"I Was Saved By God To Make America Great Again…

A night melody in an instant…

Amidst the biting chill that enveloped the District of Columbia today, the inauguration of the 47th president of the United States, Donald Trump, was generously hosted within the magnificent central rotunda of the Capitol building. This majestic space, nestled beneath the towering and historic dome—an architectural masterpiece completed between 1818 and 1824—radiates grandeur and significance. The rotunda, a symbol of the enduring democratic spirit that has flourished for 237 years, stands as the "symbolic and physical heart" of the Capitol. What a marvellous moment!

The atmosphere swells with anticipation as the navy's chorus, a vibrant tapestry of young sailors hailing from a mosaic of cultures and backgrounds, takes centre stage. Clad in crisp uniforms, their faces radiate enthusiasm and pride. As they begin to sing, their angelic voices intertwine harmoniously, proclaiming with heartfelt fervour, "Glory, glory, hallelujah!" Each note echoes through the air, infusing the surroundings with a palpable spirit of unity that underscores the essence of a nation coming together.

On this momentous day dedicated to Martin Luther King Jr., the visionary who dared dream of a brighter America, the air is thick with anticipation. The newly inaugurated president stands close by, a look of profound contentment and optimism gracing his face as he watches history being written alongside his predecessor.

While American democracy is not without its imperfections, it nonetheless represents a form of governance that exemplifies democratic principles. In contemporary times, the United States has reaffirmed its status as a prominent nation, particularly in contrast to one-party dictatorships that lack the mechanisms for power transition and the fundamental rights of citizens to express dissent. Recent events have provided a poignant reminder to dictators globally regarding the true essence of democracy.

The newly inaugurated president has directed his positive messaging towards previously highlighted concerns. He commences with what may be perceived as the most unexpected announcement, the revitalization of the combustion automotive industry. This initiative will ultimately allow individuals to determine their preferred technological choices. In relation to the energy sector, the administration has reaffirmed its commitment to the oil and gas industry, encapsulated by the slogan "Drill, baby, drill," alongside the suspension of the Inflation Reduction Act. President Trump also moves to exit the Paris Agreement. The president's new political agenda included discussions on migration, the renaming of the of Mexico, the fentanyl crisis, and issues concerning Panama and the influence of China on the Panama Canal.

Notably, the president has chosen to overlook the ongoing conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which is likely to become a significant point of contention for the Trump administration.

Why? ….

The Owner of Non-Man and Other Tales… Second edition, revised and expanded…

Help us make a dream come true…

From a young age we listen to the instructions of the elderly in the sense that we must be able to choose our path in life. It's a nice metaphor.

There are those who, complying with this, prepare themselves to travel the highways of life, provide themselves with fast engines and soft seats. Others, simpler, choose secondary roads where the speed does not produce so much vertigo and the tolls are cheaper. Many have to join forces and travel the kilometers in collective buses that force the touches and strident music. And there are too many who have no other option than to walk along the humble paths crossing puddles or boulders and threatened by wild beasts or insects. This is the vineyard of the Lord, and everyone can make use of their free will. Say.

Reading the stories of Germán Toro Ghio one discovers that there are also those who chose all paths. And they also added the alternatives of lifts, elevators (and descenders), cliffs, flying devices and perhaps how many more.

With its eight stories, The Owners of No Man's Land takes us to a world so real that, unfortunately, we tend to forget it. From the first story, he (Germán) rides the maelstrom of a roller coaster in which he mixes the discomforts of a Moscow hotel with the adventures in the Nicaraguan jungle. He is a de facto witness to the invasion of the USA army in Panama and his cousin of millenary stubbornness at the same time, without us being able to deduce which of the two experiences was more dangerous. He celebrates supposed birthdays in the company of an aphonic Fidel Castro (what a contradiction!) in a city of Havana corroded by sea salt or political blunders. He walks through one of the most unusual borders in the world, the one that divides the island of Hispaniola. He witnesses the sun sheltering us with unusual loves, in this case, his friend "Pepe" who, on a streak of good fortune, attracts them to a stale gypsy princess and a one-eyed gypsy king in the nights of Madrid and prologues his luck in the world of love to an island called Grinda in the Stockholm archipelago where Alexander's honey captivates.

