Category: Commentary

By Dinh Hoang Thang , Fellow the Caux Round Table for Moral Capitalism

Busan — a city that smells of salt and ocean water, once defined by tides and trade — suddenly found itself at the center of a geopolitical storm. Before arriving here, Donald Trump had stopped in Kuala Lumpur and Tokyo. Five days, three capitals (October 26–30): what seemed like a restless shuttle across Asia turned out to be a cartography of power. Did the history of East Asia just quietly turn a new page? 

I. A Journey Writting a Message 

Trump’s travels were no ordinary tour. The trip implemented a strategy , scripted in three acts: beginning in Kuala Lumpur — the symbolic heart of ASEAN; moved to Tokyo — the setting of a revived alliance; and ended in Busan — where two superpowers tested each other’s resolve.

The sequence mattered. Southeast Asia is not an audience, but part of the stage. Japan is no longer just an ally, but a co-architect of global order. And Busan — that sea-wrapped arena — became host to the acting out of raw, transactional power.

In Kuala Lumpur, ASEAN — once derided as a “talking club” — suddenly looked relevant. Small nations, through the art of flexible diplomacy, managed to engage both Washington and Beijing, bargaining for space, investment, and having a voice in an age of tightening rivalry.

In Tokyo, Prime Minister Takaichi Sanae, heir to former Prime Minister Abe’s strategic realism, met Trump to discuss supply chains, defense, and technological autonomy. The U.S.–Japan alliance is no longer built only on deterrence; it now rests on industrial and technological power — an alliance of determinative capability.

And finally, in Busan, amid jet engine thrusts and the scent of the sea, Trump and Xi met in a modest room — no red carpets, no choreographed grandeur. What unfolded was a minimalist drama of power: an interim detente, not a peace; a truce defined by interests, not ideals.

II. Japan’s New Doctrine and the Shape of a Regional Order 

Shinzo Abe planted the seeds of a “Free and Open Indo-Pacific.” Takaichi Sanae is harvesting them — with less rhetoric and more resolve. Her ambition is transparent: boost defense spending, anchor security cooperation with the U.S., and weave industrial links with India, Australia, and South Korea. This is Abe 2.0 — democratic, assertive, and determined to keep East Asia’s future from being written by Beijing.

With Trump’s pragmatic America back in play, Tokyo understands that autonomy is the new loyalty. Instead of sheltering under Washington’s security umbrella, Japan needs its own raincoat — rebuilding semiconductor industries, advancing clean energy, and reimagining its role in regional supply chains. The Abe–Takaichi doctrine turns ideals into instruments: from “rules-based order” to “capabilities-based alliances.”

III. Busan: When Two Worlds Talk in Calculus 

After months of tariff battles, tech bans, and rare-earth restrictions, both Trump and Xi needed a breather. The outcome was a temporary armistice: Washington eased some tariffs; Beijing resumed U.S. soybean imports and pledged to rein in fentanyl exports. But beneath the smiles, the calculation was cold-hearted.

Trump needed stability heading into an election year. Xi needed calm to sustain his authority at home and preserve his face internationally. Each leader stepped back a few inches — without abandoning a single trenchline.

The U.S.–China rivalry has entered a new phase: managed competition. The conflict has evolved from a trade war to a war of standards — over chips, AI, finance, and energy. Two gravitational systems now coexist: not colliding, not converging, but circling in uneasy proximity. Like twin planets in an imperfect orbit, they offset the pull of — and so limit — each other’s orbit.

IV. ASEAN Awakens: From Playing Field to Power Hub 

One quiet happening during Trump’s journey was the awakening of ASEAN. As Air Force One touched down in Kuala Lumpur, Southeast Asia ceased to be a corridor between superpowers and began to act as a hinge of strategic consequence.

ASEAN’s new realism lies in “neutral pragmatism.” Its members — Indonesia, Vietnam, the Philippines, among others — are mastering the art of balance: welcoming investment, keeping dialogue open, and leveraging great-power rivalry to augment  self-reliant autonomy.

Neutrality no longer means passivity. It’s an art of motion, not a state of immobility — the ability to maneuver between forces without being crushed. If sustained, that agility could transform ASEAN from a passive zone into a dynamic geoeconomic contributor to a multi-polar world.

V. Vietnam: From Insecure Wariness to Self-Reliant Confidence 

Vietnam stands at the confluence of two currents: commerce and security strategy. The temporary U.S.–China détente offers a breathing space — stable trade, redirected investment, supply-chain realignment — but of uncertain duration. A single tariff tweak in Washington or a military move by Beijing in the South China Sea could upend it overnight.

Vietnam’s survival strategy must therefore be double-tracked: pragmatic in action, visionary in thought.

Pragmatism means infrastructure reform, institutional modernization, human-capital investment, and advances in logistics and semiconductors — the bloodstream feeding the new global economy.

Vision means redefining “self-reliance” not through isolation, but through innovation; not by avoiding conflict, but by shaping cooperation.

“Self-reliance” today is not a slogan but a system — the ability to shift from low-cost manufacturing to high-value creation, from export dependency to endogenous value chains.

As global powers race to secure chips and critical minerals, Vietnam must secure and refine its most precious resource: people — their education, creativity, and freedom – to shape the counry’s future.

Vietnam’s strength has never been about size. It lies in self-definition — the capacity to carve a very purposeful identity and design an innovative strategy amid flux.

VI. East Asia: A Quiet Reshaping of Order 

Trump’s five-day tour did not shake the earth with thunder.  But it did trigger some quiet tectonic movements. The regional order is morphing from black-and-white confrontation to a spectrum of pragmatic competition. Japan grows firmer, South Korea more adaptive, ASEAN more flexible, and China more cautious.

This is not the collapse of an old order but the reconfiguration of one — an emerging, networked, interdependent Indo-Pacific, built less on declarations and more on interlocking actions.

The new order cannot yet neutralize Beijing’s ambitions, but it has birthed a chain reaction: middle powers linking up, industrial alliances forming, technology partnerships expanding, preventive diplomacy taking root. A soft multipolarity is emerging — not of rival empires, but of complementary capabilities.

VII. Busan: Mirror or Gateway? 

From the salty winds of Busan rises an image of contemporary East Asia — a mirror in which every nation can see itself: its possibilities, its limits. Trump’s five-day voyage did not redraw borders, but it stirred currents that may erode the old shorelines of certainty.

East Asia is entering a new phase — one of mid-sized powers asserting agency, of profitable alignments replacing rigid blocs, of competition measured not in ideology but in competence.

Vietnam, poised in the storm’s eye, has a choice: to shrink and dodge — or to reach and redefine.

In an age when power resides less in missiles or money than in ideas and intellect, any meaningful rise of Vietnam to take advantage of the new order will begin not with muscle power, but with heart/mind power – the freedom to think and the courage to create.

Trump’s five-day odyssey was but a moment. Yet history often turns on such moments — quietly, but profoundly.

What are we to make of Donald Trump from the perspective of moral governance?

A couple of weeks ago, lots of Americans – some estimates put their number at 7 million – turned out in crowds to express their animosity towards Trump for his kingly analogy in his style of putting America to right, as he alone sees the right.  Their demand was “No Kings”!

A decision to do away with kings was made by the English House of Commons in 1649 as follows:

And whereas it is and hath been found by experience, that the Office of a King in this Nation and Ireland and to have the power thereof in any single person, is unnecessary, burthensom and dangerous to the liberty, safety and publique interest of the people and that for the most part, use hath been made of the Regal power and prerogative, to oppress and impoverish and enslave the Subject; and that usually and naturally any one person in such power, makes it his interest to incroach upon the just freedom and liberty of the people and to promote the setting up of their own will and power above the Laws, that so they might enslave these Kingdoms to their own Lust; Be it therefore Enacted and Ordained by this present Parliament and by Authority of the same, That the Office of a King in this Nation, shall not henceforth reside in or be exercised by any one single person; and that no one person whatsoever, shall or may have, or hold the Office, Stile, Dignity, Power or Authority of King of the said Kingdoms and Dominions or any of them, or of the Prince of Wales, Any Law, Statute, Usage or Custom to the contrary thereof in any wise notwithstanding.

Now, in somewhat regal fashion, Trump is “Trumpifying” the White House:

The White House is demolishing the entirety of the East Wing to make way for President Trump’s $200 million ballroom, a construction project that is far more extensive than he initially let on, a senior administration official said on Wednesday.

The tear-down should be finished by this weekend, according to the official, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the plans.

And then he has personal attorneys seeking damages from the federal government to compensate him for losses in defending cases brought against him by the Biden Administration.  If successful, he, himself, might have to decide whether or not to pay himself several hundred million dollars of taxpayer’s money.

President Donald Trump acknowledged to reporters Monday that he’s seeking up to hundreds of millions of dollars in compensation from the federal government for its scuttled investigations and prosecutions of him.

“As far as all of the litigation, everything that’s going to go, yeah, they probably owe me a lot of money,” Trump said when asked about a New York Times report that he’s filed administrative claims seeking $230 million in damages from the Justice Department.

Asked about the $230-million figure, Trump said, “It could be.”

“I don’t know what the numbers” are, Trump said.  “I don’t even talk to them [the lawyers] about it.”

He also said he’d ultimately be the person approving the payout and that, if he granted it, he’d “do something nice” with the money.

“And you know that decision would have to go across my desk and it’s awfully strange to make a decision where I’m paying myself.  In other words, did you ever have one of those cases where you have to decide how much you’re paying yourself in damages?  But I was damaged very greatly and any money that I would get I would give to charity,” he said.

He also said he could give money “to the White House while we restore the White House.”

“We’ll see what happens,” he said.  “I guess they owe me a lot of money.  I’m not looking for money.  I’m looking for really, it’s got to be handled in the proper way.  We don’t want it to happen again,” he said, before adding, “You have to ask the lawyers about that.”

To put Trump in a perspective not widely discussed, we might consider Confucius’ distinction between the Junzi  (君子) – the “lordly one,” the honorable man of good temper and correct behavior and the Xiao jen  (小人) – the “little, small, mean man” who “struts and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more. … a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

Now, let’s translate Confucius into Trumpese: the lordly one we will call a “winner” and the little man a “loser.”

Confucius proposed that:

See what a man does.  Mark his motives.  Examine in what things he rests.  How can a man conceal his character?

He who acts with a constant view to his own advantage will be much murmured against.

What the winner seeks is in himself; what the loser seeks is in others.

The mind of a winner is conversant with righteousness; the mind of a loser is conversant with gain.

The winner acts before he speaks and afterwards speaks according to his actions.

The winner is not a partisan; the loser is a partisan.

The winner thinks of virtue; the loser thinks of comfort.

The winner is satisfied and composed; the loser is always full of distress.

Our fellow, Dinh Hoang Thang, keeps a close eye and ear on the evolution of Vietnam away from a traditional “socialist one-party democracy.”

After the conclusion of the recent session of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam, former Ambassador Thang came to certain conclusions, which you can read here.

Vietnam’s Central Committee Meetings and Tô Lâm’s Visit to Pyongyang: An Outside Perspective

By Dr. Hoang Thang Dinh, Caux Round Table Fellow

 

Summary: 

Vietnam’s political evolution entered a decisive stage with the 13th Central Committee Plenum  (early October 2025) followed by General Secretary Tô Lâm’s state visit to North Korea — political moves that revealed both a consolidation of power and a search for stability amid a rapidly shifting East Asian order. While Hanoi balances relations among major powers, the real test of its leadership will lie in transforming political symbolism into practical governance and successful economic outcomes. The forthcoming 14th Party Congress will determine (i) whether Vietnam can reform its political and economic power structures and practics without losing stability — and (ii) integrate more globally while maintaining its autonomous, self-reliant, identity.

