Trump buys Iranian diesel from Russia

Any geopolitical fantasy scenario would pale in comparison to the reality of the US purchasing Iranian diesel via Russia, a situation that underscores the paradoxical new balances within the global economy.

At the same time, Moscow and Beijing are leveraging shifts in the energy landscape and the impact of sanctions to consolidate an alternative, non-aligned axis of power.

Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping are redrawing the global map, effectively challenging American hegemony. Notably, Russia has maintained a ban on diesel exports for several months—a move coinciding with reports that Trump himself suggested to Zelensky that Russian refineries be targeted.

How, then, is Russia managing to secure diesel exports now that Trump has lifted sanctions?

Ships carrying Iranian diesel are en route to Russia, a country currently facing a fuel shortage. This also raises the question of whether the fuel Russia exports to the United States originates in Iran. Reports are circulating that Russia and Iran are collaborating to circumvent US sanctions: Iran supplies Russia with diesel, while payment for these supplies is funded by the sale of Russian diesel on the international market.

Consequently, the increase in diesel supply on the international market is likely attributable to Iranian exports. You need to understand how these markets operate.

Iran sends diesel to Russia for domestic consumption. Russia, for its part, sells Russian diesel on the international market and uses the proceeds to pay the Iranians for the initial supply. And the Russians, naturally, also secure a profit margin from this process.

What does Trump have in mind?

Trump has absolutely nothing in mind. Just as he never did.

Not since his days as a TV host, or later, when he appeared on trashy late-night shows—seeking a few minutes of even trashier publicity by claiming that Barack Obama was born in Nigeria. In a recent pre-election appearance, after boasting about renaming the Gulf of Mexico and Lake Ontario—things he did himself and which only he takes seriously—he declared that all that remains is for him to rename an ocean and a river.

If Macron or Merz were to say such things, the men in white coats would have already taken charge of them.

But in a democracy, election changes the rules of the game. It compels us to take seriously the pompous nonsense of an incoherent man.

He strikes erratic deals with Putin—while simultaneously wanting to destroy Zelensky—in order to hand half of Ukraine over to Russia. For what reason? The mysteries of the Kremlin.

He is in deep trouble regarding Iran and the Middle East, is at odds with the entire planet, challenges any international legitimacy that does not originate with him, and has debased every US public office. Who else would send various crooks as ambassadors to foreign capitals?

And on top of that, he complains because he wasn’t awarded the Nobel Peace Prize!

His election

But as we said, it was his election that made him someone we have to deal with—nothing else. Had he not been elected—and twice, at that—nobody would even ask him the time of day.

Will American voters put a stop to this in the November elections? We read the forecasts, but (between us) we have absolutely no faith in American voters.

That is why we are not convinced that the “Trump era” is merely a temporary phase that will end when his term expires in two years. There are plenty of unhinged individuals ready to pick up the baton.

And the Democrats? They’re doing just fine, thanks. They’ve found the solution in Muslim candidates!

The unfortunate Ukrainians are living through this in the trenches—and with Trump ordering their surrender to the Russians.

About the author

The Liberal Globe is an independent online magazine that provides carefully selected varieties of stories. Our authoritative insight opinions, analyses, researches are reflected in the sections which are both thematic and geographical. We do not attach ourselves to any political party. Our political agenda is liberal in the classical sense. We continue to advocate bold policies in favour of individual freedoms, even if that means we must oppose the will and the majority view, even if these positions that we express may be unpleasant and unbearable for the majority.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *