TikTok vs Silicon Valley: Who Will Be Dancing in the End?

 

 Ban or no ban, TikTok is still the app of the hour: it will continue to make its rivals sweat.

I will begin with a question: Is Silicon Valley secretly planning a victory dance if TikTok is banned? During the time when the CEO of the social media app TikTok, Shou Zi Chew, was being questioned by Congress last month, TikTok's more than 100 million users in the United States were concerned that their government was planning to ban the Chinese-owned platform due to concerns over national security. Their agony stands in stark contrast to the jubilation that can be seen in Silicon Valley, where locally established social media companies would be overjoyed to see the back of their well-known competitor. Shares of companies like as Meta, Pinterest, and Snap all see their prices rise whenever there is a rumble emanating from Capitol Hill.

The future of TikTok is now uncertain. But what is now abundantly evident is that the app has irrevocably altered social media in a way that will make life more difficult for social apps that are already in existence. Within a span of fewer than six years, TikTok has weaned the world off of traditional forms of social networking and hooked it on short films that are selected based on an algorithm. Users are crazy about it. The problem for the platforms is that the new model generates less revenue than the old one did, and it's possible that this will always be the case.

Incredible progress has been made in such a short amount of time. Since its introduction to the American market in 2017, TikTok has amassed a greater number of users than all but a select group of social media applications that have been available for more than twice as long (see table 1 for additional information). It dominates the market share of its target demographic, young people. A daily hour is spent on TikTok by young adults in the United States aged 18 to 24. This is twice as long as they spend on Instagram and Snapchat combined, and more than five times as long as they spend on Facebook, which is mostly used by this age group to communicate with their parents and older relatives.

 

Figure 1: Monthly Active Users of Social Media in the United States (in Millions)

Social Media	Monthly Active Users in 2022	Forecast for 2024 (Monthly Active Users)
YouTube	220 million	235 million
Facebook	170 million	168 million
Instagram	125 million	130 million
Snapchat	84 million	84 million
Twitter	49 million	47 million
TikTok	91 million	110 million

Source: Culled from The Economist (2023)

Because of TikTok's success, its competitors have been forced to develop new features and capabilities. Reels is a TikTok clone that has been grafted onto Facebook and Instagram. Reels was introduced by Meta, the company that owns both Facebook and Instagram. Both applications' main feeds have been transformed into algorithmically sorted discovery engines. Pinterest (with Watch), Snapchat (with Spotlight), YouTube (with Shorts), and even Netflix (with Fast Laughs) have all developed products that are conceptually comparable to one another. The most recent makeover, which was unveiled on March 8 and was inspired by TikTok, was carried out by Spotify, a music-streaming app. The homepage of Spotify now displays video segments that users may skip by swiping up. Douyin, the Chinese version of TikTok, is having a similar impact in China, where digital giants like Tencent are increasingly making short videos the focal point of their product offers.

As a direct consequence of this, short-form video content now dominates across all social media platforms. The available published research indicates that of the total 64 minutes that the typical American spends per day using such services, 40 minutes are spent watching video clips. This is an increase from the previous level of just 28 minutes just three years ago. However, there is a catch to this change that you should be aware of. Despite the fact that consumers have an insatiable desire for short videos, the format is proving to be less profitable than the traditional news feed.

 

The Great Monetization Race

TikTok generates revenue from its audience in the United States at a rate of just $0.31 for every hour that the average user spends on the app. This is a third of the rate that Facebook generates revenue and a fifth of the rate that Instagram generates revenue. According to estimates provided by a research company called Insider Intelligence, TikTok will generate approximately $67 from each of its American users this year, whereas Instagram will make more than $200. And this is not an issue that is unique to TikTok. As of right now, the monetization efficiency of Reels is significantly lower than that of Feed. Therefore, the more that Reels expands, it takes some time away from Feed, and Meta actually loses money as a result of this. In March of last year, Meta's chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, shared this information with investors.

The notion that TikTok, Reels, and the other sites for short videos are still in their developmental stages provides the most reassuring justification for the revenue discrepancy. TikTok is still "the other  kid on the block" when it comes to the world of social media advertising, and the app did not begin serving advertisements until 2019. Because it takes time for marketers to become familiar with new products, platforms typically limit the number of advertisements they display while they are working to attract new customers.  A new service like TikTok cannot truly wave a magic wand and announce that its new advertising are 'premium' without any performance history to back it up, thus it is only reasonable that they begin at the end of the line.

Meta identifies this state of the affairs as one that it has visited in the past. It took some time, but Instagram's Stories feature is now a lucrative revenue generator for the social media platform. Meta is taking a more aggressive approach to monetizing Reels, and the company anticipates that it will stop losing money by the end of this year. However, the company recognizes that there will be a significant amount of time before Reels achieves the same level of profitability as the previous news stream.  The management of Meta is aware that it took them a number of years to successfully bridge the gap that existed between Stories and Feed advertisements. They anticipate that Reels will require a greater amount of time for this.

Some people question whether or not the gap will actually ever be filled. When it comes to making money off of their users' time, even the most developed video apps are unable to compete with the traditional social networks. YouTube, which has been operational for 18 years, produces far less money per user hour compared to social media platforms like Facebook or Instagram. In China, where short-form video became popular a few years before it did in the West, the monetization rate of short-video advertisements on local e-commerce applications was only about 15% last year. This is significantly lower than the global average.

A news feed consisting of text and graphics will invariably have a higher ad load than a video will, for a number of reasons. If you scroll through Instagram for five minutes, you might see dozens of advertisements, yet if you watch a five-minute video on YouTube, you might only see three adverts. When customers are in a more passive mindset, such as when they are watching video rather than scrolling through a feed of friends' updates, they are less likely to click through to a product page to make a purchase. It costs around half as much to book 1,000 impressions for a video ad on Instagram Reels than it does for 1,000 impressions for an ad in Instagram's news feed. This suggests that advertisers view Instagram Reels ads as having a lower likelihood of generating clicks.

 

When Targeting is a Hit or a “Miss-Take”

Due to the fact that many marketers have not yet created ads in video format, competition in auctions for video advertisements is lower than competition for static advertisements. Large advertisers place a high value on video advertisements and report record interaction on TikTok, where products have become popular with the hashtag "#TikTokmademebuyit." However, the vast majority of small businesses, which are the source of the billions of dollars that social networks have amassed, find it difficult to generate video spots. According to published evidence, just over 40 percent of Meta's around 10 million advertisers employ Reels advertisements. It's possible that artificial intelligence will make it simpler to convince the remaining 60% of people to make video advertising. One senior executive envisions a not-too-distant future in which even a tiny retailer will be able to produce customized video advertisements by merely using voice instructions. In preparation for when it finally comes, half of the lengthy tail has been cut off.

The targeting capabilities of short-video apps are also significantly reduced. The fact that users of TikTok and its many imitators are required to do nothing more than watch and swipe away when they become bored is one of the reasons why the platform is so popular with viewers. This is then analyzed by the algorithm to determine the types of videos (and, consequently, advertising) that the user prefers. The last generation of social networks convinced users to fill out lengthy profiles that included information on everything from their schooling to their marital status. However, this speculation is no substitute for the hard personal data that was acquired by that age of social networks. As a consequence of this, the majority of advertisers continue to view short-form video as an appropriate venue for less specific, so-called brand advertising—that is, advertising designed to increase public awareness of their product—rather than the hyper-personalized (and more value) direct-response advertisements that traditional social networks specialize in.

