You won't be reading this sort of commentary at the lizard Oz any time soon ...
The fate of the Palestinian people offers a warning about the future of humanity. When I recently visited the West Bank, Palestinians kept impressing the same point on me: Israel has turned their land into a laboratory. The technology of oppression that it has deployed – including in its genocide in Gaza – ranges from hi-tech surveillance to military drones and AI on the battlefield. These technologies have been exported to oppressive states across the world. And it doesn’t stop there.
This brings us to Donald Trump’s “board of peace”, now set to rule Gaza. In the sleepy Oxfordshire village of Sutton Courtenay, where George Orwell lies buried, the ground itself ought to be shaking. This isn’t peace. It’s naked neocolonialism.
Not a single seat is reserved for a Palestinian, let alone a survivor of Gaza. Trump will serve as chair in an individual capacity rather than as US president – in other words, as Gaza’s emperor. Its invited members include Tony Blair, who is despised across the Middle East as an architect of the illegal invasion of Iraq. If you’re curious about his skill set when it comes to rebuilding ravaged Arab territory, recall what the Chilcot inquiry concluded about that catastrophe: “the UK failed to plan or prepare for the major reconstruction programme required in Iraq”.
Who else? At least two property developers, including Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, who once boasted of the “very valuable” potential of Gaza’s “waterfront property”. Hungary’s far-right autocrat Viktor Orbán. An Israeli billionaire, Yakir Gabay, and an American private equity tycoon, Marc Rowan. Vladimir Putin, who helped pioneer reducing predominantly Muslim lands to rubble in Chechnya, also has an invite, according to the Kremlin. Sure, Israel isn’t happy, presumably because the Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has been invited. Nothing but total control of Gaza would satisfy them – but that is little consolation for its traumatised Palestinian population.
The clues about where this is heading are hardly subtle. Trump is demanding $1bn from each country to be a permanent member, and the draft of the charter appears to suggest, as per Bloomberg, that he will control the money. A year ago, he proposed permanently resettling Gaza’s population: ethnic cleansing. He posted an AI-generated video showcasing Gaza as a luxury resort, featuring a giant golden statue of himself.
It would be naive to assume that he has abandoned such plans, even if pressure from Arab states appears to have had some effect last year, when he said “nobody is expelling any Palestinians”. That was clear in little-noticed comments he made at a recent press conference with
Benjamin Netanyahu – the Israeli prime minister wanted by the international criminal court on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Trump suggested that if Gaza’s population “were given the opportunity to live in a better climate, they would move. They’re there because they sort of have to be.”
This brings us to Donald Trump’s “board of peace”, now set to rule Gaza. In the sleepy Oxfordshire village of Sutton Courtenay, where George Orwell lies buried, the ground itself ought to be shaking. This isn’t peace. It’s naked neocolonialism.
Not a single seat is reserved for a Palestinian, let alone a survivor of Gaza. Trump will serve as chair in an individual capacity rather than as US president – in other words, as Gaza’s emperor. Its invited members include Tony Blair, who is despised across the Middle East as an architect of the illegal invasion of Iraq. If you’re curious about his skill set when it comes to rebuilding ravaged Arab territory, recall what the Chilcot inquiry concluded about that catastrophe: “the UK failed to plan or prepare for the major reconstruction programme required in Iraq”.
Who else? At least two property developers, including Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, who once boasted of the “very valuable” potential of Gaza’s “waterfront property”. Hungary’s far-right autocrat Viktor Orbán. An Israeli billionaire, Yakir Gabay, and an American private equity tycoon, Marc Rowan. Vladimir Putin, who helped pioneer reducing predominantly Muslim lands to rubble in Chechnya, also has an invite, according to the Kremlin. Sure, Israel isn’t happy, presumably because the Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has been invited. Nothing but total control of Gaza would satisfy them – but that is little consolation for its traumatised Palestinian population.
The clues about where this is heading are hardly subtle. Trump is demanding $1bn from each country to be a permanent member, and the draft of the charter appears to suggest, as per Bloomberg, that he will control the money. A year ago, he proposed permanently resettling Gaza’s population: ethnic cleansing. He posted an AI-generated video showcasing Gaza as a luxury resort, featuring a giant golden statue of himself.
