April 8, 2025 (EIRNS)—The Trump Administration has continued its bullheaded approach with new policy initiatives around the world. Among these now include: attempts to expand U.S. military further around the world, including into space, explicitly to counter Russia, China, and other “adversaries;” an escalation in Southwest Asia which threatens to unleash a full-scale military campaign against Iran—all the while seemingly putting no limits on Israel’s genocide in Gaza; and now a chaotic trade and tariff policy that threatens to crash the world economy.
Nonetheless, glimmers of diplomacy and resolution have emerged. Upon arriving at the White House on April 7, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu was shocked to learn that President Donald Trump had been in dialogue with the Iranian government, and that talks were scheduled to commence on Saturday, April 12. As the Times of Israel reported, Netanyahu was not only not informed of this until shortly before his meeting with Trump, but he also was not given any assurances about Israel’s demands regarding Iran.
It is to be hoped that this indicates at least some level of rational thinking on the part of President Trump, and an independence from the insanity of Netanyahu and his ilk. However, it remains to be seen whether cooler heads will prevail over the coming days, or if war will ultimately break out. But whatever happens, it should be emphasized that Trump’s apparent method of bullying, even if occasionally successful, is not an approach that will make the U.S.—or any other nation—truly “great” again. In addition to inflaming the region into a disastrous war, it could derail the promising improvement in U.S.-Russia relations that has so importantly pulled the world back from the brink of a nuclear holocaust.
Meanwhile, the world is still reeling from the “liberation day” announcement of tariffs last week. Some nations may bend and agree to negotiate, but others—for example, China—may hold firm. Trump’s enactment of an additional 50% tariff on Chinese imports, raising the combined tariff to 104%, will not be taken lightly. Either way, the dilemma Trump faces was laid out April 7 in an article for China’s CGTN by Helga Zepp-LaRouche, who noted that there are much bigger factors in action than playing with numbers and trade deficits. These include the atrocious levels of technological advance and productivity throughout Western economies over the past two decades, the almost non-existence of small and medium-sized firms in the U.S. that could replace imported goods, and the $2 quadrillion bubble of financial derivatives that is waiting to blow. Whether Trump commits to solving these problems in earnest, or merely tries to pump more money into the bankrupt U.S. economy, could decide whether this is the fuse that causes a meltdown of the entire financial system.
While this all was happening, a very different development was underway—one that indicates a hopeful alternative to the current chaos and danger. On Tuesday morning, April 8, the Soyuz spacecraft aboard a Russian rocket was launched with two Russian cosmonauts and one American astronaut, and successfully arrived at the International Space Station. As Special Envoy of the President of Russia for investment and economic cooperation Kirill Dmitriev said of the launch: “Fifty years after Apollo-Soyuz showed space can unite us, Russia and the U.S. fly together still. History echoes in orbit.” Dmitriev had visited the U.S. to meet on April 3 with Trump’s envoy Steven Witkoff and others regarding U.S.-Russia cooperation, over April 2-3.
The challenges today are great, and the complexities can feel overwhelming, but reflecting on the struggles and determination of previous warriors for the truth can inspire in us a sense of our more universal mission. Eighty years ago, on April 9, 1945, Dietrich Bonhoeffer—one of the strongest spiritual leaders of the anti-Hitler resistance—was executed at the Flossenbürg concentration camp. In his 1942 essay “After Ten Years,” Bonhoeffer spoke out against “the short-circuiting of unhistorical and irresponsible thinkers” who shirk responsibility during moments of great crisis. He wrote:
“In the face of such a situation, we learn that neither a theoretical point of view, nor a critical and opinionated one, nor a refusal to face facts, nor opportunism, nor self-abandonment and capitulation in the face of success, can do justice to our task. We do not want to be offended critics or opportunists, but we must be co-responsible for the historical process, from case to case and in every moment, as victors or as the defeated. Talk of heroic demise in the face of inevitable defeat is basically very unheroic, because it does not dare to look to the future. The last responsible question is not how I can extricate myself heroically from the circumstance, but how a future generation should live. Only from this historically responsible question can fruitful—albeit temporarily very humiliating—solutions arise. In short, it is much easier to persevere in principle than in concrete responsibility.”
Expanding on this theme of optimism and the future, Bonhoeffer wrote: “Optimism is not, in essence, a view of the present situation, but it is the vital force, a force of hope where others resign, a force to hold your head high when everything seems to fail, a force to endure setbacks, a force that never leaves the future to the opponent, but claims it for itself. There is certainly also a foolish, cowardly optimism that must be condemned. But no one should look down on optimism as a will to the future, even if it is mistaken a hundred times. It is the health of life, which the sick should not infect.”
Eighty years later, in 2025, there is a solution—if we choose to create it. It’s time to dump the bankrupt British imperial system, and replace it with a new security and development architecture among a world of mutually-respectful sovereign nations.