At least in this regard, TikTok's competitors have an advantage over the original TikTok app. Meta already knows a lot about many of the people who watch its videos and is able to make educated estimates about the rest of the users by utilizing a trove of data that has been accumulated over the course of a decade and a half, at a time when there were few regulations prohibiting tracking users' activity across the wider web. If a new user who is not known views the same videos as a group that is known to be comprised of wealthy female graduates who have children, for example, it is a good bet that the new user has the same profile as the group. TikTok claims that it has made significant expenditures in its direct-response advertisements, including the development of new techniques for evaluating the performance of these advertisements. But it has a ways to go before it can catch up.

In this new and more challenging advertising climate, social applications are not the only ones who stand to lose.  To a large extent, the focus of all advertising is on identifying the next-best option. The vast majority of advertisers set aside a certain amount of money to spend on advertisements on a specific platform, and that amount of money stays the same no matter how far it goes. If advertisements on social media become less effective in general, this will be terrible news not only for the platforms that sell those advertisements, but also for the marketers that buy them.

 

 

 

Notes

 

Guzman, A. (2023, April 11). There’s a Problem With Biden’s Threat to Ban TikTok: How to Actually Block Americans From Using the App? Retrieved from Fortune: https://fortune.com/2023/04/11/tiktok-ban-biden-threat-difficult-risky-implement/

The Economist. (2023, March 21). How TikTok Broke Social Media. Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/business/2023/03/21/how-tiktok-broke-social-media

Thorbecke , C., & Fung, B. (2023, March 23). The US Government is Once Again Threatening to Ban TikTok. What You Should Know. Retrieved from CNN Business: https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/18/tech/tiktok-ban-explainer/index.html#:~:text=Late%20last%20year%2C%20President%20Joe,little%20more%20than%20political%20theater.%E2%80%9D

Yurieff, K. (2021, January 26). Two of TikTok’s Competitors are Merging. Retrieved from CNN Business: https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/26/tech/byte-clash-tiktok/index.html

 

 

 

From Russia With Leaks: Inside the Shocking Story of America's Biggest Intelligence Breach Yet

 

 Leaks in the government are like earthquakes, they shake things up and make everyone run for cover! The latest leak of classified documents about the war in Ukraine was so serious, even the Pentagon is looking for a “plumber.”

The leak of highly secret documents about the war in Ukraine has sent shockwaves through the US government, just like a small earthquake that could shake up a city. Even though the White House is trying to stop the leaks, they are worried that more information could get out, which would make the leaks even more dangerous.

Chris Meagher, assistant to the secretary of defense for public affairs, stated to the press that Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin learned for the first time on Thursday that a number of classified briefing slides had been leaked. These slides detailed the activities of the United States military in the conflict in Ukraine as well as intelligence involving other countries.

The whole unfortunate incident happened this way: On February 26, the security service of Ukraine, the SBU, came to a surprising conclusion. Their own agents in Belarus had gone against orders earlier that day and attacked a Russian spy plane. There were American spies listening in. They noticed the piece of information in a highly secret slide about the war in Ukraine that the United States' joint staff passed around on March 1. Within a few days, that report and more than 50 others had been printed and put on the internet. It seems to be the most serious leak of U.S. intelligence in ten years.

Some of the leaked files, which include military reports on the war in Ukraine and CIA reports on a wide range of global issues, were posted on Telegram, a popular messaging app in Russia. This got a lot of people's attention. Bellingcat, a group that looks into things, says that some of them were posted on March 1 and 2 on Discord, a popular chat site for video game fans. Some secret information came out as early as January.

As the slides were shared on Telegram, at least one was crudely changed to make the number of Ukrainian casualties higher and the number of Russian casualties lower. Other slides, however, didn't seem to have been changed in any obvious way.  According to The Economist, a news magazine, the reports were probably real American documents, because the Pentagon confirmed it was true. A Pentagon spokesman said that it was leading a group of people from across the government to look at the damage. High-level officials talked with partners and allies all over the world. As the Department of Justice started looking into where the leak came from, the Biden administration was looking more closely at how and to whom this kind of information is given out. The timing couldn't be worse. The Ukraine is getting ready for a counterattack that could start in a few weeks. The information that got out is a very interesting look at the state of its armed forces.

On several slides, the West's plans to arm and train Ukraine's army are explained in great detail. This includes the status of each Ukrainian brigade, its inventory of armor and artillery, and the exact number of shells and precision-guided rockets that Ukraine fires each day. If the information is correct, Russian military intelligence might be able to figure out which brigades have been given the job of breaking through Russian defenses at the start of the offensive. Then, Russia could carefully watch these units to figure out where an offensive would be best placed. One slide shows that the operation is likely to be led by the Ukraine's 10th Corps, which makes its headquarters an easy target for Russia.

The documents that show the state of the Ukrainian air defenses may be the ones that do the most damage. After being hit over and over by Russian drones and missiles, these are in bad shape. Based on how fast they were being fired, it was thought that the country would run out of Buk missiles on March 31, but it is not clear if this has happened. It will only have S-300 missiles until about May 2nd. About 90 percent  of Ukraine's medium-range air defenses are made up of these two types. The Pentagon says that the remaining batteries, which include Western air defense systems, can't fire as much as the Russians, but on April 4, it said it would send more interceptor missiles. The report says that by May 23, Ukraine will no longer be able to protect its front lines. A table inside the report shows when all of each type of missile will be used up, and a map shows where each battery is.

Spying on Allies: America's Best Kept Secret (Not Anymore)

But the leaked documents don't paint a very good picture of Russia's military. Even though it  almost wiped out the city of Bakhmut in the east, its combat power is severely crippled. The Defense Intelligence Agency of the United States says that 35,000 to 43,000 Russian soldiers have died, which is twice the number of Ukrainian deaths. Over 154,000 Russian soldiers have been wounded, which is about 40,000 more than the number of Ukrainian injuries. Also, Russia has lost more than 2,000 tanks and only has 419 left in theater. On another slide, it says that Russia's grinding campaign of attrition in the east is heading toward a stalemate, and that the likely result will be a war that lasts longer than 2023.

The documents will affect politics in a wide range of ways. One slide says that there are 97 special forces members from NATO countries in Ukraine. Fifty of them are from Britain, 17 are from Latvia, 15 are from France, and 14 are from the United States. Most of them are probably teaching their Ukrainian counterparts how to do their jobs. Countries often use special forces in secret. Even so, the Kremlin is likely to use the news to back up its claim that it is not just fighting Ukraine, but all of NATO.

The leak is also a reminder that American spies gather information on their allies. When it was revealed in 2013 that America's National Security Agency (NSA), which is in charge of signals intelligence, had spied on Angela Merkel, who was the German chancellor at the time, and other world leaders, this fact caused a huge uproar. The latest batch of documents shows that American agencies are spying not only on Ukrainian generals and spies, but also on officials in Hungary, Israel, South Korea, and the International Atomic Energy Agency, a UN watchdog. One report from the CIA says that the leaders of Mossad, Israel's foreign intelligence agency, told its employees and Israeli citizens to protest against controversial changes to the law.