Germán also takes us to a café in Paris where Ernest Hemingway is in existential conversations about life, accompanied by the sweet notes of a Santa Teresa rum, which invades the soul with harmony and helps the journalist and writer try to persuade some young gang members to change the course of their lives, in this world of violence, organ trafficking, and arms. He evokes the spirit of the Nicaraguan poet and priest Ernesto Cardenal, particularly in his mesmerising "Ode to Marilyn Monroe". This remarkable work invites him to explore the labyrinth of the mind's afflictions, guided by the brushstrokes of legendary artists such as Sorolla, Munch, Botero, and Modigliani. Alongside this artistic journey, we encounter the candid whispers of Truman Capote in his poignant "Unanswered Prayers", which lays bare the frailties of our contemporary society, political systems, and monarchies. Ultimately, Germán leads us to a heartwarming conclusion with the charming figure of "il Nono", a grandfatherly character we all wish we could have known.

The book is magnified by experiences that have taken place outside the battlefields, far from palaces and ambitions. In other words, the principle of freedom of expression is paramount, even when individuals may endure defamation's repercussions. With these stories, Germán Toro Ghio allows us to taste something of everything he keeps in his cupboard, and I hope he will continue to cook and deliver in successive books.

*Juan Forch, Puerto Octay, Chile

*Film director, writer, and political scientist is renowned for the 1990 "NO" campaign. / https://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/movies/oscar-nominated-no-stirring-debate-in-chile.html

PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com

————————————————————————————————————————————————————

O gods, women, and men with the souls of gods and goodwill, we request your solidarity and support for launching the second revised and extended edition of "The Owner of Non-Man Lan and Other Tales" in November 2025. We have already contacted a senior editor at Penguin Random House in London to help us create a remarkable and distinctive book handcrafted to serve as an exceptional corporate gift.

Thanks in advance...

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

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

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

Gratitude is a vital aspect of our existence...

In a world that's constantly growing and grappling with inflation, the art of blogging faces its fair share of hurdles. To keep our content top-notch during these challenging times, we've poured resources into top-tier software, licenses, and stunning copyrighted images, among other essentials. But fear not, we're not navigating this journey alone! Just last week on "X," actions like "liking" or "retweeting" have become your secret weapons—free and private, thanks to "Musk" your support through these simple yet impactful gestures is not just a token of appreciation but a significant contribution that shapes our journey!

If you're feeling motivated to make a difference, consider extending your generosity through PayPal at gjmtoroghio@germantoroghio.com, or by using our IBAN account: SE18 3000 0000 0058 0511 2611. Alternatively, you can support our blog with a secure contribution via Stripe using the donation link. Every little bit helps!

Thank you for being a part of our journey! Your generous support is truly invaluable to us! It plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our goals and make a positive impact. Thank you for being such an important part of our journey!

https://x.com/Germantoroghio/status/1881554742188679191

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

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

Donate

Natural Gas Terminal AES ANDRES, located in the Dominican Republic. Image provided by AES Dominicana.

Andrés Gluski, President and CEO of AES, articulated this perspective during the World Economic Forum held in Davos, Switzerland, in January 2023, stating, "I am confident we will need natural gas for the next 20 years." He further emphasized, "We can start blending it with green hydrogen today."

Not Angela, not...

Image by Germán & Co is fully owned via Shutterstock.

Because…

The president's support for U.S oil and gas sector, which places him in direct opposition to Russian interests. The illustration above highlights the gravity and consciousness surrounding the Trump administration's strategy to unleash a torrent of oil and natural gas onto the global stage, wielding it as a tool of geopolitical power.

Let’s not forget the dire straits Russia faced following the Cold War (1991)—a nation grappling with the shadows of a failed state and widespread poverty. Some might argue that this cycle of suffering has deep roots, tracing back to the days of Catherine the Great and persisting through the Soviet era, where the Russian Empire kept its people in a state of despair. That is why President Vladimir Putin (Russia=China) seeks to achieve the same objective: to flood the world with Eurasia's vast gas reserves. A train wreck…

... Gazprom has often analyzed from its core business perspective, i.e., gas. However, during the Putin era, it is acquiring a relevant position within the set of instruments available to the Russian government to intervene in the economy and the country's relations with the outside world. (Gazprom, "An instrument of Russian economic and foreign policy." Rodrigo Sánchez Andrés, 2005, Spain).

A man who feels betrayed by the West…

Lieutenant Colonel Vladimir Vladimirich (Platov) Putin, a former agent of the KGB, served as a spy in Dresden, located in the now-defunct German Democratic Republic, from 1984 to 1990, during the latter stages of the Cold War. He ascended to the position of supreme president of the Russian Democratic Federal Republic. President Putin twenty-three years, has cited Ukraine's initial efforts to pursue NATO membership as the principal rationale for the Russian invasion that commenced on February 24, 2022.The leaders of the alliance have consistently emphasized that the decision regarding membership rests with each European nation. However, NATO's eastward expansion has particularly provoked Putin, who asserts that Secretary of State James Baker and other Western officials assured Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev in 1990—during the period when a unified Germany joined NATO—that the alliance would not extend "one inch eastward."

George Kennan, the architect of the "containment" policy towards the Soviet Union, would likely have comprehended Putin's response. In 1997, Kennan articulated that "expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post–Cold War era." He further warned that such a decision could exacerbate nationalistic, anti-Western, and militaristic sentiments within Russian society; negatively impact the evolution of Russian democracy; revive Cold War tensions in East-West relations; and steer Russian foreign policy in directions contrary to Western interests.

Putin contends that Russia is entitled to a sphere of influence in its "near abroad." Despite Kennan's insights, he failed to persuade President Bill Clinton or his advisor on Russia, Strobe Talbott. Additionally, the assurances provided by Secretary Baker and NATO leaders lack the binding nature of a treaty or formal agreement. Nevertheless, Putin maintains that the West betrayed Russia during the post-Soviet era, as many Eastern European countries subsequently joined NATO. This perceived betrayal is a significant factor motivating his current aggression.

However, this alleged betrayal does not equate to a breach of a formal agreement, a violation of which Putin himself has committed. By signing the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances in 1994, the Russian Federation pledged not to threaten or employ military force or economic coercion against Ukraine, Belarus, and Kazakhstan. Consequently, Ukraine relinquished its nuclear arsenal and joined the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear state. It is now facing the repercussions of its trust in Russia to uphold its international obligations.

The Imperial Dream…

President Vladimir Putin is never going to give up dreaming of making Russia an Empire again…

Putin’s nuclear warnings: heightened risk or revolving door?

Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist By Stephen J. Cimbala, Lawrence J. Korb | March 28, 2024

In his State of the Nation address February 29, Russian President Vladimir Putin issued one of his most explicit warnings about the danger of nuclear war in Ukraine and noted that Russian strategic nuclear forces “are in a state of full readiness” and able to hit targets in the West. In addition, Russian military files from 2008 to 2014—leaked recently to the Financial Times—seem to suggest that Russia’s threshold for nuclear first use is lower than Western military experts had assumed. Some 29 classified Russian military documents include discussions of war gaming and reportedly identify operational thresholds for the first use of so-called tactical or non-strategic nuclear weapons. Commenting on the unusal dump of secret Russian documents, Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center in Berlin, said: “They show that the operational threshold for using nuclear weapons is pretty low if the desired result can’t be achieved through conventional means.”

Coming on the heels of a suggestion by French President Emmanuel Macron that the option of sending NATO ground forces into Ukraine was under discussion within the alliance, the leaked documents on Russian nuclear first use seem both timely and significant. On the other hand, in previous statements about Russian military doctrine for deterrence and possible nuclear employment, many Russian officials have stressed that nuclear weapons would only be used in response to a nuclear attack on Russia or its allies, or in cases of threat to the survival of the regime and nation posed by a war with conventional weapons. In response to the leaked documents, a Putin spokesperson commented: “The main thing is that the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons is absolutely transparent and is spelled out in the doctrine. As for the documents mentioned, we strongly doubt their authenticity.”

Regardless of the authenticity of these documents, references to the possibility of Russian nuclear first use in Ukraine cannot be treated as idiosyncrasies or departures from precedent. Putin himself has, on numerous occasions since the beginning of Russia’s war against Ukraine in February 2022, reminded NATO and the world that the nuclear option remains available should Russia choose to use it. He has also noted, in this regard, Russia’s superior numbers of non-strategic or tactical nuclear weapons compared to the US tactical nuclear weapons deployed in other NATO countries.

Observers of varying backgrounds have put forward explanations for Putin’s saber rattling, all of which suggest the Russian president hopes, through nuclear threats, to achieve some current or future tactical edge in his country’s continuing face-off with Ukraine, the United States, and NATO. All that reasoning, however, cannot erase the dangerous reality: Any Russian first use of tactical nuclear weapons would create unprecedented conditions that could easily lead not to a regional Russian advantage, but to a wider nuclear war that would decimate Russia and its leadership (not to mention the rest of the world).

Why is Russia making nuclear threats? Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, a variety of commentators have put forward at least five explanations for Putin’s propensity for nuclear saber rattling. First, some contend that Putin is bluffing. This is the argument of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, among others. Zelensky feels that Putin’s nuclear diplomacy is designed to intimidate NATO into backing off from its support for Ukrainian sovereignty and independence. Others in and outside of Ukraine are more fearful of attacks with conventional weapons on Ukrainian nuclear power plants—and the residual effects of such strikes on public health, infrastructure and climate—than an actual Russian nuclear first use.

A second explanation for Putin’s nuclear threats is that they constitute a probe. Russian leadership is, as it were, taking the temperature of the United States and NATO, to see their reactions. This presents a dilemma for American and NATO European leaders. If they overreact to Putin’s intimidation, they appear fearful and potentially vulnerable to nuclear blackmail. If they simply ignore his comments about nuclear war, they may come across as lacking in awareness of the risks of escalation as fighting continues.

A third perspective on Putin’s nuclear rhetoric sees it as a response to Russia’s political and military setbacks since the war began in February, 2022. The initial objective of Russia’s so-called Special Military Operation was the prompt defeat of the Ukrainian armed forces and the abdication or surrender of its government, replaced by a Russian puppet regime. Instead, Russia found itself bogged down in a protracted war that has been extremely costly in both personnel and resources—hence the threat of nuclear weapons use, if the situation worsened. Putin has been dissatisfied with the performance of Russian armed forces on more than one occasion, and the weird attempt at a putsch by the erstwhile Wagner group created a temporary sense of chaos in the military chain of command. Wagner has since been scattered to the winds, and Russia’s military position relative to Ukraine has improved in the aftermath of the failed Ukrainian counteroffensive of the summer and the fall of 2023. Moreover, Russia’s superior numbers of available and potential military personnel and war-supporting industrial resources, relative to those of Ukraine, create the potential for an endless stalemate with outcomes favorable to Russia. But the situation remains uncertain, and so the nuclear saber-rattling continues.

