Hello Reader,

The Global Fight for Freedom

1. Germany: "Welcome Back to the Fight"
2. Romania Rejects Trumpian Firebrand
3. Senate Vows to "Put the Hurt" on Putin
4. China's Workers Unite—In Revolt
5. Kim's Brittle Empire Cracks Open

Country names are followed by their 2025 freedom scores according to Freedom House. I will resume sending source links next week as my new domain continues to establish its good reputation.

This week, German tanks rolled eastward for the first time in eight decades as Chancellor Friedrich Merz defied history, permanently stationing 5,000 Bundeswehr troops on foreign soil. Now, their Leopard tanks loom just 100 kilometers from Russian territory in Lithuania.
​
The move obliterates a postwar taboo born from the ashes of Nazi militarism. Germany's Basic Law of 1949 was written to prevent another Wehrmacht, and for decades, permanent foreign deployments were avoided as a matter of political and legal caution. For 75 years, military involvement abroad remained forbidden ground, with Germany maintaining only territorial defense forces.
​
In March, Merz's Christian Democratic Union authorized an exception to the debt brake to fund a €100 billion defense modernization plan, enabling Germany's first permanent foreign deployment since World War II.
​
Meanwhile, Russia's iron fist is closing around NATO's eastern flank. Putin has amassed 150,000 troops in Belarus, and a Russian exclave between Poland and Lithuania bristles with nuclear weapons, advanced missiles, and the Baltic Fleet. The Suwalki Gap—that 60-mile corridor between Russian Kaliningrad and Belarus—remains NATO's Achilles heel.
​
As Paul Henreid told Humphrey Bogart on that fog-shrouded Casablanca tarmac: "Welcome back to the fight. This time, I know our side will win." But this time, the Germans are firmly on “our side”.

In a shocking reversal of fortune, Romania elected pro-European mathematician Nicușor Dan in its most consequential election since 1989. Dan defeated nationalist George Simion 54% to 46% after trailing by 20 points in the first round. Thousands flooded Bucharest streets waving Romanian and EU flags as Dan declared victory over what he called a "hate wave."
​
Simion's policies raised genuine concerns about regional stability. He campaigned for territorial expansion, seeking to restore Romania's 1940 borders by reclaiming parts of Moldova and Ukraine—earning him entry bans from both countries as a "national security threat." His irredentist "Greater Romania" vision would have destabilized NATO's eastern flank. He promised to end Ukrainian aid and called banned candidate Georgescu the "rightful president," vowing to make him PM despite evidence Georgescu benefitted from a Russian-funded TikTok campaign.
​
Trump's team had championed Simion's cause. JD Vance blasted Romania's courts at Munich, dismissing their Russian interference findings as "flimsy suspicions." Although the November annulment deserved scrutiny, Vance's intervention may have hurt Simion's chances.
​
Dan—the corruption-fighting Bucharest mayor—trounced Simion in televised debates. Grassroots volunteers mobilized record turnout among voters who remembered 1989's revolution. Though Dan has yet to prove his freedom credentials, Romania chose its own destiny over Trump's influence. I call that a victory for global freedom.

The United States Senate has not bowed to Trump's fawning approach toward Vladimir Putin. As Putin launches his largest-ever arial assault on Ukraine, a bipartisan uprising is brewing, where 81 members—including Majority Leader John Thune—now back crushing sanctions against Russia if Putin continues his charade of peace talks.
​
The Sanctioning Russia Act of 2025, led by Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), would inflict significant damage on Russia's war machine with 500% tariffs on countries buying Russian oil, gas, and uranium. China and India—Putin's lifelines—would face economic warfare for propping up Moscow's shadow fleet.
​
"I'm not waiting for anything. I think we should…put the hurt on Putin," declared Sen. Todd Young (R-Ind.). "I'm not looking to anyone else for guidance on this. I've waited long enough." With 81 cosponsors commanding veto-proof support, senators are done genuflecting to Trump's Putin appeasement.
​
Yet Trump meekly urges caution while Secretary Marco Rubio pathetically warns sanctions could make Putin "walk away from negotiations." What negotiations? Putin has offered nothing but stalling tactics and missile strikes.
​
The Senate stands ready to act within weeks—with or without Trump's blessing.

For years, Western analysts have predicted China’s economic reckoning. Now, it has arrived. Labor protests have erupted across the country, with workers camping for weeks outside factory gates to demand their unpaid wages. Construction crews hold desperate banners about "sick family members urgently waiting for money to save their lives." Many teachers haven't been paid in six months, and cash-strapped local governments are imposing absurd fees on residents.
​
Desperate construction workers climb buildings, threatening to jump unless paid. At an electronics company, thousands shout "Strike! Strike!" At another, workers block highways to demand backpay. Xi’s iron-fisted control has yielded youth unemployment nearing 20% and a full-scale construction collapse. But Trump's tariffs accelerated the pain—Goldman Sachs estimates 16 million Chinese jobs at risk as export orders plummet.
​
As China continues its stunning technological breakthroughs, its economy suffocates beneath. Xi props up ghost cities, crushes private entrepreneurs, and funnels capital into bloated state firms. Markets can't breathe. Risk dies. Innovation flees overseas.
​
Angry workers have always been an engine of revolution—from the mills of Manchester to the shipyards of Gdansk. Has China’s moment finally arrived—or will fear and force win again?
​
​Editor's Note: Radio Free Asia was the source for this report, as it was for all other news outlets’ coverage of these events. RFA awaits its fate as Trump's defunding efforts head toward the Supreme Court.