1. Power Shifts and the Quest for Stability 

East Asia is reconfiguring  its power dynamics — from China’s many internal challenges to Japan’s evolving defense strategies and capabilities . Against this changing regional order, Vietnam has just taken three pivotal steps in its current five-year political cycle: the 13th Central Committee Plenum, General Secretary Tô Lâm’s state visit to Pyongyang, and preparations for the 14th Plenum in mid-November.

 Each step serves two objectives: choosing leaders and advancing Vietnam’s stature in world affairs.

Before the 13th Plenum, Tô Lâm issued Regulation No. 365 (September 2025), elevating the Standing Secretariat to “core leadership” status — effectively adding a fifth pillar to the traditional tứ trụ (“four pillars”), forming what analysts call a Bộ Ngũ or “Pentarchy” [1].
Despite administrative streamlining elsewhere in governing institutions, the Central Committee remains at about 200 members strong, and the Politburo at 17–19 members. This equilibrium preserves collective leadership and the practice of internal balancing among factions [3].

2. Two Milestones, One Message 

Hanoi’s delicate balancing act – simultaneously positioning relationships with the U.S., China, Russia, South Korea, and now North Korea—demonstrates its enduring ambition for achieving what might be called “soft multilateralism.” Importantly and in addition, with the 14th Party Congress approaching, this achievement also furthers a very important domestic objective: to strengthen Tô Lâm’s legitimacy and the influence  projected by  his political base.

A Vietnamese expert told BBC News that if the Pyongyang visit (Oct 9–11) was simply “to score within the communist club,” it could backfire. But if framed as “a balancing message that Vietnam can talk to all sides,” it would be a bold yet risky diplomatic act [4].

That visit, praised as occurring in a “particularly friendly atmosphere,” emphasized the solidarity of remaining socialist states. Still, it raised a deeper question: did it demonstrate diplomatic independence — or was it a gesture of self-importance compensating for slower progress with Washington?

While both sides agreed to cooperate in several sectors, real progress now depends on overcoming institutional and sanction barriers. Reuters quoted KCNA’s assessment of To Lam’s visit as merely a reaffirmation of “traditional comradeship” [5].

3. Concentrated Power with Attentive Execution

The four Central Committee plenums convened under Tô Lâm’s leadership — from the 10th to the 13th — illustrate a subtle governance model of “centralization with fine tuning” [6]. Introducing confidential voting within the Politburo — an unusual move — signals an attempt to have both firm control and participatory consensus [7].

However, system performance remains uneven. Despite administrative reforms, the hesitant response to recent typhoons exposed weak coordination among agencies and responsible officials. Prime Minister Phạm Minh Chính’s public scolding of absent provincial leaders became emblematic of widespread personal inefficiency and irresponsibility in the apparatus of government[8]. The gap between having political authority and delivering good results has become Vietnam’s “Achilles Heel”.

4. Diplomacy: Symbolism delivering limited results 

Tô Lâm’s Pyongyang trip symbolized ideological loyalty and political steadiness on his part [9]. Yet, with North Korea under heavy sanctions, the scope for cooperation benefiting Vietnam is narrow.

 

While domestic media stressed the visit’s symbolic value, such public imagery has limited practical effect as Vietnam seeks investment and deeper integration into CPTPP and RCEP. In an increasingly pragmatic world, only invoking “socialist friendship” does not impress those potential partners who prioritize performance over ideology [10].

The muted global response to Vietnam’s appeal for disaster aid after the recent typhoons highlights this gap between “socialist solidarity” and money provided when it is needed.

5. Administrative Mergers and the Two-Level Governance Test 

Domestically, reforms such as consolidation of some provinces one with another and administrative streamlining were designed to cut costs and boost efficiency — but outcomes have not met expectations. Bigger, consolidated, administrative units do not guarantee better, more effective, governance.

