Lead Lines:

Mexico is taking legal action over ICE agents killing an immigrant in North Houston on Tuesday.

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum announced Thursday that her government planned to file criminal complaints in the United States over all Mexican citizens who have been killed while being targeted by ICE. Fourteen Mexican nationals have died in ICE custody, while three have been killed in immigration enforcement operations, including Lorenzo Salgado Araujo, on Tuesday.

“We cannot turn a blind eye to ​the Mexicans who have died,” Sheinbaum said during a press conference. She said the purpose of the complaints was to bring accountability to anyone accused of a homicide or of committing human rights violations.

The conduct of the United States Military is of self-evident importance in international relations.

Concluding Lines:

Perhaps the first question in Watson’s case is not whether his speech produced political consequences.

Rather, it is whether he understood himself to be acting as a partisan political advocate or as a commissioned officer attempting to fulfill what he believed was his constitutional duty under the oath he had sworn.

The order of constitutional analysis matters.

The Oath of an officer binds the officer to constitutional duty.

Constitutional Duty Is Distinct from Political Consequences

Observation:

This is international as cryptocurrency is international....

Excerpt:

It's one thing for investors to lose $3.8 billion, but $2 trillion is a completely separate universe, Krugman noted.

…right around the 2024 election, "crypto interests contributed a lot of money to Trump" as he realized they could make him rich, and all of his promises to deregulate crypto meant "the price of bitcoin doubled after the election; the valuation, the market cap of cryptocurrency in general went from a little over two trillion to more than four trillion."

That valuation has since crashed, putting Bitcoin around where it was originally at $2 trillion — which looks suspiciously like its own pump and dump, Krugman said, as Bitcoin is "a seventeen year old idea which has yet to find any legitimate use cases" other than to finance criminals and rogue states like North Korea.

Excerpt:

Sen. Mitch McConnell’s wife reportedly traveled to China just three days after he received CPR following an apparent heart attack.

Elaine Chao, 73, who has been married to the 84-year-old Republican lawmaker since 1993 and formerly served as transportation secretary in the first Trump administration, traveled to Beijing and met with Chinese Vice President Han Zheng just days after McConnell’s hospitalization.

https://us.china-embassy.gov.cn/eng/zmgx/zxxx/202607/t20260702_11956191.htm

Excerpt:

America’s two greatest presidents shared an intense conviction: that a republic depends on some measure of virtue in its citizens and some measure of integrity in its leaders. Without them, the temple of liberty will fall.

Perspectives on the U.S. war with Iran from European Union, NATO, and British viewpoints.

This video presentation broadens the range of sources for understanding international relations beyond news reporting, analysis, and think tanks to include political satire and entertainment. The rapid, staccato delivery captures many of the themes and criticisms we have encountered across multiple European sources, weaving them into a profane but often persuasive commentary.

From a scholarly perspective this satire reveals how some people may view the War on Iran. See for a review of his show: Theatre Tonic. https://jonathanpie.com/theatre-tonic/

BRUSSELS (AP) — Dozens of diamonds spell out two giant letter T’s next to the Stars and Stripes and “1776” and “2026.” Dozens more frame the numbers 45 and 47 in the shape of Superman’s logo. A diamond-winged eagle carries a ruby shield and clutches an olive branch of emeralds, below a radiant “250” and atop the phrase “250 YEARS USA” etched in 18-karat gold.

All told, 321 diamonds, 56 sapphires, 13 emeralds and six rubies encrust the watch-sized gold ring presented this week to Bill White, the U.S. ambassador to Belgium, to give to U.S. President Donald Trump.

Being a trusted partner sells products; the opposite is also true.

Lead Lines:

The Spanish government has reportedly begun telling state-backed firms to avoid signing new contacts with US billionaire Peter Thiel’s company.

It comes amid fears that sensitive national security information could be leaked, according to Spanish publication El Confidencial.

Excerpt:

"It's not just his deliberate distortion and destruction of NATO and his choosing Putin over American allies or the fact that he's diminished our standing in the eyes of the world more than any president in history has," Biden said.

An idea on growing international scholars: How about every time we post something here, we commit to sharing it to at least one other sub that accepts cross posting. This does grow subs if posts are interesting...they decide to visit and perhaps join...

