, political accountability, and the contested narratives that emerge when systems fail. The phenomenon of "El Apagón Felino" serves as a particularly instructive case study, not merely because a lynx was initially blamed for a grid failure, but because this scapegoating reveals the systematic tendency of institutions to externalize responsibility when confronted with the uncomfortable reality of their inadequate planning.

This pattern of deflection is neither accidental nor unique to Spain. When critical infrastructure fails, the immediate institutional response often involves identifying the most politically palatable explanation—preferably one that absolves human decision-makers of responsibility. Wildlife, weather events, or "acts of God" become convenient culprits, deflecting attention from the more uncomfortable truths about deferred maintenance, inadequate investment, or systemic design flaws. The lynx becomes a metaphor for broader institutional failures to acknowledge and address the growing gap between ambitious renewable energy targets and the fundamental infrastructure investments required to support them.

2. The Paradox of Renewable Success and Grid Instability

Spain's position as a renewable energy leader presents a fascinating paradox that illuminates the complexities of energy transition. The country has achieved remarkable success in renewable deployment—solar and wind now constitute significant portions of its energy mix, positioning Spain as a climate policy exemplar. Yet this success has exposed profound vulnerabilities in the broader energy ecosystem, creating new forms of instability even as it addresses others.

The rapid scaling of renewable capacity has fundamentally altered the physics of the Spanish grid. Traditional power systems were designed around the predictable, controllable output of centralized fossil fuel and nuclear plants. Integrating massive amounts of variable renewable energy has introduced new technical challenges that existing infrastructure was never designed to handle. Grid operators now must manage dramatic fluctuations in supply that can occur within minutes, as cloud cover shifts across solar installations or wind patterns change across vast wind farms.

This transformation has created what energy engineers describe as the "integration challenge"—the gap between renewable energy potential and the grid's ability to utilize that potential effectively. Spain regularly experiences periods where renewable generation exceeds demand, forcing operators to curtail output and waste clean energy. Conversely, during periods of low renewable generation, the system struggles to maintain stability without adequate backup capacity or storage resources.

3. The Critical Role of Energy Storage in Grid Transformation

Energy storage emerges as perhaps the most critical missing piece in Spain's renewable puzzle. The intermittency challenge is not merely a technical inconvenience—it represents a fundamental mismatch between the temporal patterns of renewable energy generation and electricity demand. Solar generation peaks during midday hours when commercial demand is high but residential demand remains moderate, while wind patterns often peak during nighttime hours when overall demand is lowest.

The temporal mismatch creates cascading problems throughout the energy system without adequate storage capacity. Excess renewable energy that cannot be stored becomes a liability, forcing grid operators to curtail clean energy production or export surplus power at unfavourable prices to neighbouring markets. During periods of low renewable generation, the system must rely heavily on remaining fossil fuel plants, which are increasingly expensive to maintain as they operate less frequently and less predictably.

Deploying grid-forming batteries and other advanced storage technologies represents more than just a technical upgrade—it constitutes a fundamental reimagining of how electrical grids operate. Unlike traditional "grid-following" renewable installations that feed power into existing grid infrastructure, grid-forming technologies can help provide the stability services that traditional power plants once provided. These systems can respond to frequency fluctuations, provide voltage support, and help maintain grid stability during rapid changes.

However, the required storage deployment scale is staggering. Spain would need to install storage capacity measured in tens of gigawatt-hours to manage its renewable fleet's variability effectively. The investment would rival the cost of the renewable installations themselves. This reality highlights why storage cannot be treated as an afterthought in renewable energy planning but must be integrated from the earliest stages of system design.

4. Economic Interests and the Battle for Energy's Future

The ideological battles surrounding the energy transition cannot be separated from the powerful economic interests that shape energy policy and infrastructure investment. The renewable energy sector has evolved into a massive industrial complex, with manufacturers, developers, and financial institutions holding billions of dollars in assets tied to continued renewable deployment. These stakeholders have powerful incentives to promote rapid renewable expansion, sometimes with insufficient attention to the infrastructure investments needed to support that expansion effectively.

Simultaneously, incumbent fossil fuel and nuclear industries face existential threats from renewable energy growth. Their responses have ranged from attempting to slow renewable deployment through regulatory and legal challenges to pivoting their business models to maintain relevance in a changing energy landscape. Utility companies are caught in the middle, maintaining grid reliability while navigating rapidly changing technology costs, regulatory requirements, and customer expectations.

Financial institutions add another layer of complexity, as they increasingly view renewable energy projects as attractive investment opportunities while simultaneously holding significant exposure to existing fossil fuel infrastructure. This creates complex incentive structures where the same institutions may simultaneously finance renewable energy expansion and lobby against policies that would accelerate the retirement of existing fossil fuel assets.