High restructuring costs and cultural disparities have generated pushback where the reforms have been imposed. Experts suggest that true efficiency will come only through capacity-building, digital governance, and empowered local autonomy, not with just consolidation alone [11].

Ironically, once-efficient disaster-response systems slowed down after the mergers of provincial administrations. Hanoi’s decision not to release typhoon casualty figures, while appealing for aid, underscored a paradox: centralized power does not guarantee accountability or good results [12].

6. Institutional Credibility and the Implementation Gap 

A political system is judged by its ability to implement, not by its scope of control. Its strength grows out of good results, not from the sweep of its legally authorized span of control.  Regional surveys (2024–2025) show declining public trust in local governments due to poor crisis response and service delivery [13].

The widening gap between “political rhetoric” and “administrative outcomes” now defines Vietnam’s foundational political dilemma — reforming the system without precipitating instability.

7. Between Reform and Stability 

The political landscape following the 13th Central Committee plenum reflects a model of “conditional stability”: political power remains concentrated, yet must adapt to the demands of modern governance; diplomacy remains largely symbolic, yet needs to shift gradually toward pragmatism. To what extent will the concept of “liuzhi”—a key framework for understanding how Beijing integrates Party discipline with state authority—be adopted in Hanoi’s political system? [14] Or, as analyst David Brown once observed, Vietnam’s new regime is still finding its footing—caught between freedom and discipline, stability and innovation, expectation and reform. [15]

The country now faces a dual adjustment process: consolidating political legitimacy while enhancing institutional capacity. The success of this strategy depends on whether the system can turn political symbolism into practical effectiveness—whether administrative reform can genuinely improve governance, and whether symbolic diplomacy can open new economic frontiers.

On the eve of the 14th National Congress, these questions remain unanswered. The upcoming Congress will not merely be a personnel reshuffle—it will be a test of Vietnam’s governance model: can the country remain stable while pursuing reform, and integrate globally while preserving its own identity? How can it reinforce central authority without neglecting the balance of power with local institutions? [16]

References 

[1 & 3] https://fulcrum.sg/to-lam-is-institutionalising-politics-again/
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z128gPCvTnY
[4] https://www.bbc.com/vietnamese/articles/cge2e1ywd4go
[5] https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/north-korea-vietnam-agree-cooperate-defence-other-fields-kcna-says-2025-10-11/
[6] https://fulcrum.sg/to-lam-is-institutionalising-politics-again/
[7] https://youtu.be/9dWd3-s1KB4?si=6LvXedt8YbOpL_Sg
[8] https://youtu.be/AioD65l4nyE?si=F3xl9pmrJLQGZs0-
[9] https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2025/10/10/the-message-of-the-visit-to-north-korea-that-vietnam-wants-to-send-to-major-countries/
[10] https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3328310/vietnams-leader-heads-north-korea-first-visit-18-years-rebalance-relations
[11] https://asiatimes.com/2025/08/to-lam-consolidating-hard-fast-and-forceful-rule-in-vietnam/
[12] https://www.preventionweb.net/publication/enablers-and-barriers-implementing-effective-disaster-risk-management-according-good
[13] https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/entities/publication/0c2ba150-f410-4cb0-994e-ad1ea812642c

[14] https://youtube.com/watch?v=B18pzEYjdwM&si=9DZCTxEq-Hbm57D9

[15] https://www.eurasiareview.com/16012025-vietnams-new-regime-finds-its-footing-analysis/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

[16] https://eastasiaforum.org/2025/09/03/vietnam-redraws-its-administrative-map/

As I have reported previously to our global network, thanks to the initiative and kind assistance of Sayyid Kashmiri, representative of the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in Washington D.C., our Caux Round Table study group was invited to visit Kufa University and noted seminaries in Najaf, Iraq and discuss with Shi’a leaders, clerical and lay, the Prophet Muhammad’s Constitution of Medina and his covenants with Christians and Jews.  The visit was most engaging and successful.  It was so informative to us.