The Dear Leader's week from hell began with his newest 5,000-ton destroyer crashing sideways into Chongjin harbor. Kim Jong Un watched in horror as the transport cradle slid prematurely, crushing the hull and leaving his naval pride stranded—bow jutting skyward, stern submerged. Satellite images now show the warship draped in blue tarps, lying wounded on its side like a beached whale.
​
Kim's rage was volcanic. He branded the "catastrophic failure" a "criminal act," promising to punish officials for "absolute carelessness" that damaged "national dignity." The destroyer—meant to showcase North Korea's naval modernization—instead became a humiliating symbol of incompetence.
​
Simultaneously, the UN General Assembly held its first-ever plenary meeting focused solely on North Korea's human rights nightmare. Defector Kim Eun-joo testified how her father died of starvation while Kim diverted resources to weapons. Gyuri Kang revealed three friends executed for watching South Korean dramas—one just 19 years old.
​
North Korea's ambassador called the women "human scum," but the damage was done. Two fronts of failure: military embarrassment at home, international condemnation abroad. Kim’s aura of infallibility takes another hit.
​

Our American Democracy

America's Fiscal Reckoning Arrives

Bond markets delivered a brutal verdict this week. Treasury yields spiked sharply as investors fled U.S. debt, forcing higher borrowing costs on a government already drowning in red ink. Higher yields mean investors demand greater compensation to lend money to Washington, reflecting diminished confidence in America's ability to repay its debts.
​
While media blamed Trump's "Big Beautiful Bill" for the selloff, decades of bipartisan overspending built this powder keg. The U.S. was already a fiscal train wreck when Fitch downgraded America's credit rating under Biden, sending yields above even their current levels.
​
Yet the House Republican budget plan threatens unprecedented damage. Independent estimates project deficits topping 7% of GDP for a decade—higher than any sustained stretch in U.S. history. The plan cuts taxes by $4 trillion and spending by merely $1.6 trillion.
​
For the first time in American history, spending on debt service now exceeds military spending, leading bond investors to send Washington an unmistakable message: the fiscal party is over. America's economic future hangs in the balance.

Titanic Budget Bill Approaches Fiscal Iceberg

"It's a sad joke," Wisconsin GOP Senator Ron Johnson thundered, condemning Trump's budget bill with the fury of a fiscal conservative watching America burn. Rand Paul chimed in, calling the bill's spending cuts "wimpy" and "anemic." With only three votes to spare, Majority Leader John Thune faces a GOP intraparty nightmare as Johnson demands pre-pandemic spending levels while Flippin’ Josh Hawley vows to block any Medicaid cuts.
​
America's debt trajectory has become mathematically impossible. Entitlement spending is on course to devour most of the federal budget within decades, even without the Trump tax cuts. The Congressional Budget Office projects debt-to-GDP ratios that historically trigger currency collapse. Yet Washington fiddles while Rome burns.
​
Meanwhile, Democrats peddle fear with breathless hyperbole, while offering no solutions to the crisis. Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries warned "people will die" and hospitals will "close." Yet FactCheck.org notes these dire predictions remain "speculative" without knowing "the specifics on spending reductions."
​
Behind closed doors, Trump issues venomous threats: "Don't f___ around with Medicaid," he warned House Republicans. When Thomas Massie refused to bend, Trump threatened he "wouldn't be a Republican much longer."
​
Washington's Titanic addiction to spending speeds us toward the fiscal iceberg as both parties debate deck chair arrangements.

10th Amendment Triumphs in Memphis

Memphis Mayor Paul Young (D) delivered a constitutional masterstroke last December, refusing to sign Joe Biden's consent decree—a court order that could have given unelected federal bureaucrats power to manage his police department for a decade. This week, the Trump administration vindicated his resistance, dropping the investigation and backing away from prior claims of constitutional violations in Memphis and six other major cities.
​
The Biden order targeted a predominantly Black police department for allegedly discriminating against Black residents—then demanded the Black community shoulder hundreds of millions in compliance costs. Young calculated that consent decrees have cost Chicago and Seattle more than $500 million and $200 million respectively, with mixed results at best.
​
The constitutional foundation is unshakeable. The Tenth Amendment reserves policing powers to states and localities: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution...are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people." Consent decrees erode local police accountability, violating core principles of federalism.
​
The injustices that sparked Minneapolis and Louisville investigations—George Floyd's and Breonna Taylor's deaths—demanded justice. And they received it through state and federal prosecutions.
​
This correction of federal overreach restores accountability to the communities where it belongs—a victory for both democracy and fiscal responsibility.

Wilson's Progressive Vision Crumbles

The Supreme Court delivered a constitutional thunderbolt Thursday, refusing to reinstate two Democratic labor officials Trump fired from "independent" agencies. The 6-3 decision strikes down America's century-long drift toward rule by unelected experts.
​
Since Wilson's Progressive revolution, federal bureaucracies have multiplied like rabbits —spreading far beyond their constitutional bounds. Wilson's Federal Trade Commission (1914) and Federal Reserve (1913) opened the floodgates. FDR’s New Deal tsunami then followed—the SEC, FCC, and NLRB—all designed to insulate "expert" decision-making from democratic accountability.
​
"Because the Constitution vests the executive power in the President," the majority declared, "he may remove without cause executive officers who exercise that power on his behalf." This strikes directly at 1935's Humphrey's Executor decision, which blessed congressional schemes to shield bureaucrats from presidential control.
​
Justice Elena Kagan's dissent defended “bipartisan administrative bodies carrying out expertise-based functions with a measure of independence from presidential control." Here Kagan offers the very definition of technocracy, which is precisely the problem—governance by credential rather than consent.
​
The decision challenges a century of administrative power structures that concentrated legislative, executive, and judicial functions in unelected hands, restoring accountability to the only official voters can fire: the President.

​

Refer a Friend:

If you've enjoyed this episode of Dispatches from the Rebellion, please consider referring a friend. Forward this email and ask them to click on the "Subscribe" button below to sign up.

​