The result is an energy policy landscape shaped as much by these competing economic interests as by technical requirements or environmental concerns. Subsidy structures, market design rules, and regulatory frameworks often reflect political compromises between these interests rather than optimal engineering solutions. Spain's experience illustrates how this dynamic can lead to renewable energy deployment that outpaces supporting infrastructure, creating new vulnerabilities even as it addresses climate concerns.

5. Regulatory Frameworks and the Challenge of Adaptive Governance

The regulatory challenges exposed by Spain's renewable transition extend far beyond simple rule-making to fundamental questions about how governance systems adapt to technological change. Traditional electricity regulation developed around stable, predictable systems dominated by large, centralized power plants. Integrating massive amounts of variable renewable energy requires new regulatory approaches to accommodate uncertainty, promote flexibility, and coordinate across multiple time scales and geographic boundaries.

Current regulatory frameworks often struggle to price the true value of flexibility and reliability in systems with high renewable penetration. Traditional electricity markets focus primarily on energy commodity prices, with limited mechanisms to reward grid stability services that become increasingly valuable as renewable penetration increases. This creates situations where renewable energy installations can appear economically attractive in isolation while imposing hidden costs on overall system stability.

Spain's experience suggests that regulatory evolution must occur at the same pace as technological deployment. Delayed regulatory adaptation creates periods of uncertainty that can discourage the infrastructure investments needed to support renewable integration. Grid operators, storage developers, and other critical system participants need clear, consistent regulatory signals to justify the substantial investments required for a successful energy transition.

6. Geopolitical Complexity and Energy Security in Transition

The broader geopolitical context surrounding energy infrastructure adds layers of complexity that go far beyond domestic policy considerations. The Nord Stream pipeline attacks, cyberattacks on grid infrastructure, and threats to undersea power cables illustrate how energy systems have become critical components of the international security architecture. For energy companies operating in this environment, geopolitical risk has evolved from a peripheral concern to a central business consideration.

Spain's position as a European energy hub connected to North Africa through undersea cables and to France through cross-border transmission lines makes it particularly vulnerable to geopolitical disruption. The country's renewable energy transition occurs against broader European energy security concerns, Russian energy supply disruptions, and growing awareness of energy infrastructure as a target for state and non-state actors.

This geopolitical dimension creates additional challenges for energy system planning. Infrastructure investments that make economic sense from a purely domestic perspective may become liabilities if they increase exposure to international disruption. Conversely, investments in energy independence and resilience may be economically suboptimal in the short term while providing crucial strategic value over longer time horizons.

7. The Management Challenge: Navigating Radical Uncertainty

For energy company executives operating in this environment, the challenge extends beyond traditional business management to navigating fundamental uncertainty about the future structure of energy systems. The transition from fossil fuels to renewables represents not merely a fuel switch but a comprehensive transformation of energy system architecture, market structures, regulatory frameworks, and geopolitical relationships.

Traditional business planning models, built around relatively predictable regulatory environments and stable technology costs, become inadequate when facing the radical uncertainty of the energy transition. Companies must simultaneously manage existing assets with declining long-term value, invest in new technologies with uncertain returns, and navigate regulatory frameworks in flux.

The Spanish experience illustrates how quickly energy system realities can change. Companies that invested heavily in renewable development faced unexpected curtailment and grid stability challenges. Utilities that deferred grid modernization investments discovered that their infrastructure could not accommodate the renewable energy they were required to integrate. Financial institutions that provided capital based on traditional energy system assumptions faced new categories of stranded asset risk.

8. Toward Integrated Energy System Planning

Spain's renewable energy transition offers crucial insights for other countries and regions embarking on similar transformations. The most important lesson may be that successful energy transition requires integrated system planning that addresses renewable energy deployment, grid infrastructure modernization, storage development, and regulatory framework evolution as interconnected challenges rather than separate issues.

The technical requirements for high-renewable energy systems are now well understood. The challenge lies in developing institutional capabilities to coordinate investments across these multiple dimensions while managing the political and economic interests that shape energy policy. Spain's experience suggests that countries can avoid some of the growing pains of renewable transition by treating grid modernization and storage deployment as prerequisites for, rather than consequences of, large-scale renewable energy development.

This integrated approach requires new forms of collaboration between government agencies, utility companies, renewable energy developers, and technology providers. It also requires regulatory frameworks sophisticated enough to provide appropriate price signals for the full range of services needed to maintain grid stability in high-renewable systems.

The stakes of getting this integration right extend beyond technical performance to questions of public confidence in renewable energy transition. Infrastructure failures that can be blamed on renewable energy integration, regardless of their actual causes, provide ammunition for opponents of climate action. Conversely, successful integration that maintains high levels of grid reliability while achieving deep decarbonization can be a powerful demonstration of renewable energy viability.