I had never learned the teachings and theology of Shi’a Islam.  We visited the holy shrines and held several round table discussions with noted imams on the Shi’a vision of peaceful co-existence.

We saw the proclamation put in public for the visit of Pope Francis and his meeting with the Grand Ayatollah: “You are part of us; we are part of you.”

Professor Tahseen Fadhil Abbas, holder of the UNESCO Chair at Kufa University, was our gracious and most informative host.

After our visit, Prof. Tahseen wrote an important book in Arabic, now with an English translation, The Role of Shia Muslims in Peaceful Coexistence, available on Amazon.

For me, his book builds on our learning in Najaf about the Shi’a tradition from its founder, Imam Ali, the cousin and son-in-law of the Prophet Muhammad.

Prof. Tahseen importantly makes the case for a charismatic Shi’a tradition of prophetic mercy and compassion.

I am very grateful for his intellectual leadership and his sharing of his learning with a global audience.

I most strongly encourage you to order it and read it.

Recently in Hanoi, the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam met to prepare for next year’s party conference.  On the internet, one can become aware of a deep chasm between the party and the Vietnamese people.  I was sent a link to a short essay by an anonymous writer on the voice of the “powerless.”  The essay is attached here.

This emotionally compelling comment on power puts in high relief the Caux Round Table Principles for Government.  These principles, in part, affirm:

Just as the Principles for Business, these Principles for Government derive from two ethical ideals: “kyosei” and “human dignity.”  The Japanese concept of “kyosei” looks to living and working together for the common good, while the moral vision of “human dignity” refers to the sacredness or value of each person as an end, not simply as a means to the fulfillment of others’ purposes or even of majority demands.

The state is the servant and agent of higher ends.  It is subordinate to society.  Public power is to be exercised within a framework of moral responsibility for the welfare of others.  Governments that abuse their trust shall lose their authority and may be removed from office.

My correspondent made three points in his cover letter:

First, the most consequential task of the forthcoming Party Congress is to pick Vietnam’s leaders. Which individuals will rise to the top of the country’s power structure and who will be passed over?  From personalities will come policy.  From policy will come weal or woe for the people.

More and more in Vietnam, the thought is to decentralize control of the economy, politics, education, culture and the press.

Secondly, the references by Party General Secretary To Lam to a “new era” or to “newness” for Vietnam and the Vietnamese are not supported by specific ideas or recommendations.

Thirdly, is there a deadlock within the party leadership between those who see the value in and the wisdom of “newness” leading to reform of the system of concentrated power and control of people’s lives and those who prefer the status-quo, which privileges them as the “powerful?”

With a ceasefire achieved between Israel and Hamas, the shooting and bombing in Gaza has stopped.  But is that peace?  Given its 1988 charter, a covenant by its own terms, Hamas is at perpetual war with Jews.  That covenant with Allah says:

Today it is Palestine, tomorrow it will be one country or another.  The Zionist plan is limitless. After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates.  When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion and so on.  Their plan is embodied in the “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying.

Leaving the circle of struggle with Zionism is high treason and cursed be he who does that.  “For whoso shall turn his back unto them on that day, unless he turneth aside to fight or retreateth to another party of the faithful, shall draw on himself the indignation of Allah and his abode shall be hell; an ill journey shall it be thither.” (The Spoils – verse 16).  There is no way out except by concentrating all powers and energies to face this Nazi, vicious Tatar invasion.  The alternative is loss of one’s country, the dispersion of citizens, the spread of vice on earth and the destruction of religious values.  Let every person know that he is responsible before Allah, for “the doer of the slightest good deed is rewarded in like and the doer of the slightest evil deed is also rewarded in like.”

The Islamic Resistance Movement considers itself to be the spearhead of the circle of struggle with world Zionism and a step on the road.  The movement adds its efforts to the efforts of all those who are active in the Palestinian arena.  Arab and Islamic peoples should augment by further steps on their part.  Islamic groupings all over the Arab world should also do the same, since all of these are the best-equipped for the future role in the fight with the warmongering Jews.