More importantly, the leaks show not only who the U.S. is spying on, but also how. For example, the SBU's assessment of the attack on the Belarus plane is marked not only as "top secret," which is the highest level of classification in the United States, but also as "SI-G." Officials who are familiar with the notation say that this acronym stands for information that comes from highly sensitive signals intelligence, like phone taps or electronic intercepts. But because many of the leaked documents describe specific conversations between people or groups (including those in the Russian military and intelligence agencies), they might help the targets figure out how America is getting the information.

Thomas Rid of Johns Hopkins University says that the release of these documents is probably one of the four most important leaks of intelligence in this century. The other three are the theft of files by Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor, in 2013 and the release of NSA and CIA hacking tools in 2016 and 2017, respectively. There could be a lot of damage. The leak proves that American intelligence agencies have gotten very deep into Russia. But Russian spies and generals are likely to take steps to protect themselves, like changing how they talk to each other – or communicate in general.

There is a possibility that American allies will be reluctant to reveal secrets now. A significant number of people in the United States have access to sensitive information. Over 1.3 million of them, including a large number of contractors and individuals like Edward Snowden, have access clearance to top secret files. Yet in the aftermath of the attacks on September 11, sensitive material was disseminated to a far wider audience than before. These attacks occurred in part because intelligence was not shared fast and extensively enough between agencies. The end consequence was a system with more leaks. Because of this, Ukrainian generals already had a healthy respect for the confidentiality of their information. It's possible that they'll freeze up at a crucial juncture now. Mr. Rid made the observation that if something of this nature had occurred in the United Kingdom, in Israel, in Germany, or in Australia, the United States would have completely stopped sharing intelligence.

 

  

Notes

Cooper, H., Barnes, J. E., Schmitt , E., & Gibbons-Neff, T. (2023, April 7). New Batch of Classified Documents Appears on Social Media Sites. Retrieved from The New York Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/07/us/politics/classified-documents-leak.html

Copp, T., & Baldor, L. C. (2023, April 10). Leaked Documents a 'Very Serious' Risk to Security: Pentagon. Retrieved from Yahoo! News: https://www.yahoo.com/news/leaked-documents-very-serious-risk-190706906.html

The Economist. (2023, April 10). A Leak of Files Could Be America’s Worst Intelligence Breach in a Decade. Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/united-states/2023/04/10/a-leak-of-files-could-be-americas-worst-intelligence-breach-in-a-decade

Trofimov, Y., McMillan, R., & Weinberger, S. (2023, April 9). New Details on Intelligence Leak Show It Circulated for Weeks Before Raising Alarm. Retrieved from Wall Street Journal: https://www.wsj.com/articles/new-details-on-intelligence-leak-show-it-circulated-for-weeks-before-raising-alarm-7730a395

 

 

 

Why Easter Celebrations Moves Around So Much.

 

Easter's date can change, but it is not chosen at random. Instead, it is determined by a formula that takes into account the lunar cycle and the Gregorian calendar.

 

Easter's date can change a lot from year to year, sometimes by more than a month. This is different from other Christian holidays. For the Western church, it happens between March 22 and April 25, and for the Eastern church, it happens between April 4 and May 8. This, in turn, affects when public holidays, school breaks, and school terms are in many countries. Why does Easter change so often?

The Bible states that on the evening of the Jewish holiday of Passover, Jesus shared the Passover meal with his disciples, died the following day (which Christians refer to as "Good Friday"), and was resurrected three days later (the following Sunday). The first full moon that occurs following the vernal equinox marks the beginning of the Passover holiday, and this full moon might appear on any day of the week. The Council of Nicaea made a decision in 325 AD that Easter would be celebrated on the Sunday that came after the first full moon that occurred on or after the vernal equinox. This decision was made so that Easter would always fall on a Sunday. Nevertheless, there is a catch: if the full moon happens on a Sunday, then the first day of Passover will also be on a Sunday. In this case, Easter will be moved back one week to ensure that it will still take place after Passover. To make matters even more confusing, the council fixed the date of the vernal equinox to March 21st, the date on which it occurred in 325 AD (even though it now occurs on March 20th), and introduced a set of tables to define when the full moon occurs, which do not quite align with the actual astronomical full moon. Both of these actions were done to make the date of the vernal equinox the same as the date on which it occurred in 325 AD. This indicates that, in actuality, Easter can take place before to Passover if it so chooses.

When the hypothetical full moon happens on March 21st itself—that is, in a year in which March 21st falls on a Saturday—the date of Easter is considered to be the earliest that it can possibly be. After that, Easter is celebrated on Sunday, March 22nd, which is a very unusual occurrence that hasn't taken place since 1818 and won't again until 2285. The latest date that Easter can fall on is the one that occurs when there is a full moon on March 20. In this scenario, the first full moon that occurs after March 21st will be on April 18th, which is a lunar month or 29 days later. In the event that the 18th of April happens on a Sunday, the "special Sunday rule" will be in effect, and Easter will be celebrated on the Sunday that comes after it, which is April 25. The last time that occurred was in 1943, and the next time will be in 2038. Because of this, the date of Easter can fall anywhere within a 35-day range before or after the 21st of March, depending on when the full moon occurs in relation to that date. The earlier Julian calendar, which is currently 13 days behind the Gregorian calendar, is utilized by Eastern Christianity. This results in a different range of possible dates being used by this branch of Christianity, despite the fact that it follows the same fundamental rule. This may create some difficulties and confusion.

 

Unfinished Business

Several plans have been made to change how the date of Easter is figured out. At a meeting in Aleppo in 1997, people from different churches suggested that, starting in 2001, the dates of the spring equinox and the full moon should be based on real astronomical observations instead of tables. This would have made sure that both parts of the church celebrated Easter on the same day. But the idea was not taken up. In 1928, Britain's parliament passed a law that says Easter is the Sunday after the second Saturday in April. This law has never been put into place. In another idea, Easter would be the second Sunday in April. Several churches, including the Catholic church, say they are open to the idea of setting the date of Easter in this way, so that it doesn't change by more than a week. But until everyone agrees on a date, it will keep moving around within a five-week window.

 

 

Notes

 

Bikos, K. (2023). Calculating the Easter Date. Retrieved from Time and Date: https://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/determining-easter-date.html

Boeckmann, C. (2023, April 2). Why Does Easter Change Every Year? Retrieved from Almanac : https://www.almanac.com/content/when-is-easter

Carter, M. (2023, March 16). Everything You Need to Know About Why Easter's Date Changes Every Year. Retrieved from Yahoo! Finance: https://finance.yahoo.com/finance/news/ash-wednesday-valentine-apos-day-223005225.html#:~:text=Easter's%20exact%20date%20varies%20so,moon%20after%20the%20vernal%20equinox.