Spain's ongoing experience will continue to provide valuable insights as the country works to resolve the tensions between its renewable energy ambitions and infrastructure realities. The lessons learned—both positive and negative—will prove invaluable for the dozens of other countries now embarking on similar transitions, facing similar challenges, and navigating similar complexities in their own journeys toward sustainable energy systems.

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

Germán & Co 5/7/25 Germán & Co 5/7/25

OPEC's 'Mother of All Battles' Sparks Global Clash Against the Fracking!

Just as OPEC’s technocrats quietly negotiate oil production amid global volatility, the Vatican’s cardinals clash over doctrine in an era of waning authority. Both institutions navigate a fragmented world where traditional hierarchies are dissolving—a condition mirrored in the persona of Madonna Louise Ciccone, the “Queen of Pop.” Far beyond her image as an erotic provocateur, Madonna symbolizes the evolution of Western iconoclasm, her career tracing America’s oscillation between Puritan restraint and capitalist spectacle. Her provocative use of Catholic imagery, rooted in her upbringing, reflects a deeper engagement with the sacred and the profane.

In stark contrast, Russia today marks the 80th anniversary of Victory Day under the shadow of war in Ukraine. Once a solemn tribute to Soviet sacrifice, the Red Square parade has become a stage for Vladimir Putin’s historical revisionism, where memory is militarized to justify present aggression. Drone strikes near Moscow underscore the parade’s shifting symbolism—from unity and resilience to a spectacle of embattled power. Together, these moments reveal how power, identity, and memory are being redefined across political, religious, and cultural spheres.

¨The energy sector with its sword outstretched...

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1919765056083947783

By Germán & Co.
Karlstad, Sweden | May 7, 2025

________________________________________

Introduction

As OPEC unleashes a strategic flood of crude oil into saturated markets, the global energy landscape quivers under the weight of retaliatory trade policies and resurgent ideological ghosts. This surge in production—a counterstrike against the U.S.-led shale revolution and escalating tariff wars—has thrust energy markets into chaos, with Brent crude prices plummeting to levels unseen in years. The cartel’s manoeuvres, timed against a backdrop of slowing growth and Washington’s protectionism, expose the brittle interdependence of modern geopolitics: petrostates scramble for revenues, American frackers teeter on insolvency, and maritime chokepoints grow tense as tankers glutted with cheap oil idle offshore. Meanwhile, half a world away, another ancient institution—the Catholic Church—grapples with its existential reckoning, its conclaves echoing with clashes as profound as those reshaping energy alliances.

Over the next few years, maritime logistics will adjust through new tanker builds, optimized shipping routes, port capacity expansion in growing regions, and infrastructure underutilization in declining ones. Insurers and shipping companies will navigate ongoing risks and compliance with environmental regulations.

Long-term Consequences

Long-term logistics could reflect permanent regionalization of oil trade, shifts toward shorter routes, development of alternative maritime channels (e.g., Arctic routes), specialized ship technologies, and new port hubs in strategic locations. Insurance and security strategies will evolve alongside geopolitical stability.

________________________________________

Conclusion

The confluence of rising OPEC production and an escalating global trade war is producing multidimensional shocks that extend far beyond the immediate fluctuations in commodity prices. These developments are reverberating across the global economic system, destabilizing energy markets, reconfiguring geopolitical alliances, and straining the logistical architecture that underpins international energy trade. In the short term, these shocks demand swift and adaptive policy interventions to stabilize supply chains, shield vulnerable economies, and prevent inflationary spirals. But the medium- and long-term implications are far more consequential: they point toward a deep structural transformation in how energy is produced, distributed, and politicized in the 21st century.

This transformation entails shifting from the post-Cold War assumptions of open markets and energy interdependence toward a more fragmented and securitized global order. Countries are increasingly re-evaluating their energy strategies, prioritizing national resilience over efficiency, and doubling down on domestic capacity, strategic reserves, and bilateral agreements. For energy-importing nations, the pressure to diversify sources and accelerate clean energy transitions has intensified as a response to environmental imperatives and as a strategic hedge against geopolitical vulnerability. Meanwhile, traditional energy exporters face renewed volatility, as market power becomes more precarious in a world where demand patterns shift and political risks rise.

At the geopolitical level, the breakdown of multilateral coordination—in trade, climate policy, and energy governance—is giving rise to a multipolar competition over technological dominance, resource access, and supply chain control. Emerging alliances and rivalries are being shaped not just by ideological affinities, but by infrastructural dependencies, critical mineral access, and regional security calculations. The global energy order is entering a phase of recalibration, where the lines between economic policy, national security, and environmental strategy are increasingly blurred.