It would be naive to assume that he has abandoned such plans, even if pressure from Arab states appears to have had some effect last year, when he said “nobody is expelling any Palestinians”. That was clear in little-noticed comments he made at a recent press conference with
Benjamin Netanyahu – the Israeli prime minister wanted by the international criminal court on charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity. Trump suggested that if Gaza’s population “were given the opportunity to live in a better climate, they would move. They’re there because they sort of have to be.”
And so on, thanks to Owen Jones at the Graudian ... with more here ...
Now on to what you will be reading if you tuned in to the lizard Oz this dismal Wednesday morning ....
Late-night vote
Major test looms for Ley after Coalition splits on post-Bondi reforms
Coalition rift exposed as Nationals cross floor on post-Bondi reforms
A dramatic late-night Senate rebellion has torn open Coalition unity after three Nationals senators voted against their own shadow cabinet’s position on hate crime reforms, which passed after a marathon sitting.
By Sarah Ison
Major test looms for Ley after Coalition splits on post-Bondi reforms
Coalition rift exposed as Nationals cross floor on post-Bondi reforms
A dramatic late-night Senate rebellion has torn open Coalition unity after three Nationals senators voted against their own shadow cabinet’s position on hate crime reforms, which passed after a marathon sitting.
By Sarah Ison
Buck Stops With … Ex-PM?
Anthony Albanese’s antisemitism blame shift ‘delusional’, says Scott Morrison
Anthony Albanese has blamed Scott Morrison’s government for Australia’s antisemitism crisis, prompting the former prime minister to hit back calling the Labor leader ‘delusional and cheap’.
By Dennis Shanahan and Richard Ferguson
Anthony Albanese’s antisemitism blame shift ‘delusional’, says Scott Morrison
Anthony Albanese has blamed Scott Morrison’s government for Australia’s antisemitism crisis, prompting the former prime minister to hit back calling the Labor leader ‘delusional and cheap’.
By Dennis Shanahan and Richard Ferguson
Phew, tricky turf for the reptiles, what with the lettuce gaining heart and the Libs complicit in the bill, and that left the the bouffant one to indulged in a two minute rant:
Commentary by Dennis Shanahan
Hypocrisy and politicking rule in coward’s castle
The Prime Minister has rewritten history by claiming the Morrison government failed on antisemitism while refusing to say sorry for his own delayed royal commission response.
Hypocrisy and politicking rule in coward’s castle
The Prime Minister has rewritten history by claiming the Morrison government failed on antisemitism while refusing to say sorry for his own delayed royal commission response.
This helps conjure up the reptile mood, thanks to Golding:
A pox on that boofhead ratbag bloody galah coward's castle full of ning nongs, he cried, as the Adelaide matter stayed on the boil, with the reptile jihad delighting in its new target with an EXCLUSIVE:
EXCLUSIVE
Facebook ‘excuse’ exposed: Abdel-Fattah kept paraglider photo for five months
The Anti-Israel activist kept a controversial parachute image on her account until March 2024, contradicting her public claims she had ‘no idea about the death toll’.
By Natasha Bita and Joanna Panagopoulos
Facebook ‘excuse’ exposed: Abdel-Fattah kept paraglider photo for five months
The Anti-Israel activist kept a controversial parachute image on her account until March 2024, contradicting her public claims she had ‘no idea about the death toll’.
By Natasha Bita and Joanna Panagopoulos
Hah, gotcha!
They won't be satisfied until they've driven her from the country, as they've done with others...and Joshua joined in ...
If Adelaide mess is what accountability looks like, it’s worth it
Institutions legitimise speech. When festivals platform eliminationist anti-Zionism as politics, they normalise bigotry and violence—then feign surprise when its champions perform victimhood.
By Joshua Dabelstein
Institutions legitimise speech. When festivals platform eliminationist anti-Zionism as politics, they normalise bigotry and violence—then feign surprise when its champions perform victimhood.
By Joshua Dabelstein
Here's a clue where the celebratory Josh is coming from...
...The most consequential form of anti-Jewish vilification today is not race-based antisemitism but anti-Zionism: distinctly permissible, distinctly dangerous.
