Trump Skips Beijing’s Parade, Dodging a Blush

Who’s not coming, and why
Twenty-six foreign heads of state and government have been invited to attend the 9/3 Victory Day military parade in Beijing. One feature stands out: not a single “great power” will show up. And in the past few days, European outlets have zeroed in on the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in Tianjin, asserting that “Xi Jinping is turning China into the centre of a ‘new anti‑Western order’.”
 
“The main countries of Europe and America are collectively absent, and Japan and South Korea are not on the list either. Japan even urged other countries to stay away from these events, underscoring the geopolitical divide.” Taiwan’s Central News Agency added: “Friction between China and Western countries over trade, technology, the Russia–Ukraine war and human rights issues may lead those countries to opt out of such high‑profile political commemorations.” Note: Slovakia is the only EU member state in attendance.
 
Is attendance the point?
Do the “great powers” need to show up at a pageant that symbolises the end of 300 years of Western hegemony? Deutsche Welle reported that Russian President Vladimir Putin, at the SCO summit in Tianjin, called for a reordering of global politics, saying “the Europe‑centric, trans‑Atlantic‑centric model has run its course.” Agence France‑Presse said that when Xi Jinping met leaders in Tianjin, he lambasted bullying in the current world order, with the aim “to underscore Beijing’s central role in regional affairs.” Earlier, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs told reporters that “the Global South is no longer the silent majority or a vast, backward expanse – it represents an awakened new force and a new hope in a once‑in‑a‑century transformation.”
 
If the “great powers” won’t go to Beijing, so be it – there’s no need to force it. But to spin “no Western leader attended” as China’s embarrassment is, frankly, putting the wrong hat on the wrong head.
 
The Trump–Yalta fantasy
Some pundits had speculated Trump might attend the event, and that if a US–China–Russia trio actually materialised at the Beijing parade, the symbolism would rival the Yalta Conference – in February 1945 the leaders of the United States, the United Kingdom and the Soviet Union met in Yalta to design the post‑war order.
 
That talk is just froth – not worth a second look. To borrow an analogy, Trump fancies himself the Son of Heaven of the Zhou (the Emperor of Zhou Dynasty) – though he most resembles the last of them, Emperor Nan. That said, America’s sway still holds. Didn’t the “seven European powers” previously – together with Zelenskyy – march into the White House to pay homage to Washington? And the United States announced that, before the September UN General Assembly, it had revoked visas for members of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the Palestinian Authority.
 
Nine Tripods, UN visas, and debt
The UN is headquartered in the United States. With a word, Washington can refuse visas and deprive anyone of the right to petition the UN for justice. All this is the very aura of the Nine Tripods in the hands of the Son of Heaven – and, to be fair, the comparison to Emperor Nan is actually not a bad fit.
 
Emperor Nan of Zhou – personal name Ji Yan, also called Chengjun – is best known for being “buried under a mountain of debt.” He borrowed from his subjects: “but, unable to repay, could only climb a high podium to hide from his creditors. The people of Zhou named the podium the Debt‑Dodging Terrace. Dependent on others for shelter and ashamed of his evasion, he was called “Nan”, the Blushing Emperor .”
 
Baidu Baike also records this: “In the fifty‑ninth year of Emperor Nan of Zhou – 256 BCE – the Son of Heaven allied with the lords to attack Qin, but was no match and lost. After defeat he offered up all the cities. That same year Ji Yan died, and Qin took possession of Zhou’s Nine Cauldrons – symbols of the heavenly authority. Seven years later Qin destroyed Eastern Zhou, and the Zhou dynasty perished.”
 
Any resemblance is purely coincidental. The United States owes more than US$37 trillion in public debt. Trump may not fear “default” – borrow long, roll it over and let size make it too big to fail. That said, voices in the Russian parliament once proposed moving the UN headquarters to China or Brazil – tantamount to stripping the United States of its Nine Cauldrons.
 