Navigating this period of upheaval requires more than reactive policymaking; it calls for strategic foresight anchored in long-term thinking, institutional resilience, and international cooperation. Policymakers must balance the urgent need to manage volatility with the foresight to design adaptive frameworks that anticipate future disruptions. This includes strengthening regional energy integration, investing in flexible infrastructure, reinforcing diplomatic mechanisms, and embedding energy policy within broader strategies for sustainable development, technological sovereignty, and economic justice. Only through such a multifaceted and forward-looking approach can the international community hope to mitigate systemic risks while seizing the transformative opportunities emerging in this rapidly evolving global energy landscape.

Sources:

International Energy Agency (IEA) World Energy Outlook and energy system reports, along with our own notes.

Gratitude is our heartbeat.

Inflation bites, platforms shift, and every post now fights for survival. We’re holding the line with premier tools, licensed software, and striking images—but we can’t do it alone.

Help us stay loud:

One click: Like, repost, or share on X, LinkedIn, or Energy Central—free, private, game-changing.

One gift: PayPal gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com | IBAN SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611 | Swish 076 423 90 79 | Stripe (donation link).

Each gesture—tiny or titan—powers the words you read.

Thank you for keeping the flame alive.

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1915515888515899541

Just a Single Penny in 2025—Yet the Work Burns Bright

The times are uncertain. The need for clarity is not.

Introduction:

I. Suspicion: The Poisoned Crown

II. Empire: The Red Continent

III. The Poet: Abundance in Red

IV. The Actor: Pride in Red

V. The Builder: Prosperity in Red

Epilogue: The Red Destiny

The Author

Doubt.

You can't possibly deny me...

The task ahead is not to fear them but to recognise, safeguard, and work with them…

The task ahead is not to fear them but to acknowledge, protect, and collaborate with them…

Just a Single Penny in 2025—Yet the Work Burns Bright

The times are uncertain. The need for clarity is not.

The Uncomfortable Truth About Wind Energy in the Iberian Peninsula and Its Global Impact

Introduction: When Giants Return

Windmills in History: From Progress to Symbol

Disinformation and Its Mechanisms

Spain and Mexico: Economic Engines of Transition

Global Lessons: A Shared Transformation

Conclusion: The Giants Are Real

The Author

Doubt.

You can't possibly deny me...

This is the juncture at which history finds itself. In the absence of restraint, memory, and truth, politics devolves into mere spectacle, energy becomes a tool of coercion, and democracy deteriorates into a mockery.

Energy: a constant tug-of-war…

Prologue

Just a Single Penny in 2025—Yet the Work Burns Bright

The times are uncertain. The need for clarity is not.

Prelude: Kennedy, Khrushchev, and the Measure of Humanity

I. Bannon’s Creed and Trump’s Stage

II. Vodka, Fingers, and the Ritual of Collective Despair

III. The Farce

IV. The Alaska Summit: A Theatre of Shadows

V. Outcry in Europe and NATO: Deficits and Determination

VI. The Real War: Energy

Fossil Veins and Critical Minerals

Fossil Veins of War: Disinformation and Amnesia

Anchorage as Allegory

Epilogue: The Choice of Humanity

Complementary Annex

1. Diplomatic Context

2. European Reactions & NATO

3. The $750 Billion Energy Pact

4. War for Energy

5. Global Conflicts

6. Moral and Historical Parallels

Conclusion

References

The Author

You can't possibly deny me...

Executive Summary

Just a Single Penny in 2025—Yet the Work Burns Bright

The times are uncertain. The need for clarity is not.

The clash of two worlds

Two portraits, according to Lagarde

The origins of their strategies

A wounded president

The energy war

Cards on the table

Possible scenarios

The post-summit spin

Spassky and Fischer in Alaska

Epilogue: A midsummer dream in the Arctic

The Author:

You can't possibly deny me...

Executive Summary

Pulitzer Prize for genocide denial. Three point nine million dead. Say it again — three point nine million.

Just a Single Penny in 2025—Yet the Work Burns Bright

The times are uncertain. The need for clarity is not.

EPILOGUE: THE HUMAN CONDITION

The Author:

You can't possibly deny me...

The Trump over the Bygg Sting EU.

Executive Summary

Not a Single Penny Has Found Its Way into Our Piggy Bank in 2025

Under the clear-eyed wisdom of Aristotle—who in Nicomachean Ethics celebrated generosity as the art of giving just the right amount, to the right cause, at the perfect moment—we declare with steadfast resolve: throughout all of 2025, not one penny of support has graced our coffers.

Timeline: Key Events Ahead of the Alaska Summit

Pulitzer Prize for genocide denial.
Three point nine million dead.
Say it again — three point nine million.