The Economist. (2013, March 28). Why does Easter move around so much? Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/the-economist-explains/2013/03/28/why-does-easter-move-around-so-much

 

 

The “Almighty” Dollar: China Cannot Change the Dollar’s Rule of the Financial Universe

 

It is true: the U.S. dollar rules the financial universe. Even though the dollar's hold on the world’s financial markets and instruments has been getting weaker over the past few years, no other currency comes close. The Chinese renminbi isn't a good alternative – until China opens its financial markets and accepts the rule of law, no investor will really trust its currency.

 

Those baffled by the U.S. dollar’s rule of the financial universe should listen to “It’s all about the Benjamins”, an ode to the 100-dollar bill by Puff Daddy, an American rapper. Broadly, if there is one benefit that can be attributed to hegemons, it is the stability that they bring to the systems that they rule. The United States dollar has dominated the world's financial and monetary system for the past seven decades. In spite of all the rhetoric about the Chinese yuan's ascent, the dominance of the dollar remains unshakeable. Nothing can compete with it in terms of being a method of payment, a store of value, or a reserve asset. But, the dominance of the dollar is built on shaky ground, and the system that it supports is inherently unstable. Even worse, the alternative reserve currencies suffer from a number of fundamental flaws. The shift to a more stable system will be so difficult that it could be compared to setting a wet log ablaze with a lighter.

For several decades, the economic might of the United States legitimized the claims of the dollar to be the world's reserve currency. Yet, according to published evidence, there is now a schism between the economic clout and the financial strength that the United States possesses. The United States is responsible for around 15.47% of the world's GDP and 8.11% of the entire export commerce in the world in 2021 and in 2020 respectively. Nevertheless around 70% of the world's output as well as a comparable portion of the world's population lies within a de facto dollar zone. This is a zone in which the local currency is tied to the dollar or moves in some synchrony with the dollar. Since 1999, when it was 39%, the percentage of American companies in the stock of worldwide corporate investment has decreased to around 24% of what it is today. Yet, Wall Street now more than ever determines the pace at which markets around the world move. The percentage of the world's assets that are managed by American fund managers has increased to approximately  55% from 44% a decade ago.

The expanding difference in economic and financial power between the United States and other countries, both within and outside of the dollar zone, presents issues for those other countries. The reason for that is simple: the expenses associated with the supremacy of the dollar are beginning to outweigh its benefits. First, economies have to be resilient enough to weather wild gyrations. Throughout the past few months, the interest rate increase in the United States has driven money away from emerging countries, causing currency and share prices to suffer. The decisions made by the Federal Reserve have an impact on offshore dollar debts and deposits totaling at least $9 trillion. Because certain nations peg their currencies to the dollar, the central banks of those countries are required to respond to actions taken by the Federal Reserve. In countries such as Indonesia, Malaysia, Mexico, South Africa, and Turkey, foreign investors own between 20 and 50 percent of the local currency's issuance of government bonds. When interest rates in the United States rise, these investors are more inclined to exit developing economies.

At one point in the past, the Fed would have been able to offset the negative effects of capital outflows by pointing to the increased demand for goods and services, which would have included an increase in imports. Nonetheless, during the course of the last ten years, the United States saw its proportion of global merchandise imports fall from 16% to 13%. The number of countries for which the United States is the largest export market has decreased from 44 in 1994 to only 32 in 2015; in comparison, the number of countries for which China is the largest export market has increased from two to 43. Unstable is a system in which the Fed continues to print money as the rest of the world trembles.

A second issue is that there is no safety net in place in the event that the offshore dollar system experiences a crisis. During the financial crisis of 2008–2009, the Federal Reserve reluctantly intervened, playing the role of a lender of last resort by providing international banks and central banks with a total of one trillion dollars in liquidity. If there were to be another crisis, it would involve far larger quantities of money. Since 2007, the global dollar market in offshore locations has more than doubled in size. By the 2020s, its size rivaled that of the banking business in the United States. After 2008-2009, Congress has developed a healthy amount of skepticism regarding the Fed's emergency loans. In the event of the next crisis, the Federal Reserve's intentions to issue massive swap lines may run into opposition from regulatory agencies or members of Congress. How much longer are countries going to be willing to have their financial systems tied to the turbulent and ineffective politics of the United States?

This subject is brought to the forefront by a third cause for concern, which is the growing tendency of the United States to utilize its economic might as a political instrument. The dollar payment system is being used by policymakers and prosecutors to exert control not only over rogue bankers and corrupt football officials, but also over rogue countries such as Russia and Iran. This weakness in American foreign policy causes other states to clench their teeth.

People in America might wonder why this is important to them. They didn't make any country tie its currency to the dollar, and they didn't try to get foreign companies to issue dollar debt. But Americans are affected by the dollar's huge role. It has benefits, like making loans cheaper. But there are costs as well as the "exorbitant privilege" of having the reserve currency. If the Fed doesn't step in as the "lender of last resort" during a dollar liquidity crisis, the collapse of economies around the world will hurt the U.S. economy. Even if there isn't a crisis, the dominance of the dollar will put American leaders in a tough spot. Foreigners will control the Treasury market by the 2030s if they keep building up their reserves. To meet the growing demand from other countries for safe assets denominated in dollars, the U.S. government could issue more Treasuries, which would add to its debts. Or, it could let foreigners buy up other securities, which could lead to asset bubbles like what happened during the 2000s mortgage boom.

 

A Matter of History

A natural question to ask at this point is clear: how do currencies achieve reserve status? There is no formal way to become a reserve currency. Instead, it's like winning a popularity contest. The de facto reserve currency is the currency that is used most often for international trade and business. The "popularity" of a currency is just based on how safe and strong people think the country issuing the currency is. This is the asset or currency that most central banks around the world prefer to keep in reserve. This is why the dominant asset is called a "reserve currency."

There have been six major reserve currency periods since 1450. Portugal had the most money in the world until 1530, when Spain got stronger. During most of the 17th and 18th centuries, trade around the world was done with money from the Netherlands and France. But when the British empire grew, the Pound Sterling became the reserve currency and stayed that way until the end of World War I. The pound was replaced by the U.S. dollar at the same time that the U.S. became more economically powerful than Britain. Since 2008, more than 75% of all transactions around the world have been done in U.S. dollars. The dollar is also used to pay for more than 60% of foreign debt and 59% of central bank reserves around the world.

Even though the dollar's hold on all of these markets and instruments has been getting weaker over the past few years, no other currency comes close. The Chinese renminbi isn't a good alternative, but geopolitical and macroeconomic trends make it likely that it will become one of the popular currencies soon.

 

Playing to Win

In a perfect world, America would not be the only reserve currency. But if the dollar's position as the world's most important currency is unstable, other currencies can't take over either. As I said above, the role of financial superpower has changed hands before, when the U.S. took over from Britain from 1920 to 1945. But Britain and the United States were friends, so the transfer went smoothly. And America already had things going for it, like a strong economy and, like Britain, a stable government and the rule of law.

Compare that to the people who are trying to become reserves today. The euro is a currency that can't be taken for granted, even in its existence. These questions won't be completely answered until the euro area agrees to a full banking union and joint bond issuance. As for the yuan, China's government has set up a huge network of currency swaps with foreign central banks, which is like an eight-lane highway, but no one is on it (except, perhaps, Russia). The yuan won't be a big deal until China opens its financial markets. And until it accepts the rule of law, no investor will really trust its currency.