By treating antisemitism as the sole test for anti-Jewish harm for so long, Australia has created a category error that leaves the primary driver of contemporary vilification untouched, and people such as Abdel-Fattah untouchable. The Adelaide Festival’s leadership fumbled a long overdue institutional reckoning: popularity, academic credentials and claims of victimhood do not mitigate one’s role in a violent ecosystem.
The boycott was more a clarification than a crisis. When people who insist on the moral necessity of eliminationist speech remove themselves from public institutions, they narrow the space in which that speech is normalised.
The cancellation of the Adelaide Writers Week is no loss. It’s an opportunity to observe just how pervasive bigotry and eliminationism has become.
Had the board stood by its decision, this could have been a moment of confirmation that language has consequences that institutions cannot launder anti-Zionist bigotry. If this mess is what accountability looks like, it’s worth enduring.
Joshua Dabelstein is a Sydney-based writer.
By treating antisemitism as the sole test for anti-Jewish harm for so long, Australia has created a category error that leaves the primary driver of contemporary vilification untouched, and people such as Abdel-Fattah untouchable. The Adelaide Festival’s leadership fumbled a long overdue institutional reckoning: popularity, academic credentials and claims of victimhood do not mitigate one’s role in a violent ecosystem.
The boycott was more a clarification than a crisis. When people who insist on the moral necessity of eliminationist speech remove themselves from public institutions, they narrow the space in which that speech is normalised.
The cancellation of the Adelaide Writers Week is no loss. It’s an opportunity to observe just how pervasive bigotry and eliminationism has become.
Had the board stood by its decision, this could have been a moment of confirmation that language has consequences that institutions cannot launder anti-Zionist bigotry. If this mess is what accountability looks like, it’s worth enduring.
Joshua Dabelstein is a Sydney-based writer.
Bit of a clunky style there Josh, which could do with some eliminationism ... but all good, now it's on with eliminating Gaza, hey?.
Then the pond almost fainted in terror at this EXCLUSIVE:
EXCLUSIVE
Libs back push for gender quota, women-only picks
A radical plan to address the Liberals’ woman problem will be progressed, after the leadership of the NSW division supported a proposal to pursue gender quotas and women-only preselections.
By Lachlan Leeming
Libs back push for gender quota, women-only picks
A radical plan to address the Liberals’ woman problem will be progressed, after the leadership of the NSW division supported a proposal to pursue gender quotas and women-only preselections.
By Lachlan Leeming
Oh that'll need a Dame Slap jihad ...
Meanwhile, the reptiles continued tormented, having themselves let this hare out of the box ...
Unlike China, Taiwan offers a partnership without conditions
Ambassador Xiao likens Taiwan to Tasmania. But Taiwan has far more in common with Australia than the beautiful Australian state of Tasmania – like Australia, Taiwan is a strong, proud, maritime trading nation.
By Douglas Hsu
Ambassador Xiao likens Taiwan to Tasmania. But Taiwan has far more in common with Australia than the beautiful Australian state of Tasmania – like Australia, Taiwan is a strong, proud, maritime trading nation.
By Douglas Hsu
See how easy it is to stir the possum and keep the fuss going by getting sundry countries into a 'he said, he said' situation?
Luckily, while there was no bromancer to hand, there was one reptile import who attempted to tackle King Donald ...
The header: US push to own Greenland a proxy for emerging order;Donald Trump’s renewed push for Greenland has shattered the status quo. As Washington pressures Nuuk and Copenhagen, independence stalls, NATO strains grow, and Europe confronts a harsher age of realpolitik with global consequences.
The caption for the entirely meaningless deep frozen snap: Greenland is no longer remote from great-power politics.
Liz spent four minutes contemplating the current Kind Donald debacle:
The Trump administration has hit the ground running in 2026 and Greenland is firmly in its sights.
Last September I published a book, So You Want to Own Greenland, in which I posited four scenarios for Greenland’s future, and landed on a conclusion that the status quo would endure. I was wrong.
From the establishment of a special envoy for Greenland to purposely vague offers (from $US10,000 to $US100,000 a pop) to the Greenlandic community, Washington is not backing away.
