International Laws? You Kidding Me?

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 The UN bodies to be withdrawn from include UN Women, the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), and the International Law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?

Deep Blue

** 博客文章文責自負,不代表本公司立場 **

A superpower like the United States has resorted to playing the victim. That is almost bewildering. It remains unclear whether this reveals China's rising strength or America's weakening grip. Either way, a sobering sign of the times.

The dust has not yet settled after China's navy conducted an underwater launch of a submarine-launched ballistic missile into the Pacific on July 6. A US State Department official claimed that "China's notification to the United States came only a few hours before ​the launch and failed to provide sufficient detail, falling considerably short of standards adopted by all other P5 nuclear weapon states." A check of the US Department of Defense's website tells a different story. Washington is only telling half the truth, and such hypocrisy does not look good on the world stage.

The agreement actually being invoked reads as follows: "On May 31, 1988, in Moscow, U.S. Secretary of State Shultz and Soviet Foreign Minister Shevardnadze signed the Agreement on Notifications of ICBM and SLBM Launches. The Agreement provides for notification, no less than 24 hours in advance, of the planned date, launch area, and area of impact for any launch of an ICBM or SLBM. The Agreement also provides that these notifications be provided through the Nuclear Risk Reduction Centers. The Agreement entered into force on the date it was signed."

This is a bilateral pact between the United States and the Soviet Union, now 38 years old. Yet somehow, when it gets dredged up again, it "automatically" morphs into "the standard jointly observed by the UN Security Council's permanent five." How does that work? Perhaps the US and Russia believe they alone are qualified to represent the entire "P5." Perhaps the White House cannot even be bothered with proper wordplay anymore and simply decides it gets to set the rules for the whole world. 

China, however, holds even more tricks up its sleeve. Following the usual rule that "one thing leads to another," a show of force from China's space program came hot on the heels of the missile launch. Global Times reported: "China's Long March 10B carrier rocket lifted off from the Hainan commercial space launch site at 12:15 pm on Friday. Approximately six minutes after the separation of the rocket’s first and second stages, the first stage made a vertical return and was successfully recovered by an offshore recovery platform.” It noted that it is the world’s first net-based recovery system.

Elon Musk's SpaceX has carried out multiple successful rocket recoveries in the past. Its mature technology has earned it the title of "the undisputed leader in global commercial spaceflight." This time, though, marks China's first successful rocket recovery using a net-capture system, and the first such feat achieved globally. It has been described as "China’s first successful implementation of controlled recovery of a launch vehicle’s first stage." In simple terms, China has developed its own recovery method, distinct from SpaceX's "vertical powered landing" approach. The advantage lies in lower fuel consumption compared to traditional vertical landings, plus lighter equipment since landing legs are not needed. This could well become a viable alternative path outside the US-dominated model.

China has already flexed its muscles in artificial intelligence. Seedance 2.0, unveiled earlier this year, showcased the dominance of homegrown Chinese technology. Then there is Huawei's "Tao chip," a disruptive force challenging Silicon Valley's grip on Moore's Law. If China now has its own model for reusable space rockets too, how many strongholds of advanced technology does the US have left to claim as its exclusive turf?

Of course, the US has its own playbook for going after China on all these fronts. It can slap China with accusations of copying or stealing technology. Just tack on the word "future" and call it "copying America's (future) technology." Suddenly Washington gains the moral high ground to demand explanations, or better yet, to slap on punitive tariffs whenever Trump feels like it.

Still, it has to be said that a submarine-launched intercontinental strategic missile, chips and AI, and space technology are not merely civilian tools. They are either purely military or dual-use instruments of national power. Together, they show that China's comprehensive national strength has pulled ahead of the US by a generational. What is truly unnerving is that China now stands to gain a real voice across technical standards, the international order, and trade rules alike. 

When China rules the world, the US may one day struggle even to stage a convincing "victim" act. This matters. Ye be warned.