A fourth perspective on Putin’s nuclear diplomacy asserts that he is laying the predicate for escalation to nuclear first use if unexpected battlefield reverses threaten to destabilize Russia’s operational-tactical position for the defense of important objectives. NATO support for Ukraine provides that county not only with military hardware such as tanks, armored personnel carriers, long range missiles and antimissile systems, and the like, but also with the “software” of warfare, including C4ISR (command, control, communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance) assistance with navigation, warning, special operations, and strategic deception. On more than one occasion, Ukrainian brainpower has outmaneuvered Russian muscle. But the Russians are learning fast and have upped their game significantly since the embarrassing blunders of 2022. Moreover, Russian armed forces have demonstrated in training exercises superior understanding of the extreme complexity of modern airland battle and its potential risks and costs. They are also aware of the difficulties in operational-tactical maneuver on a nuclear battlefield.[4]

A fifth possible interpretation of Putin’s propensity for nuclear rhetoric is that it reflects the reasoning of some Russian military and political thinkers about the management of escalation toward favorable outcomes by the manipulation of risk. According to this line of reasoning, nuclear first use is one point on a continuum of coercion that extends from the lowest point on the conflict spectrum up to the crossing of the threshold from conventional into nuclear war. Prominent Russian analyst Sergei Karaganov’s essay, “A Difficult but Necessary Decision,” argued that a Russian tactical nuclear first use somewhere in Europe might be necessary to shock NATO back into its senses and concede to Russia’s view of the situation in Ukraine.

Still, it is clear that many experts within Russia are not aligned with Karaganov’s high-octane nuclear chest-thumping. For example, Ivan Timofeev, director general of the Russian International Affairs Council and a widely published academic, noted that Karaganov’s approach “underestimates the Western elites’ determination to climb the escalation ladder with Russia, and, if necessary, ahead of it” and “overlooks the possibly catastrophic consequences for Russia itself.” According to noted military theorist Dmitry Adamsky, Russia offers a cross-domain cocktail of conventional war-fighting and nuclear deterrence options. Crossing the nuclear threshold would most likely occur when Russia felt that its nonnuclear escalation options had been exhausted and its nuclear rhetoric had thus far proved futile. Even then, prior to actual nuclear first use, a “muscle-flexing” phase of gradually increasing “strategic gestures” will be used to communicate resolve and capability to climb the escalation ladder, Adamsky writes.

The limits of nuclear threats. The preceding discussion focuses on a Russian decision for conventional war or nuclear escalation without reference to the possibility of a Russian-Chinese coordination of tactics and strategy in regional wars. US deterrence and defense requirements for a simultaneous Russian and Chinese regional aggression assume a greater need for forward-deployed forces and power-projection capabilities than hitherto. The final report of the Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States warned that US objectives must include “effective deterrence and defeat of simultaneous Russian and Chinese aggression in Europe and Asia using conventional forces” and that, if existing conventional forces were inadequate to this objective, US strategy would have to be adjusted to increase reliance on nuclear weapons “to deter opportunistic or collaborative aggression” in the other theater.

One should be cautious, however, in estimating the sizes and capabilities of future Russian and Chinese nuclear forces. Nor can it be assumed that the current rapprochement between Russia and China will be everlasting or apply to all issues of military significance. China and Russia have a history of border conflicts and Cold War disagreements, and China’s world historical view is somewhat apart from Russia’s.

William Alberque, director of strategy, technology and arms control at the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank, has provided a concise description of the possible roles for non-strategic nuclear weapons in Russian military strategy: “deterring unwanted conflicts; coercing adversaries; shaping the battlefield for planned conflicts; controlling escalation within conflicts to protect the Russian homeland; preventing outside powers (read: the United States) from intervening in its conflicts; and ensuring that it prevails in war.”

Notwithstanding the rationale, the decision to move from nuclear deterrence to nuclear first use in Europe or Asia would be a world-historical marker—and not one of progress. The firebreak between non-strategic and strategic nuclear warfare has never been tested under exigent conditions, and indeed, part of the deterrent efficacy for tactical nuclear weapons lies in their potential coupling to strategic nuclear war. Putin’s assertive nuclear rhetoric is strategically unhelpful and politically dangerous.

Glory, glory, hallelujah!