Will Elon Musk mark a victory in politics?
Al-Ittihad, United Arab Emirates, January 3
Elon Musk, the South African immigrant currently ranked as the wealthiest individual globally, has emerged as a significant figure in president-elect Donald Trump’s inner circle. Musk is reported to have contributed at least $277 million to bolster Trump’s efforts in swaying Republican voters in key battleground states, most notably Pennsylvania.
Following Trump’s electoral victory, Musk appears to have established what seems to be a semi-permanent abode at Trump’s resort in Palm Beach, Florida. His bold and overt attempts to obstruct Congress’s recent bill aimed at funding the government for several months have drawn considerable attention.
Whether Musk’s close association with Trump will persist remains uncertain. Trump is known for his disdain for ridicule and for being labeled a subordinate or deputy. He has, in the past, distanced himself from close allies who inadvertently or deliberately challenged his prominence and stature.
His initial administration was marred by strained relationships with many of his closest advisers. Yet, might Musk be too affluent and powerful to be dismissed so easily? As the owner of Tesla and SpaceX – two immensely successful enterprises – Musk commands significant influence, a power further amplified following his acquisition of Twitter, now X, in 2020.
He has utilized this platform to express his views on politics, the economy, and social issues. In a recent development, Musk has collaborated with fellow entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy, founder of the thriving pharmaceutical firm Roivant Sciences, to spearhead a cost-cutting advisory group named the Department of Government Efficiency.
The operational dynamics and authority of this body remain ambiguous, but its function aligns with Trump’s agenda to eliminate wasteful government expenditure and, consequently, reduce the federal workforce. This workforce, from the perspective of MAGA supporters, represents a “deep state” that needs substantial curtailing.
Why? They argue that these federal employees, who enjoy extensive legal rights ensuring job security, are responsible for promulgating endless new regulations that hinder activities, particularly those of entrepreneurs eager to pursue new initiatives with minimal oversight. However, an ethical quandary presents itself regarding Musk’s mission to curtail government spending, given that his companies have thrived largely due to government contracts, notably those from NASA, which underpins his successful space endeavors. These ventures have recently gained momentum and profitability, particularly amidst challenges faced by Boeing, one of Musk’s chief competitors in the aerospace sector.
Furthermore, Musk’s current role in American politics is unofficial, as he has not been elected to any public office. Critics argue that his financial resources might afford him immunity from potential scrutiny by a Republican administration, a contention likely to capture Democratic attention and possibly result in judicial proceedings.
One cannot overlook Musk’s remarkable contributions as an engineer who designed, developed, and marketed the inaugural successful line of electric vehicles. His space program has revolutionized the technology of reusable rocket launchers, significantly reducing costs. SpaceX stands as a pivotal force in America’s relentless pursuit of space exploration, poised as a leader for potential manned missions to Mars.
As long as Musk prioritizes technology and innovation, he will retain his status as a celebrated figure. However, his ventures into the political realm might pose more formidable challenges, given that political triumph generally entails arduous negotiations and intricate compromises. Skeptics question whether he possesses the requisite temperament and mindset for such endeavors.
The initial months of the Trump administration will undoubtedly serve as a litmus test of his ability to function as a political adviser. Should he succeed, it would mark yet another remarkable achievement for a man renowned for his unexpected triumphs. – Geoffrey Kemp
Trump’s counterrevolution
Al-Masry Al-Youm, Egypt, January 2
As president-elect Donald Trump gears up to officially assume office on January 20, he has yet to issue a single executive order. Nonetheless, his provocative statements have already sent shock waves through international circles – from China and the East to the European Union in the West.
Nations worldwide are on tenterhooks, uneasy and even bewildered by Trump’s rhetoric, which questions foundational elements of the global order, including international trade agreements, immigration policies, and diplomatic relations – not only with adversarial nations but also with longtime allies.
In response to this growing global anxiety, Trump remarked, “It seems like the world has gone a little crazy.” Until now, political analysts have largely operated under the assumption that US governance remains institutionally stable, regardless of who sits in the Oval Office or which party holds power.
American interests were seen as immutable. However, Trump’s ascendancy has upended these perceptions. The usual predictive scenarios no longer seem applicable, giving rise to pressing questions: Will Trump reshape the international order? Is he set on building an imperial America? What future awaits the European Union? How will the conflict between Ukraine and Russia evolve? Could Trump annex Canada and seize control of the Panama Canal? And what are the possible outcomes of the tariff war he has threatened against both adversaries and allies?
Canada finds itself embroiled in political turmoil following Trump’s remarks about possibly making it a US state, while Denmark seethes over his comment about exerting absolute control over Greenland, the world’s largest island, ostensibly for US national security reasons.