All of this shows that the world's monetary and financial system won't be able to stop using the dollar easily or quickly. America can take on more responsibility by, for example, setting up bigger emergency swap lines with more central banks. More likely is that the system will break up, as other countries adopt capital controls to protect themselves from Fed decisions. The dollar is unique. But the system it is part of is falling apart.

 

 

 

References

Chandler, M. (2023, March 31). The Dollar Rules the Financial Universe. China Can’t Change That. Retrieved from Barron's: https://www.barrons.com/articles/dollar-china-petro-yuan-saudi-b0b6e48f

Genius. (2023). It’s All About the Benjamins (Remix). Retrieved from https://genius.com/Diddy-its-all-about-the-benjamins-remix-lyrics

O'Neill, A. (2023, February 15). United States' Share of Global Gross Domestic Product (GDP) Adjusted for Purchasing Power Parity (PPP) From 2017 to 2027. Retrieved from Statista: https://www.statista.com/statistics/270267/united-states-share-of-global-gross-domestic-product-gdp/

Raisinghani, V. (2023, February 23). Could China’s Yuan Replace the US Dollar as the World's Dominant Currency? How the Asian Nation's Trade Supremacy is Quickly Boosting its Reserve Status. Retrieved from Yahoo! Finance: https://finance.yahoo.com/news/could-china-yuan-replace-u-163600681.html?fr=sycsrp_catchall

The Economist. (2015, October 3). Dominant and Dangerous. Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/leaders/2015/10/03/dominant-and-dangerous

The Economist. (2020, August 6). Dollar Dominance is as Secure as American Global Leadership. Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2020/08/06/dollar-dominance-is-as-secure-as-american-global-leadership

 

 

Nigeria’s Government Cuddling Terrorists

Nigerian government need to understand that deradicalizing former Boko Haram members should not substitute for severely punishing them for the heinous crimes they committed over a period of more than 10 years. Any program intended to deradicalize these terrorists must also take into account the need to offer victims, traumatized families, communities, and society with justice and a sense of closure for their experiences.

 

There are still over 2 million individuals in northern Nigeria who have been displaced by the Islamist armed group Boko Haram and who are trying to reconstruct their lives as you read this. Camps established and managed by state governments in the northeast region have become safe havens for many people who have been displaced from their homes. With an estimated 1.8 million displaced people living in Borno State (one of the states in northern Nigeria) in the center of the conflict, the state government there began closing camps in the state capital of Maiduguri in 2021. Nigeria has violated its obligations under African regional law and international law regarding the rights of internally displaced persons by ordering people to leave camps without consulting with them, providing them with adequate information, or providing them with viable alternatives to ensure their safety and livelihoods. Nigerian domestic policy norms have also been violated by the actions.

Public data suggests that many displaced persons, who were already suffering from the fighting, have fallen further into poverty as a result of the camps' closure, finding it difficult to find food, satisfy basic necessities, or find safe housing. State governments in northern Nigeria plan to close the remaining camps, and residents are understandably worried that they may suffer the same fate if nothing changes in the authorities' attitude to the crisis.

Meanwhile, as part of Nigeria Federal Government's Operation Safe Corridor rehabilitation and reintegration program, the Nigerian military has just released another 594 Boko Haram militants and facilitators into society. A training center in the Kwami Local Government Area of Gombe State released the so-called "repentant" Islamist militants, the latest in a program whose success is still up for debate. The government should proceed cautiously along this path to satisfy the demands of justice without releasing hardened killers on the public, as has been said to be the case with some former fighters.

There are important points that need to be taken into consideration. The first is the all-encompassing idea of wrongdoing and retribution. Even while the modern justice system's end purpose is to rehabilitate lawbreakers, this does not negate the importance of imposing severe punishments and serving as a deterrent for the commission of serious offenses. One more thing is to make the distinction between extremist Salafist killers on the one hand and fringe players such as those who provide support for them, as well as those who were coerced into terrorism or family members of terrorists.

Most significantly, any program intended to deradicalize individuals must take into account the need to offer victims, traumatized families, communities, and society with justice and a sense of closure for their experiences.

 

A Plan Written in Jelly

Since 2009, Islamist extremists have been responsible for a horrifyingly wide range of atrocities in northern Nigeria. During the ceremony that marked the completion of the program for the 594 purportedly reformed terrorists, the coordinator of the program, an Army major-general named Joseph Maina, recalled that more than two million people had been displaced within their own country, and hundreds of thousands of others had been forced to seek refuge in countries that were nearby.

According to the Health and Human Rights Journal, there have been 43,000 homicides, the destruction of entire communities, and other horrifying violations of human rights in the 12 years leading up to 2021. These violations include kidnappings, sexual violence, forced labor, forced conscription of children, looting, and arson. The governor of Borno State estimated at the time that the number of deaths would exceed 100,000 by 2019. Boko Haram and its offshoots have been responsible for a number of atrocities, including the kidnapping of 276 schoolgirls from Chibok in 2014 and another 110 schoolgirls from Dapchi in 2018, as well as massacres, the widespread destruction of schools, and jail breakouts.

According to UNICEF, there has been a reduction of access to quality education for 1.3 million children, and 56% of the children who have been uprooted in the states of Borno, Yobe, and Adamawa are unable to attend school. Notwithstanding the pathetically low number of trials and even fewer convictions, the Nigeria's federal government has selected Operation Safe Corridor as a non-kinetic multi-agency method in support of military efforts since 2015.  This counter-terrorism strategy, despite the government's claims of success, is provocatively lopsided. Although efforts are made to de-radicalize secondary actors, the world's most hardened terrorists and their sponsors must be relentlessly prosecuted. A blanket amnesty that doesn't require a trial and penalty will only rewards the murderers.

There have been mass releases of terrorists and their families by the government and the military. Almost 500 people were laid off in March of 2022. Over 900 "repentant" Boko Haram members were registered by the Nigerian Identity Management Commission in 2020. In 2019, the Nigerian Army reported successfully rehabilitating 893 former Boko Haram fighters. Alarmingly, the fears that have been voiced by the victims of so-called rehabilitated terrorists returning to their communities have not been given the due consideration that they deserve. In addition, the thousands of citizens who have been relocated to camps known as Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) have not been given the adequate support they need to fully recover from the trauma that was inflicted on them by jihadists. This is a situation that needs to be rectified immediately.

The Nigerian government had persisted in making an incorrect diagnosis of the issue. Salafism is an apocalyptic ideology whose supporters are hellbent on forcing their version of Islam on the rest of the world and establishing a global caliphate. They believe that this would bring about the end of the world. The Salafist yearns for death in the service of jihad because they have their sights set on an eternity that is filled with unending sumptuous reward. They can pretend to repent, as the US-led coalition forces learned in Afghanistan, bide their time, infiltrate the security and civilian establishment, and execute crimes at an appropriate time. They are adaptable and tenacious.

Meanwhile, terrorism is considered a serious offense under Nigeria's current legal system, and those who are found guilty face harsh penalties. Because of this, it is both unethical and unjust to let Boko Haram terrorists off the hook by saying that they are participating in a "rehabilitation" or "de-radicalization" program.