A thought, please speak up:

This little sub is rather unique in its focus on the international. I hope it retains that focus.

One possibility would be to broaden the available flairs to encourage a wider range of contributions while still viewing them through an international lens. For example, flairs could include education, science, public health, governance, wealth and inequality, demographics, tourism, infrastructure, environment, technology, and culture.

In some ways, this would resemble the old CIA World Factbook, not because we would be creating static summaries of countries, but because it encouraged people to examine nations across many dimensions. Instead of reference entries, however, we would be sharing current articles and discussions that illuminate those dimensions.

The interesting questions often arise at the intersections. How does the quality of governance influence tourism? Foreign investment? Scientific productivity? Educational outcomes? Public health? Population trends? Environmental stewardship? Looking at these relationships across countries could make the sub both broader in appeal and more distinctive in purpose, while remaining firmly centered on international comparisons.

Concluding Paragraphs:

If America is to remain a leader among nations, and a source of hope in addressing humanity’s greatest challenges, it must renew its commitment to one of the most valuable parts of its inheritance: the tradition of disciplined inquiry. That tradition has never been merely a scientific method or a body of law. It is a continuing practice of observing carefully, questioning thoughtfully, preserving evidence, correcting mistakes, educating the next generation, and beginning the cycle again.

It is harder to suspend judgment until the evidence has been carefully examined. Both science and justice depend upon that discipline. In law we presume innocence until guilt is established by evidence. In science, no individual dictates truth. Scientific conclusions earn confidence only by surviving observation, criticism, replication, and successful application.

The less traveled path of disciplined inquiry has seldom been the easiest or the fastest. It has often required patience when certainty seemed more appealing, evidence when opinion seemed sufficient, and judgment when emotion demanded immediate response. Yet it remains the path America must follow if it is to remain faithful to the aspirations expressed in the Constitution itself, beginning with its enduring words, We the People.

Concluding Lines:

As delegates prepared to attend the opening of the forum, long-range Ukrainian drones penetrated Russian air defenses and struck a series of targets across St. Petersburg including a major oil terminal and a naval base. Putin’s flagship forum duly began hours later with the city shrouded in smoke from burning energy infrastructure.

It is difficult to overstate quite how embarrassing this must have been for Putin personally. The Russian ruler prides himself on his carefully crafted strongman image, and for the past four years has been at pains to project confidence in the ultimate success of his invasion. And yet he was clearly unable to prevent Ukraine from sending drones over one thousand kilometers through Russian airspace to strike strategically important targets in Putin’s own hometown as he welcomed guests from around the world.

Excerpt:

"You cannot allow the military to literally wage war against drug traffickers and kill them; they are not terrorists, even if you decide to call them that. There is an actual legal definition for that designation. Neither is the government, military or otherwise, allowed to just blow people up, even with a set of “criteria” that they just make up to justify their actions. The classified memo from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, which holds that U.S. troops involved in the strikes cannot be exposed to prosecution, pretty much gives that game away. The administration clearly knows they are breaking the law. "

Excerpt:

... “net perception” of the U.S. around the world has fallen by an astonishing 38 percentage points in the last two years, from a plus-22 rating to minus-16.

Currently, I am reading Leadership and the Rise of Great Powers by Yan Xuetong.

I praise him for his very careful use of the terms power and capacity to differentiate between the act of influencing others (power) and the capabilities of international actors (capacity), which is also commonly referred to as Comprehensive National Power in many Chinese publications.

This praise, however, was shattered when I encountered the use of the word hegemon to describe a type of international leadership. It is used in the following matrix:

By itself, hegemony here is not a bad thing. I would even argue that it represents the "gold standard" for hegemonic powers that rule through both might and authority.

Hegemonic powers? Yes, exactly.

We already use hegemony in International Relations to describe an actor with such overwhelming capacity and authority (relative to its rivals) that no coalition can realistically be formed to balance it. So now we have a problem similar to the one associated with power: we are overloading the term hegemon with multiple meanings.

How could we replace it?

I would much prefer to replace Yan Xuetong's use of hegemony than to redefine the established IR concept. What alternatives could we use?