Meetings between the White House, Greenland’s Foreign Minister and Danish officials have been pulled together as all three seek to understand the parameters of exactly who has the most leverage. European leaders, meanwhile, have urged Trump to keep his hands off Greenland, only to receive threats of tariffs in response.
Speaking out the other side of their mouth, European leaders also have continued to demand US assurances of any peace deal struck in the ongoing Ukraine-Russia war, a war we’ve heard little of in past few days.
Europe has sent boots, 60 or so if you count both feet, to snap exercises in Greenland.
NATO has some pre-scheduled biannual exercises for the High North set to fall in 2026; time will tell if these go ahead.
My original scenario of the “decoupling” between Denmark and Greenland still appears to be a viable end point. But US strategy may yet delay the independence movement. Still, Greenland’s Prime Minister has stated publicly “if we have to choose between the US and Denmark here and now, then we choose Denmark”.
My second scenario based on an interrupted move towards independence has gained momentum. Denmark’s resistance to Greenlandic independence may harden amid an escalation of US intent to secure the island.
Last September I published a book, So You Want to Own Greenland, in which I posited four scenarios for Greenland’s future, and landed on a conclusion that the status quo would endure. I was wrong.
From the establishment of a special envoy for Greenland to purposely vague offers (from $US10,000 to $US100,000 a pop) to the Greenlandic community, Washington is not backing away.
Meetings between the White House, Greenland’s Foreign Minister and Danish officials have been pulled together as all three seek to understand the parameters of exactly who has the most leverage. European leaders, meanwhile, have urged Trump to keep his hands off Greenland, only to receive threats of tariffs in response.
Speaking out the other side of their mouth, European leaders also have continued to demand US assurances of any peace deal struck in the ongoing Ukraine-Russia war, a war we’ve heard little of in past few days.
Europe has sent boots, 60 or so if you count both feet, to snap exercises in Greenland.
NATO has some pre-scheduled biannual exercises for the High North set to fall in 2026; time will tell if these go ahead.
My original scenario of the “decoupling” between Denmark and Greenland still appears to be a viable end point. But US strategy may yet delay the independence movement. Still, Greenland’s Prime Minister has stated publicly “if we have to choose between the US and Denmark here and now, then we choose Denmark”.
My second scenario based on an interrupted move towards independence has gained momentum. Denmark’s resistance to Greenlandic independence may harden amid an escalation of US intent to secure the island.
The reptiles interrupted with a snap of the King, Washington is no longer pretending to ask. Picture: AP
Whenever the pond sees the King, there's always a strong desire to reach for a 'toon ...
Liz stayed curiously restrained at the sight of a bully doing a copycat sociopathic Vlad the impaler routine:
Copenhagen’s deeper fiscal injections may be viewed as an enticement to coerce enduring patronage. Here, Greenland’s rural-urban societal divide among its 57,000 nationals may yet be a decisive factor in the speed or progress of Nuuk’s independence plans.
US refusal to take military action off the table has surely concerned Denmark, particularly in terms of losing its Arctic stake (and the resources) as well as its NATO standing.
No longer able to cite access to and use of Greenland as its contribution to NATO, Copenhagen may fear the real cost of having to contribute to the alliance.
A concession between Denmark and Greenland may be in the form of so-called hyper-autonomy. This may affect Copenhagen’s domestic sentiment with public backlash against enduring semblances of denial of Greenlandic independence.
In many ways the increased US interest in Greenland has sharpened Denmark’s enduring dilemma. But it will be the people of Greenland who suffer; investment firms and major resource multinationals are not going to take a risk on an emerging market characterised by instability.
And foreign investment is essential for a real, sustainable Greenlandic independence.
My third scenario, at the time, felt unlikely: Greenland to become the 51st US state. This scenario saw the US simply acting on securing Greenland. Such action could be taken militarily or non-militarily. Alignment on the back of an independent Greenland could occur, but it is likely Nuuk would have to cede further concessions to secure sustainable economic prosperity and strategic protection under the US military umbrella.
Becoming an overseas territory, of which the US has for example Guam and the US Virgin Islands, would afford Nuuk a similar deal to what it has with Denmark right now: under someone else’s sovereignty, albeit with significant self-governance powers. For Nuuk this is undesirable.
Forming a compact of free association, however, maybe an option. The US already has these with, for example, Federated States of Micronesia, Republic of the Marshall Islands and Republic of Palau. Greenland would be self-governing but, significantly, an independent state.
The US would then provide substantial economic assistance, defence provisions and security.
US refusal to take military action off the table has surely concerned Denmark, particularly in terms of losing its Arctic stake (and the resources) as well as its NATO standing.
No longer able to cite access to and use of Greenland as its contribution to NATO, Copenhagen may fear the real cost of having to contribute to the alliance.
A concession between Denmark and Greenland may be in the form of so-called hyper-autonomy. This may affect Copenhagen’s domestic sentiment with public backlash against enduring semblances of denial of Greenlandic independence.
In many ways the increased US interest in Greenland has sharpened Denmark’s enduring dilemma. But it will be the people of Greenland who suffer; investment firms and major resource multinationals are not going to take a risk on an emerging market characterised by instability.
And foreign investment is essential for a real, sustainable Greenlandic independence.
My third scenario, at the time, felt unlikely: Greenland to become the 51st US state. This scenario saw the US simply acting on securing Greenland. Such action could be taken militarily or non-militarily. Alignment on the back of an independent Greenland could occur, but it is likely Nuuk would have to cede further concessions to secure sustainable economic prosperity and strategic protection under the US military umbrella.
Becoming an overseas territory, of which the US has for example Guam and the US Virgin Islands, would afford Nuuk a similar deal to what it has with Denmark right now: under someone else’s sovereignty, albeit with significant self-governance powers. For Nuuk this is undesirable.
Forming a compact of free association, however, maybe an option. The US already has these with, for example, Federated States of Micronesia, Republic of the Marshall Islands and Republic of Palau. Greenland would be self-governing but, significantly, an independent state.
The US would then provide substantial economic assistance, defence provisions and security.
Oh yes, talk about unalloyed joy ...
Not to worry, it's all good...
This year may also see the fracture of NATO, but history is full of other pressures on the alliance that have not broken it. For now, Europe appears hesitant to will US exit from NATO. Indeed, provisions in the Washington Treaty (article four) for members to meet to discuss Danish concerns over US threats have not been used – despite having a window to do so since the first Trump presidency.
My final scenario – the status quo – is rapidly evaporating.
Congress may be able to stop Trump, but much relies on the November 2026 mid-terms. Europe may yet seek to buy time through negotiations and a strongly worded tweets until this point. That would be a mistake. Trump is likely to persist with securing Greenland in terms of hemispheric defence. We should expect a blend of actions taken across the spectrum of logistics, military-strategic investments, technological support, seabed cable infrastructure and resource extraction or production investments. America’s tech boys and leaders already are jetting in and out of Greenland.
What happens in Greenland is no longer simply a matter for Greenland. Greenlandic indigenous rights will likely gain prominence in the coming months. Opposition leaders and some community leaders in Greenland are now actively pushing for direct bilateral talks with Trump.
Diplomacy may have some impact, in that a firing war over Greenland is extremely unlikely, but diplomacy is no match for the tide of realpolitik that now washes over the international system.
Greenland is in some ways now a proxy for defining the characteristics of the emerging international order. Alliances and partnerships are subordinate to national interests and traditional ways of business are no more. This is of course a watershed moment for modern Europe; it must strike a deal, and the cost may be to sacrifice the Kingdom of Denmark. Canada has pivoted to Beijing and Australia remains blissfully ignorant to the world changing around it.
Elizabeth Buchanan is a senior fellow at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute and a polar geopolitics expert. She is the author of So You Want to Own Greenland: Lessons from the Vikings to Trump (Hurst, 2025).
My final scenario – the status quo – is rapidly evaporating.
Congress may be able to stop Trump, but much relies on the November 2026 mid-terms. Europe may yet seek to buy time through negotiations and a strongly worded tweets until this point. That would be a mistake. Trump is likely to persist with securing Greenland in terms of hemispheric defence. We should expect a blend of actions taken across the spectrum of logistics, military-strategic investments, technological support, seabed cable infrastructure and resource extraction or production investments. America’s tech boys and leaders already are jetting in and out of Greenland.