 

Crumbled Promises

The deadly narrative of atrocities committed by the so-called rehabilitated or de-radicalized terrorists is hinted at by stories in the media that purported former members of Boko Haram have returned to their old habits and are now spying for other terrorist organizations. In March, security forces detained Ba'anaBdiya, a purportedly "repentant" Boko Haram fighter, in connection with an attack with a bomb that claimed the lives of some security personnel. The suspect, also known by his alias "Manci," provided logistical support to the militants that ambushed the troops. It was also reported a week earlier that two "repentant" Boko Haram commanders, Goni Farouq and Amir Zabu, were captured via phone intercepts planning assaults on troops.  In a similar fashion, in July 2022, some terrorists who were among the 800 people who had been "reintegrated" into the Bama village in Borno State detonated an improvised explosive device, which resulted in the deaths of eight people in the community. It was stated that the suspects kept in touch with their former coworkers and were secretly leaving the city to conduct business with other terrorists.

The demoralization of terrorists' victims, which includes troops, police, and other members of the security forces, as well as the thousands of citizens who have been slain in the conflict, is caused by releasing terrorists without putting them on trial. Many criticisms of the program have been voiced by professionals in the field of security and human rights organizations. A retired brigadier-general named Sani Usman stated that the Federal Government needs to step in, establish a committee, and review them critically based on their role in the insurgency. He suggested that the Federal Government should take these steps. The judicial system must take part in every aspect of this.

The Human Rights Writers Association of Nigeria (HURIWA) is unrelenting in its criticism of the Nigeria's de-radicalization exercise. It maintains that the strategy of allowing terrorists back into society after they may have and, in all likelihood, will have shed the blood of innocent individuals constitutes the gravest kind of illegality possible. No other stable nation in the world gives terrorists the impression that they can kill as many citizens as they like and still be granted a reprieve once they surrender; without being put on trial or being held accountable for their actions. By way of illustration, the Patriot Act of the United States of America enhanced the penalties for those who perform or support terrorist operations, both within the country and outside of it. A law that not only allows for the prosecution of terrorists but also allows for the revocation of citizenship for people participating in terrorist acts has been passed in the United Kingdom. The Netherlands has also announced that the sentence for an offense committed with the intent to commit terrorism will be heavier than the sentence for the basic offense. Not only does this rule apply to those who actually carry out attacks, but it also applies to those who are intending to carry out assaults. Italy has increased the severity of the punishments for terrorism perpetrators.

 

Modus Operandi

Terrorist insurgency in Nigeria needs to be put down by the government and the military. Terrorist leaders should be targeted in "kill or capture" operations, with any survivors facing public prosecution. Those on the periphery should also face consequences for their actions before being considered for de-radicalization. The governors, traditional authorities, and religious leaders of the states in the North should abolish the Sharia law penalties and devote themselves to educating their people instead. All states should prioritize providing social services and rural development initiatives to increase production and employment and decrease radicalization. The Child Rights Act should also be completely enacted and implemented. Terrorists should not be released by the Nigerian government until a full assessment and punishment has been  made.

 

Notes

Anzalone, C. (2018). Salafism in Nigeria: Islam, Preaching, and Politics. American Journal of Islam and Society, 35(3), 98–103.

Human Rights Watch. (2022, November 2). Nigeria: Displacement Camp Closures Worsen Suffering. Retrieved from HRW Press Release: https://www.hrw.org/report/2022/11/02/those-who-returned-are-suffering/impact-camp-shutdowns-people-displaced-boko#:~:text=As%20of%20July%202022%2C%20the,Cameroon%2C%20Chad%2C%20and%20Niger.

Nwannekanma, B. (2023, January 9). HURIWA Condemns Planned Rehabilitation of 613 Deradicalised Terrorists. Retrieved from The Guardian: https://guardian.ng/news/huriwa-condemns-planned-rehabilitation-of-613-deradicalised-terrorists/

Punch Editorial Board. (2023, April 4). Revisiting the Faulty ‘Repentant Terrorists’ Narrative . Retrieved from Punch Newspaper: https://punchng.com/revisiting-the-faulty-repentant-terrorists-narrative/

Ugwueze, M. I., Ngwu, E. C., & Onuoha, F. C. (2022). Operation Safe Corridor Programme and Reintegration of Ex-Boko Haram Fighters in Nigeria. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 57(6), 1229–1248.

UNICEF. (2022, June 30). Nigeria Humanitarian Situation Report. Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/media/126276/file/Nigeria%20Humanitarian%20Situation%20Report%20No.%202,%2030%20June%202022.pdf

US Department of Justice. (2023). Highlights of the USA PATRIOT Act. Retrieved from https://www.justice.gov/archive/ll/highlights.htm

 

 

The New York Drama: Why Alvin Bragg Get It Wrong

 

This indictment will continue to be viewed by me as a political drama staged by Mr. Bragg, the District Attorney for Manhattan, with the intention of garnering cheap publicity.

 

For the political drama that took place in the courtroom today, you have to give credit to the Democrats on the far left and their woke-indoctrinated representative in the office of the district attorney for Manhattan, Alvin Bragg. When you thought they had nothing else to offer, they surprised you with a wonderful episode just when you didn't expect them to. A stunning courtroom scene took place today as Donald Trump became the first former President of the United States to be charged with criminal offenses. In total, he is facing 34 of these counts. These accusations are based on three separate payments of hush money, one of which was made to a former porn star, and are related to the alleged violation of regulations governing campaign financing. They are common, but nonetheless shocking enough to hold the attention of an audience. Mr. Trump has refuted each and every one of them. According to what I have been seeing in news broadcasts from CNN, Fox News, and CBS, as well as newspaper reports, the United States of America is, as it always has been, sharply split in its responses to the most recent turn in the plot, but they are unanimous in their adherence to the spectacle. What are other parts of the world supposed to think about it? The situation calls for two quite different responses.

One should have a calm demeanor. Even while taking previous presidents to court is quite usual in other democracies, this is the first time it has happened in America. There are many previous presidents and prime ministers who have been charged with crimes, including those from France (such Jacques Chirac and Nicolas Sarkozy), Italy (Bettino Craxi, Silvio Berlusconi), and Israel (Moshe Katsav, Ehud Olmert, and currently Binyamin Netanyahu). Even Olusegun Obasanjo, the former president of Nigeria, served four years in prison between 1995 and 1999. In Taiwan, indicting former presidents is practically customary. Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, the president of Brazil, has been released from prison after serving a 580-day sentence. At a special tribunal in The Hague this week, Hashim Thaci, a former president of Kosovo, entered a not-guilty plea to charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Although Mr. Trump claims that his judicial judgment is a political witch hunt,  elsewhere, similar events have not incontrovertibly destroyed democracy. Quite often, it is the opposite.

It's true that those who disagree with Mr. Trump have tried and failed to use the democratic system to remove him from office. On both occasions, the House of Representatives attempted to impeach him, but the Senate fell short of the necessary two-thirds vote to convict him. The Constitution of the United States was written to make impeachment difficult on purpose. Mr. Trump made it through the phony hearings held by a House committee on January 6th. Now, what seems to be the weakest and most confusing of the several legal issues threatening him is being used as the basis for an effort to punish him through the courts. Because of this, the New York indictment is definitely a bad move. Prosecuting a past president only affirms a key concept of democracy, that no one is above the law, if it is not a political persecution like this President Trump's case.