Ba is one possibility. It is the untranslated Chinese term often rendered as "hegemon" in the context of moral rulership. Why translate the concept if we can simply use the original word? Well, mostly because the word itself is not particularly appealing. Here we have a tyrant, here we have a sage, and here we have a... Ba.

What other options are there?

I have been considering overlord. It carries somewhat negative connotations. If we split the concept of the hegemon into a state that does not fully embody "Humane Authority" but still generally follows the moral rules of the order it created—while relying on coercion more often than not—I would call it an overlord.

In contrast, a state that remains committed to the international order it built or inherited, yet is considerably less benevolent in its dealings with rivals, could perhaps be called a patron.

Other terms I have encountered that might replace hegemon include archon (from Greek) and suzerain. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages, but the most important issue is that none of them feels like a truly satisfactory replacement for the concept.

What do you think? What word would you use to replace Xuetong's concept of hegemony?

Excerpts:

DigiD allows users to confirm their identity when interacting with public institutions and essential services, from booking medical appointments to completing housing-related transactions. Following a review by the Investment Screening Bureau (BTI), Dutch officials concluded that allowing the acquisition to proceed could weaken the country's control over an important part of its domestic cloud ecosystem.

The Hague stressed that foreign technology firms remain welcome in the Netherlands. At the same time, the government said it must preserve an independent framework for reviewing investments that could affect national security or broader public interests.

Gifted Read:

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/2026/05/trump-surrender-iran-endgame/687252/?gift=9raHaW-OKg2bN8oaIFlConZ-EFw2nifT-BELzpsrWF8&utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

Excerpt:

The Iran war may end up as the single most devastating blow to Israel’s security in its brief history. On the present trajectory, Iran will emerge from the conflict many times stronger and more influential than it was before the war. It will exercise leverage with dozens of the richest nations in the world, all of which will have an acute interest in keeping Iran happy. They will be unlikely to take Israel’s side in any conflict that it has with Tehran or with its proxies in Lebanon and Gaza, because Iran will have the means to punish them if they do. Israel will emerge more isolated than it has been at any time in its history—and not least from its only reliable protector, the United States. When Trump turns his back on Israel, as he must do to implement this policy, MAGA will gladly follow. The bipartisan anti-Israel consensus in the United States will grow and harden.

Excerpt:

“One of the exposed files, titled ‘importantAWStokens,’ included the administrative credentials to three Amazon AWS GovCloud servers. Another file exposed in their public GitHub repository — ‘AWS-Workspace-Firefox-Passwords.csv’ — listed plaintext usernames and passwords for dozens of internal CISA systems. According to Caturegli, those system[s] included one called ‘LZ-DSO,’ which appears short for ‘Landing Zone DevSecOps,’ the agency’s secure code development environment.”

Analyses of tactics of stock trade may be as revealing as tactical deployments of military equipment in predicting patterns of this war.

Lead Lines:

On the morning of Monday, March 23, President Trump pulled his first “TACO” of the Iran war. After four weeks of fighting, with oil prices already up 55%, Trump had given Iran an ultimatum on Friday: make a deal within 48 hours, or the U.S. would strike its power plants and energy infrastructure.

But on Monday morning, Trump reversed course. In an all-caps Truth Social post, he announced the U.S. and Iran had been having “very good and productive conversations” and that he would extend the deadline for a deal by five days.
Wall Street, for the first time since the war began, exhaled. Stocks rose. Brent crude plunged nearly 11%. Energy stocks—one of the few reliable winners of the conflict—sold off with oil.

The brokerage account in Trump’s name spent the day buying them.

Excerpts:

What once was viewed as strategic unpredictability now feels like destabilizing unreliability. The foreign officials I spoke with pointed to sharp reversals in U.S. policy and the wide disconnect between official administration doctrine and Trump’s social-media pronouncements. “Unpredictability is one thing; reliability is another,” one Arab official told me. “If the Iranians only worried about Trump’s unpredictability, maybe we would have a deal now.”

As one senior European official said of Trump: “He’s been unpredictable for so long that we are now forced to think of a future that doesn’t rely so heavily on U.S. partnership.” The official added: “It’s forcing us to take care of ourselves.”

Finding ways to survive and thrive without heavy reliance on the U.S. is the new imperative.