Thus, it would seem that as long as there are Jews in the Holy Land, once ruled entirely by Muslims (as Hamas notes in its Covenant), Hamas will fight them as a religious obligation not to be avoided.  This is not a vision of peace.

But the Hamas interpretation of the will of Allah is not the only one.

The Prophet Muhammad made covenants with the children of Israel to respect and protect them. He did this as an agent of Allah.

A colleague of ours, Recep Senturk, dean of the College of Islamic Studies at Hamad Bin Khalifa University in Doha, Qatar, has written a book with a stunning proposal.

He points to the passage in Qur’an that affirms the equality of all descendants of Adam: “I am, therefore, I have rights and duties.”

Recep draws conclusions from this verse that a moral standard of Adamiyyah – equality among those who carry the DNA of Adam – applies in our time everywhere there are descendants of Adam.

The book is available on Amazon here.

Please buy a copy as soon as you can and read it.  Consider for yourself the implications for reconciliation between Palestinians and the Jews of Israel if both peoples would accept the premise of Adamiyyah and therefore learn to accept the other as worthy and respectable and not an enemy.

Two Wall Street Journal reporters (David Uberti and Jack Pitcher) just wrote on the dramatic market rush to buy gold – an inert metal that pays no interest.  Is this a judgment on Trump- managed capitalism?

They write:

Investors worried about the future of the dollar and other major currencies are piling into gold, bitcoin and other alternative assets, powering what has become known on Wall Street as the debasement trade. …

Most-actively-traded gold futures on Tuesday surpassed $4,000 a troy ounce for the first time. On Wednesday, gold rose further to settle at $4,043.30 a troy ounce.

The gold rally of 2025 is unusual in that it hasn’t been fueled by a financial meltdown.  A 52% gain in futures this year is on track to outpace similar surges during the first year of the Covid-19 pandemic and the 2007-09 recession, trailing only the inflationary shock in 1979.

These days, investors are pouring money into precious metals such as gold and cryptocurrencies like bitcoin at the same time President Trump has pledged to juice the economy through tax cuts and traders have pushed stocks to records with a fervor for all things artificial intelligence.

As investors make increasingly speculative bets that the boom will continue, they are also looking for ways to shield themselves from potential fallout of U.S. policy dysfunction, including widening budget deficits and the current government shutdown.  That is pushing them into assets not denominated in dollars.

Wall Street has pointed to this move as evidence that ballooning debt and uncomfortably high inflation are disrupting the outlook for currencies underpinning the global financial system.

“We’re seeing a tug of war,” said Joe Davis, chief economist at Vanguard Group.  “You’ve got the S&P 500 pricing in an AI supernova and you’ve got the gold camp saying, ‘We’re going to have structural deficits, we have fiscal pressure in the U.S., and I need to manage that risk.’”

Gold prices have risen for years … Trump’s promise to upend the global trading system in 2025 added momentum by pushing the U.S. dollar by one measure to its weakest first half in more than five decades.

What do you think?

As a fan of Adam Smith – the writer of both An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations and The Theory of Moral Sentiments – I want to share most of the recent commentary written for the Wall Street Journal by former U.S. Senator Phil Gramm and a colleague on how President Trump’s obsession with tariffs is a very bad, long term growth strategy for our national economy and is incompatible with successful free markets and creation of the “wealth of nations.”

Gramm’s argument validates one of the Caux Round Table’s Principles for Business:

Principle 5: Support Responsible Globalization:

-A responsible business, as a participant in the global marketplace, supports open and fair multilateral trade.
-A responsible business supports reform of domestic rules and regulations where they unreasonably hinder global commerce.

Here is Gramm’s essay.

Consider these quotes and reflect on this question: In thinking about his place in our world, does this man (Donald Trump) have a reassuring grip on reality?