 

Locus Standi

On a different level, though, America's allies have good reason to be concerned about the situation. Many people have spent the past two years basking in the blissful relief that Mr. Trump is no longer in power and desperately wanting to believe that, surely, given his misconduct after the election in 2020 and his many troubles (from legal jeopardy to electoral setbacks and the rise of rivals), he cannot return to the White House. This belief is based on the fact that many people have spent the past two years basking in the blissful relief that Mr. Trump is no longer in power. Such carelessness was always foolish, but it now appears to be dangerous. The most recent attack on Donald Trump has had the unintended consequence of reinforcing his position as the leading candidate for the Republican nomination, with a road to the presidency that is challenging but not impossible. This fact will begin to have an effect on the estimates made by other countries.

Consider Ukraine. Its leaders would conclude that the threat of a Trump presidency makes it all the more urgent to make military gains as quickly as possible. The contrary conclusion will be drawn in Moscow, where Vladimir Putin will decide he should wait until the United States, Ukraine's main Western supporter, is led by a president who openly mocks Ukraine and predicts Russian conquest. Consider NATO as an alternative. Many have worried that Trump would drop it in his second term. Thankfully, Russia's aggressiveness has only served to fortify and grow the partnership. Finland joined NATO officially as its 31st member on the same day that Mr. Trump appeared in court. Now that the alliance has been shaken, all members have a vested interest in strengthening it so that it can weather another Trump shock.

This indictment will continue to be viewed by me as a political drama staged by Mr. Bragg, the District Attorney for Manhattan, with the intention of garnering cheap publicity. Obviously, there is a lot that could go wrong in order to stop the production of a new White House season of this program. As a result of the precedent that the Manhattan case has set in the United States for the indictment of a former president, it is more likely that additional, more serious cases will follow. These cases could focus, for example, on election interference in Georgia or on his mishandling of classified documents. The good news is that Mr. Trump will not be completely overpowered by these legal messes. Due to the support that he enjoys among Republican primary voters, there is a distinct likelihood that Donald Trump may win the candidacy of his party. Even while there is a possibility that he will have a lower probability of victory in a  rematch with Joe Biden, it is possible that the electorate as a whole will reward him for his efforts. The crux of the matter is that there will undoubtedly be other turns in this narrative. Yet it is important for the American people to keep in mind the horrible reality that this indictment is nothing more than a cynical political maneuver.

 

References

 

AP News. (1994, July 29). Former Socialist Premier Craxi Convicted in Bank Fraud Case. Retrieved from https://apnews.com/article/371a1143e1bb6ea478f5f32cb3402267

BBC News. (2021, March 1). Sarkozy: Former French President Sentenced to Jail for Corruption. Retrieved from https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56237818

Joseph , Y., & Kingsley, P. (2022, November 3). Netanyahu Will Return With Corruption Charges Unresolved. Here’s Where the Case Stands. Retrieved from The New York Times : https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/03/world/middleeast/netanyahu-corruption-charges-israel.html

Newburger, E. (2021, Feberuary 13). Senate Acquits Trump for Inciting Capitol Riot Even as Bipartisan Majority Votes to Convict. Retrieved from CNBC: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/02/13/senate-acquits-former-president-donald-trump-on-charge-of-inciting-insurrection-at-us-capitol-.html

Tara John. (2023, April 4). Finland Joins NATO, Doubling Military Alliance’s Border With Russia in a Blow for Putin. Retrieved from CNN: https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/04/europe/finland-joins-nato-intl/index.html#:~:text=Finland%20officially%20became%20the%2031st,the%20alliance's%20frontier%20with%20Russia.

The Economist. (2023, April 4). What America’s Friends Should Make of The Trump Show. Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/leaders/2023/04/04/what-americas-friends-should-make-of-the-trump-show

Transparency International. (1998, June 16). Olusegun Obasanjo is Freed From Prison. Retrieved from https://www.transparency.org/en/press/olusegun-obasanjo-is-freed-from-prison

 

 

Alvin Bragg’s Botched Job

 

For whatever reason that made him to indict Trump, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg has miscalculated. For this indictment could be the best thing that happened to Trump, simply because it could have unintended consequences that ultimately end up benefiting him and making him the personification of the phrase "what didn't kill him makes him stronger."

 

The news that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s office had issued the indictment of a former president Donald Trump grabbed all the headlines last week, probably because this is uncharted territory for the American legal system, the American government and for the country, which has never seen the indictment and prosecution of a former president. Though the precise evidence against Trump remains unknown, the reason for his indictment appears centered on hush money payments to a porn actress, Stormy Daniels, in 2016 – a payment which, according to media reports, was made to silence her allegations of a sexual relationship during Trump’s first presidential bid.

There can be little doubt that the motivations behind this indictment are solely political, with the end goal of hindering Trump's ability to make a political comeback. If one examines the context of this indictment, they cannot fail to conclude that it is a political vendetta. Just consider this:  Alvin Bragg’s office pushed for the indictment after Trump's recent announcement that he intends to run for president again. Alvin Bragg probably knows that the move could severely damage his chances of winning over voters and mounting a successful campaign. Furthermore, given that 2024 Presidential election is just around the corner, Mr. Braggs figured any form of indictment could have a significant impact on the outcome of the race, potentially shifting public opinion and swaying voters away from Trump.

 According to published evidence, Alvin Bragg’s office and most politicians of the Democrat party had  claimed that Trump’s indictment is not a political stunt, but rather a necessary step to hold Trump accountable for any criminal activity he may have engaged in. They argue that no one, not even a former president, should be above the law, and that failure to hold powerful figures accountable could erode public trust in government institutions.

 Nonsense: If this indictment is not a political maneuver against Trump, then why did the New York District Attorney choose to do it now, after Trump stated his desire to run for president in 2024? If it is not a political move, then why did the New York District Attorney choose to do it now? Why didn't he take action like this, say, three years ago while the matter was still open and the statute of limitations hadn't run out? After all, they had access to all of the data that was necessary to move forward and construct a compelling case against Trump at that time. Yet they made the decision not to.

 The truth is that Donald Trump has been under the microscope of local district attorneys in New York and Georgia for potential prosecution for some time. These district attorneys are widely politically ambitious and has the goal of using Trump as a means of advancing their own careers. In New York, the investigations center around allegations of financial impropriety and tax fraud, while in Georgia, they center around alleged interference in the state's 2020 presidential election. These investigations have been ongoing for some time, and there is no clear end in sight. Furthermore, the federal Justice Department has also been pursuing potential prosecution of Trump for various reasons.

 Just like Alvin Bragg , the New York Attorney General Letitia James has also been at the forefront of a civil investigation into the Trump Organization and its various business dealings. The investigation has been ongoing for several years and has focused on potential financial impropriety, tax fraud, and other forms of misconduct. James has been particularly vocal about her determination to hold the Trump Organization accountable for any wrongdoing, and her office has issued numerous subpoenas and requested documents related to the organization's finances and business practices.