Trump has also intensified his rhetoric against Panama, threatening to take over the Panama Canal. He accuses the government of inflating shipping fees for US vessels and permitting Chinese personnel to manage the waterway – claims that have been proven false.
Are these just verbal threats that Trump will abandon upon realizing that governance doesn’t operate this way? “World leaders are flocking to the table because the president is delivering on his promise to make America great again,” asserted Anna Kelly, spokesperson for Trump’s transition team. “Foreign nations will think twice about undermining us. America will regain respect, and the world will be safer.”
Another team official insisted: “This is not recklessness. Trump knows how to weigh possibilities.” Some observers interpret Trump’s aggressive commentary as a targeted message to China, which he views as America’s chief rival. If even allies like Denmark, Canada, and Panama are not immune to his threats, how might he handle adversaries? Tariff weapons aimed at Chinese exports to the US mark just the beginning, foreshadowing further confrontational measures to curtail China’s global ascendancy.
But China’s not the sole target. For the BRICS nations – comprising China, Russia, India, Brazil, and South Africa – along with Egypt, Iran, the Emirates, and Ethiopia, the message is explicit and severe: “One hundred percent tariffs on your exports if you attempt to replace the dollar with another currency!”
The European Union is not clear either, prompting some officials to wave the metaphorical white flag. Christine Lagarde, head of the European Central Bank, has suggested that Europe purchase American weapons, goods, and liquefied natural gas to stave off sanctions. Meanwhile, NATO, which Trump has deemed obsolete, finds its secretary general, Mark Rutte, attempting to gain favor with Trump, stating, “We have to dance with whoever is on the dance floor.”
Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky, once defiant with the backing of the Biden administration, is beginning to reconsider, proposing peaceful resolutions amid concerns that Trump might broker a secret deal with Russian President Vladimir Putin to end the ongoing conflict.
Turning to the Middle East, Trump shows little interest in resolving the Palestinian issue and instead focuses on rebooting Arab normalization with Israel. During his first term, he recognized occupied Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and acknowledged its sovereignty over the Golan Heights. It seems plausible he might now recognize Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank and sanction strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. The travel ban he enacted on several Muslim-majority countries, which Biden had lifted, is likely to make a comeback.
Previously, Trump’s tenure faced resistance. His electoral victory was narrow, Democrats held the House, and his executive team lacked cohesion, all amid a critical press. Now, following a landslide victory, he enjoys a Republican majority in Congress, a unified ministerial team, and a media landscape at its weakest.
The year 2025 aligns with the Year of the Snake in the East Asian calendar, and the world braces for the metaphorical bites that American policy might deliver – bites capable of paralyzing and envenomating the global order. The question remains: Is there an antidote to neutralize Trump’s potentially disruptive agenda? – Abdullah Abdul Salam
The implications of Trump’s energy policies
Asharq Al-Awsat, London, December 31
Donald Trump will assume office for his second term in late January, bringing with him a suite of frequently touted energy policies. Given the pivotal role of the United States in the global energy sector, these anticipated policies are poised to significantly affect both the Middle East and global energy strategies.
The United States has positioned itself among the top three crude oil producers globally, joining the ranks of Saudi Arabia and Russia, each with a production capacity exceeding 12 million barrels per day. This elevation was largely due to a surge in production capacity starting in the mid-2010s, driven by a significant increase in shale oil production.
Similarly, US natural gas reserves surged during this period, propelled by substantial shale gas output, positioning the country alongside other major gas producers like Russia, Qatar, and Iran. One outcome of this production boom was a dramatic collapse in oil prices, which eventually led to a Saudi-Russian accord and the creation of OPEC+. This coalition, comprising OPEC members and other key producers, has played a crucial role in market stabilization since its inception.
The developments of nearly a decade ago precipitated substantial changes in the global energy landscape. The United States transitioned from being a net importer of crude oil and petroleum products to becoming a leading oil producer outside OPEC+, as well as a net exporter of both crude oil and liquefied natural gas. Additionally, the US endeavors to assert an influential role in the arena of sustainable energy production and consumption have been met with mixed outcomes, swayed by partisan disagreements.
Under Trump’s leadership, political discord intensified, leading to the withdrawal from the 2015 Paris Agreement, a cornerstone global pact aimed at achieving net-zero carbon emissions by mid-century. Trump perceives the shift toward sustainable energy as counterproductive and detrimental to his America First ethos, arguing it undermines the American economy.
During his last campaign, Trump pledged numerous changes to energy policy over the next four years, should he win. True to form, he vowed to dismantle most of President Joe Biden’s energy policies. The recent electoral results herald a sweeping Republican victory across the presidency, Senate, and House of Representatives, potentially easing the passage of Trump-backed legislative proposals through Congress.
With the Republicans’ triumph across all branches of government, championed by far-right elements, a regression to previous policies appears imminent. In practice, this signifies a revival of oil and gas exploration and drilling, with an emphasis on domestic shale oil while sidelining the advancement of renewable energy sectors like solar and wind.
Trump also hinted at potentially withdrawing from the Paris Agreement once more, echoing sentiments from his campaign. Such a policy shift entails an increase in US oil production capacity, broadening its influence in global oil markets and boosting liquefied natural gas exports, especially to European nations severing ties with Russian gas amid the Ukraine war.
This strategy could significantly bolster the stock values of shale oil companies, a prospect eagerly supported by wealthy stakeholders in Trump’s inner circle. However, Trump’s proposed policies could detrimentally impact sustainable energy by stalling or scaling back emissions reduction programs. Curtailing US financial support for sustainable energy research and initiatives in developing nations would hamper emissions reduction efforts, increasing the burden on other industrialized countries.
The reduced American involvement challenges an already daunting global task of investing trillions into developing carbon capture technologies and lowering the costs of building renewable energy infrastructure. Trump’s campaign rhetoric underscores his commitment to implementing numerous policies swiftly, promising to draft myriad laws upon his return to the White House on January 20, 2025. Yet, passing such a volume of legislation immediately is an improbable feat, constrained by the constitutional processes requiring congressional review and approval over weeks or even months.
Nevertheless, the president can expedite certain initiatives by issuing executive orders, which carry the weight of the law upon signing. Trump is expected to leverage this approach for energy policy changes and stricter measures on illegal immigration – key priorities for the Republican platform.
The strategic use of executive orders in the energy domain, particularly at this juncture, could expedite oil drilling approvals on federal lands, many of which have historically been off-limits due to environmental protections. Trump’s intent to facilitate drilling in these areas, including Alaska’s ecologically sensitive reserves, has drawn fierce criticism from environmental advocates, who may now seek judicial intervention.
If broadly enacted, Trump’s energy policies would exert profound global ramifications, chiefly by stalling the implementation of the Paris Agreement and consequently delaying the mid-century net-zero emissions target. – Walid Khadduri
The steadfast Christians of Gaza
Al-Ahram, Egypt, January 1
This year, Christmas is shrouded in sadness, grief, and sorrow throughout Palestine, particularly in the Gaza Strip. The pervasive anguish stemming from the Israeli occupation’s relentless actions stifles any sense of joy that typically accompanies the season.
Gone are the celebrations and hymns within the churches of Palestine, the revered birthplace of Jesus Christ. In the churches of the Gaza Strip, which have faced various assaults, a cloud of grief and distress overshadows their Christmas rituals. The relentless aggressor does not discriminate between Muslims and Christians as it perpetuates its daily crimes and works toward the devastation of the region.
Christians, much like their Muslim counterparts, endure the daily barrage of aerial and artillery strikes. On numerous occasions, these raids have targeted areas near churches, inflicting varying degrees of damage to their interiors since the onset of hostilities. While, fortunately, many of these incidents have not resulted in fatalities, they have nonetheless instilled fear and insecurity.
For instance, on November 1, 2023, a raid near the Holy Family Church, Gaza’s only Roman Catholic church, occurred just as several Christians were inside with their children for prayers. Remarkably, there were no injuries reported, as the attack took place when no one was in the immediate vicinity.
Similarly, the Russian Cultural Center in Gaza’s Tel al-Hawa neighborhood was bombed the previous day, October 31. A far more tragic scenario unfolded on October 19 when the area surrounding the Church of Saint Porphyrius, the oldest church in Gaza, was bombed. This historic Orthodox church, nestled in the Zeitoun neighborhood, likely dates back to the 5th century and was named after a former Bishop of Gaza, purported to have passed away before its construction began. The attack resulted in the tragic loss of 18 lives, including 10 members of a single family.
It is crucial to understand that when discussing the church’s surroundings, reference is made not only to the adjacent streets but also to the inner courtyard, which often shelters those displaced or fleeing the turmoil of bombings elsewhere. Yet, the remaining Christians in Gaza, alongside their Muslim fellow citizens, persist with resilience, holding steadfast to the hope of a future free from one of history’s most oppressive colonial forces. – Wahid Abdel-Meguid.
Translated by Asaf Zilberfarb. All assertions, opinions, facts, and information presented in these articles are the sole responsibility of their respective authors and are not necessarily those of The Media Line, which assumes no responsibility for their content.