“And I don’t mind making the speech without a teleprompter because the teleprompter is not working.  I feel very happy to be up here with you nevertheless and that way you speak more from the heart.  I can only say that whoever’s operating this teleprompter is in big trouble.”

“All I got from the United Nations was an escalator that on the way up, stopped right in the middle.  If the first lady wasn’t in great shape, she would’ve fallen.  But she’s in great shape.  We’re both in good shape.  We both stood.  And then a teleprompter that didn’t work.  These are the two things I got from the United Nations, a bad escalator and a bad teleprompter.”

“… the guns of war have shattered the peace I forged on two continents.”

“One year ago, our country was in deep trouble, but today, just eight months into my administration, we are the hottest country anywhere in the world and there is no other country even close.”

“Under my leadership, energy costs are down, gasoline prices are down, grocery prices are down, mortgage rates are down and inflation has been defeated.”

“In my first term, I built the greatest economy in the history of the world.  We had the best economy ever, history of the world and I’m doing the same thing again, but this time, it’s actually much bigger and even better.  The numbers far surpass my record-setting first term.”

“My administration has negotiated one historic trade deal after another, including with the United Kingdom, the European Union, Japan, South Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, the Philippines, Malaysia and many, many others.”

“… in a period of just seven months, I have ended seven unendable wars.  They said they were unendable. … No president or prime minister.  And for that matter, no other country has ever done anything close to that and I did it in just seven months.  It’s never happened before.  There’s never been anything like that.  Very honored to have done it.  It’s too bad that I had to do these things instead of the United Nations doing them.  And sadly, in all cases, the United Nations did not even try to help in any of them.”

“I’ve also been working relentlessly stopping the killing in Ukraine.  I thought that would be, of the seven wars that I stopped, I thought that would be the easiest because of my relationship with President Putin, which had always been a good one.”

“I’m really good at this stuff.  Your countries are going to hell.  In America, we’ve taken bold action to swiftly shut down uncontrolled migration.”

“And I’m really good at predicting things.  They actually said during the campaign, they had a hat, the best-selling hat.  Trump was right about everything.  And I don’t say that in a braggadocious way, but it’s true.  I’ve been right about everything.”

“He liked me.  I liked him and I only do business with people I like.”

In reflecting on his words, consider this summary from Google AI:

“Grandiose overt narcissism is a subtype of narcissistic personality disorder characterized by an exaggerated sense of self-importance, a need for constant admiration and a lack of empathy, all of which are displayed outwardly.  Unlike more hidden “vulnerable” narcissism, grandiose narcissists are often charming, outgoing and appear highly confident, using this persona to achieve their desires for power, prestige and control.  While they may seem successful, this facade masks a fragile ego that relies on external validation and their behavior often involves arrogance, entitlement and a tendency to manipulate others.”

Key characteristics:

-Inflated self-importance: A grandiose sense of self-importance, believing they are superior to others and destined for great things.

-Need for admiration: A deep need for excessive admiration and praise from others to validate their perceived superiority.

-Lack of empathy: A profound inability to recognize or care about the feelings and needs of others.

-Charismatic and outgoing: Often possess superficial charm and charisma, drawing people into their orbit, especially when they want something.

-Sense of entitlement: A firm belief that they deserve special treatment and automatic compliance with their expectations.

-Arrogance and haughtiness: Exhibit an arrogant or haughty demeanor and behavior.

-Manipulation and exploitation: Willingness to lie, cheat or manipulate others to achieve their goals.

-Fragile ego: Beneath the outward confidence lies a fragile self-esteem that requires constant external validation to maintain.

We recently posted several short videos on relevant and timely topics.  They include:

–Immigration as Hosts and Guests

–Pope Leo and the Caux Round Table Principles

–On Words and Violence

–The Reality of Supply and Demand

–Caux Round Table Principles as a Blueprint for the UN

All our videos can be found on our YouTube page here.  We recently put them into 9 playlists, which you can find here.

If you aren’t following us on Twitter or haven’t liked us on Facebook, please do so.  We update both platforms frequently.