Before Alvin Bragg came into the picture, his predecessor, DA Cy Vance, was conducting  a parallel criminal investigation into the Trump Organization. The investigation is believed to center around many of the same issues as the civil investigation, including potential financial impropriety and tax fraud. Vance has been similarly vocal about his determination to hold the Trump Organization accountable for any criminal behavior, and his office has reportedly convened a grand jury to consider charges against the organization and its executives. The two investigations are independent of each other, but they are believed to be closely intertwined, and many observers believe that they could ultimately lead to criminal charges against the former president or members of his inner circle.

So, what does this evidence suggest about the new indictment against Trump? The obvious one is that the liberal Democratic party's allergic reaction to any conservative or outsider who gains considerable support from the electorate is glaringly clear. This is why they are resorting to political persecution and other extreme methods to hinder Trump's ability to raise money for political candidates. It's worth remembering that many political candidates rely on the assistance of well-known personalities in order to collect money and win endorsements. If Trump's image takes a hit, he may be less willing to lend his name and reputation to candidates. Any serious harm to a candidate's reputation or credibility in today's political climate might have a negative impact on that candidate's potential to win elections.

 

Pass the Salt, Please

Don't get me wrong, though. Trump is not an angel. In actuality, he had a reputation for being contentious ever since he entered politics. While he enjoys a sizable base of fans who see him as an advocate for conservative ideals and a political outsider, he has also come under harsh condemnation for his actions both before and during his presidency. For instance, Trump is renowned for his gruff and aggressive demeanor and has a history of making contentious claims about a variety of subjects. Thus, I don't believe anyone will have an issue with his indictment  provided it is issued in good faith and Mr. Bragg's decision is not influenced by politics. After all, Americans hold that the Constitution is supreme and that everyone, including Donald Trump, is subject to the law. The difficulty is that this indictment is very different. That is actually a political voodoo aimed at Donald Trump. Simply said, while I am not ashamed to admit that Trump is not the “goose that lays golden eggs” when it comes to politics, and that he do outrageous things sometimes, I also believe that the woke apologists and the Democratic political establishment have unfairly targeted him.

Nevertheless, I am also convinced that District Attorney Alvin Bragg, who came into office touting liberal non-prosecution policies, have stabbed himself on the foot with this Trump’s indictment. Let me put it as politely as I can: for whatever reason that made him to make this move, he has miscalculated, for four reasons. First, this indictment could potentially backfire on the district attorney's office. Even if we choose to believe his claim that his office did this to hold Trump accountable for any potential wrongdoing, the political and legal implications of the move would be significant. Indicting a former president could be seen as politically motivated and could fuel accusations of partisan bias, particularly given the contentious nature of Trump's presidency. Additionally, a high-profile trial could draw attention away from other important issues and could further polarize an already divided electorate. Furthermore, the burden of proof required in a criminal trial is high, and in the coming weeks the whole world will be watching to see whether the evidence is strong enough to secure a conviction.

 The second reason is that this indictment could be the best thing that happened to Trump, simply because it could have unintended consequences that ultimately end up benefiting him and making him the personification of the phrase "what didn't kill him makes him stronger." Even though Mr. Bragg and the Democratic establishment may hate Trump with every fiber of their being, they cannot deny the fact that Trump has a large and devoted base of supporters who are fiercely loyal to him, and who may view any legal action against him as politically motivated persecution. In fact, this indictment could even serve to further solidify his base and rally support around him, with many of his followers seeing it as evidence that he is being unfairly targeted by the "deep state" or other political enemies.

Another factor that could work in Trump's favor is the attention that an indictment would bring. Even negative attention can be helpful in politics, as it keeps a person in the public eye and keeps them at the forefront of people's minds. Trump has always been adept at using the media to his advantage, and an indictment could allow him to continue to dominate the news cycle, which has been a major factor in his political success. Moreover, any legal action against Trump could also serve to keep him relevant and in the conversation. Trump has always been a polarizing figure, and an indictment would only serve to amplify that. People who may have been apathetic towards him before could suddenly become interested, and his loyal base would likely become even more energized. In other words, an indictment could actually work to Trump's advantage by keeping him in the public eye and keeping people talking about him.

 This indictment can equally give Trump a sense of victimhood. Trump has always portrayed himself as an outsider fighting against the establishment, and an indictment would only serve to reinforce that narrative. If he is able to convince his supporters that he is being unfairly targeted by the "deep state" or other political enemies, then he could use that to his advantage to rally his base and garner sympathy from undecided voters.

Having Trump face charges might also make him more of a martyr in the eyes of his supporters. To many of his fans, this  indictment would lend credence to their belief that he is being persecuted by the political and media establishment. If Trump can exploit his legal woes as a rallying cry for his supporters, he may emerge from any legal battles stronger than before. A charge would also give Trump the chance to play the underdog, a role he has always relished. Trump has always portrayed himself as a fighter; if convicted, he may be able to prove to his supporters that he would fight even if the deck is stacked against him. This might strengthen his standing with his base and win over those still on the fence about him but drawn to his doggedness.

 It's also important to consider the prospect that an indictment would allow Trump to continue utilizing the victim narrative long after any court processes had completed. It is possible that he may continue to utilize his legal troubles to keep himself in the public eye even if he is eventually found guilty. He might be able to rally his fans and get his political agenda farther along with this. Last but not least, this indictment would boost Trump’s  image as a political outsider who operates outside the norms of the political system. He has worked hard to cultivate this image, and this indictment would only serve to bolster it. If Trump can convince his supporters that he is being singled out by the political establishment (which is very possible), he may be able to utilize this to rally his base and forward his political agenda.

Although he may not realize it at the moment, District Attorney Alvin Bragg has painted himself into a position, and I feel terrible for him. In the following weeks, we will be watching to see how this drama unfolds. For the time being, I'd rather consider the courageous words of American businessman and philanthropist Warren Buffet, who once said, "When the tide goes out, that's when you discover who's swimming naked."

 

 

 Notes

 

Cheney, K., Carney , J., & Orden, E. (2023, March 31). ‘Unlawful Political Interference’: Bragg Defends Trump Indictment Against GOP Attacks. Retrieved from Yahoo! News: https://www.yahoo.com/news/unlawful-political-interference-bragg-defends-142220802.html

Cole, D. (2023). Donald Trump Has Been Indicted Following an Investigation Into a Hush Money Payment Scheme. Here’s What We Know. Retrieved from CNN Politics: https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/31/politics/trump-indictment-what-to-know/index.html

Gorlon, M. (2020, June 13). What Does the Saying “When the Tide Goes Out, You Find Out Who is Swimming Naked” Mean? Retrieved from Medium: https://gorlon.medium.com/what-does-the-saying-when-the-tide-goes-out-you-find-out-who-is-swimming-naked-mean-4d28b79b0b69

Halpert, M. (2023). Trump and Stormy Daniels Cash in on Merchandise After Indictment. Retrieved from BBC News: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-65143479

Malcolm, J., Smith, Z., & von Spakovsky, H. A. (2023, March 31). The Indictment of Donald Trump: The Players and the Cards They’re Playing. Retrieved from The Heritage Foundation: https://www.heritage.org/crime-and-justice/commentary/the-indictment-donald-trump-the-players-and-the-cards-theyre-playing