Looking back at reports from a decade ago, the Russian made its case plainly: “America’s global influence has declined significantly, and its behaviour and image are becoming ever more aggressive. We should therefore discuss moving the UN headquarters out of New York.”
 
Anyone with common sense would agree – I back it one hundred percent!

Deep Blue

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

At the beginning of the new year, Donald Trump has single-handedly changed the United States, and the global landscape may also be reshaped. First, he declared that as Commander-in-Chief, the President’s authority is limited only by his own morality. Later, he posted an image on his social platform Truth Social with the caption “Acting President of Venezuela”. The New York Times directly questioned: “Does this mean ignoring international law and acting without any constraints to invade other countries?” Regarding international law, Trump stated, “I abide by it,” but made it clear that when such constraints apply to the United States, he would be the ultimate arbiter.

On January 7, 2026, the President signed a presidential memorandum ordering the United States to withdraw from 66 international organizations, including 31 United Nations entities and multiple major international agreements. This action is aimed at exiting organizations deemed by the White House to be “contrary to U.S. interests” and a waste of taxpayer funds. The UN bodies to be withdrawn from include UN Women, the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and the International Law Commission.

Clearly, Trump has a unique blueprint that serves only American interests. He might retort: “What era is this, still talking about international law and core values? Don’t you know the current state of the U.S.? Don’t you know that the U.S. has long been planning drastic actions?”

In April 2020, retired U.S. Marine Corps officer Mark Cancian proposed a bold strategy. The National Interest reported: “With a coastline of 9,000 miles and the world’s second-largest merchant fleet after Greece, including Hong Kong, China has over 4,000 ships. This is not an advantage but a vulnerability. The U.S. could effectively blockade China’s economy by launching a clever campaign, leaving it exhausted.” The suggestion was for the U.S. to emulate 16th-century Britain by supporting privateers—civilian organizations specialized in plundering Chinese merchant ships. Given China’s current military capabilities, it should be able to meet such challenges, so there’s no need to worry. Still, one can’t help but applaud the audacity of such an idea.

Back then, Biden paid no attention to this plan, as the Democrats were still refined and attached great importance to the cloak of universal values. At the same time, Biden, at least nominally, had to pay lip service to the United Nations, because ideology mattered. The U.S. had previously displayed a magical logic: attacking you to save your people, destroying your country to introduce democracy and freedom, imposing sanctions because you’re a dictatorship... Trump cannot be like ordinary advocates of universal values, who always cite international law and classical references. First, neither he nor his team possess such knowledge. Second, pretending to uphold morality can no longer maximize American interests. Third, former adversaries have “risen,” gradually establishing international moral authority. If the U.S. continues to preach benevolence, righteousness, propriety, wisdom, and trustworthiness, it will only become a laughingstock. After all, Trump has already discarded America’s credibility like trash.

Retired officer Cancian’s plan is exactly the White House’s cup of tea. For context—in the 16th century, Britain supported privateers, civilian organizations that plundered rival nations’ merchant ships. This was essentially the legalization of piracy, with the British monarch issuing “letters of marque” to recruit outlaws for royal service, dubbing them “royal pirates.” These privateers helped Britain destroy the then-dominant Spain at sea, significantly boosting British power and laying the foundation for the Industrial Revolution.

In reality, Trump has already begun “highway robbery” operations, seizing multiple cargo ships in the Caribbean. The White House has also dropped the pretense. Foreign media reported that Deputy Chief of Staff Miller recently declared: “The only permissible maritime energy transportation must comply with U.S. law and national security.” This is no different from robbery—“This mountain is my domain, these trees are my planting; if you wish to pass, leave your toll.” The only difference is that the U.S. is not just a bandit but a pirate. Similarly, Trump and Cheng Yaojin from the Dramatized History of Sui and Tang Dynasties share the title of “Chaos Demon King.”

Next, following the “Trump Gold Card,” Trump could publicly issue “letters of marque,” auctioning them to the highest bidder, and even list them on Wall Street. Their valuation might surpass that of the “Seven Sisters” oil companies—who knows?