What happens in Greenland is no longer simply a matter for Greenland. Greenlandic indigenous rights will likely gain prominence in the coming months. Opposition leaders and some community leaders in Greenland are now actively pushing for direct bilateral talks with Trump.
Diplomacy may have some impact, in that a firing war over Greenland is extremely unlikely, but diplomacy is no match for the tide of realpolitik that now washes over the international system.
Greenland is in some ways now a proxy for defining the characteristics of the emerging international order. Alliances and partnerships are subordinate to national interests and traditional ways of business are no more. This is of course a watershed moment for modern Europe; it must strike a deal, and the cost may be to sacrifice the Kingdom of Denmark. Canada has pivoted to Beijing and Australia remains blissfully ignorant to the world changing around it.
Elizabeth Buchanan is a senior fellow at the Australian Strategic Policy Institute and a polar geopolitics expert. She is the author of So You Want to Own Greenland: Lessons from the Vikings to Trump (Hurst, 2025).
Or might it be a watershed moment for the United States?
As for being blissfully ignorant?
Why that'd be thanks in no small part to the reptiles, with even Dame Groan on hand to tell us, or at least the RBA, to keep shtum:
The header: It’s best RBA keeps shtum over US Fed showdown; Central bank independence is more nuanced than a letter from RBA governor Bullock suggests. Donald Trump, politics, and policy meddling show it’s never absolute.
The caption for the concerned figure doing a little finger-wringing: RBA governor Michele Bullock joined 13 other central bank leaders to defend Fed independence amid political pressure from Donald Trump. Picture: Bloomberg
Dame Groan spent a bigly four minutes urging head in sand ...
It’s an arcane world, the world of central bank politics. But for those who are involved, certain events can lead to a lot of huffing and puffing and group letters.
One of the most triggering events in this obscure realm is an attempt by a political leader to influence the decision-making of the committee that sets official interest rates. When that leader is US President Donald Trump, the passion of the response rises to stratospheric levels.
In recent days governors from 14 central banks, including Reserve Bank of Australia governor Michele Bullock, have issued a joint statement saying they “stand in full solidarity” with US Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell.
According to these wise heads, “the independence of central banks is a cornerstone of price, financial and economic stability”.
Jim Chalmers expressed support for Bullock’s intervention. Interestingly, New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters criticised the governor of his country’s central bank for signing the letter. He warned her to “stay in her New Zealand lane and stick to domestic monetary policy”.
The precise impetus for this group letter was the opening of a criminal inquiry into Powell’s alleged mishandling of the refurbishment of the Federal Reserve’s headquarters in Washington DC and his testimony to congress.
For some time, Trump has been trying to remove Powell from the top job, notwithstanding the fact Trump in his first term had appointed Powell, a former investment banker.
Powell’s term as chairman of the Fed ends in May but he is entitled to remain on the board until 2028. (Typically, former chairs do not take up this option.)
Certainly, Trump’s attempts to influence the outcomes of the Federal Reserve’s decisions on official interest rates have lacked any subtlety. Indeed, Trump’s personal attacks on Powell have involved calling the chairman a “numbskull” and “being too stupid”.
The President became particularly annoyed when Powell pointed out the potentially inflationary impact of raising tariffs. Understandably, Trump is a fan of low interest rates, given his background in property development. The fact US government debt is so large and rising – fiscal restraint is not one of Trump’s strengths – adds strong impetus to his preference for lower interest rates.
One of the most triggering events in this obscure realm is an attempt by a political leader to influence the decision-making of the committee that sets official interest rates. When that leader is US President Donald Trump, the passion of the response rises to stratospheric levels.
In recent days governors from 14 central banks, including Reserve Bank of Australia governor Michele Bullock, have issued a joint statement saying they “stand in full solidarity” with US Federal Reserve chairman Jerome Powell.
According to these wise heads, “the independence of central banks is a cornerstone of price, financial and economic stability”.
Jim Chalmers expressed support for Bullock’s intervention. Interestingly, New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters criticised the governor of his country’s central bank for signing the letter. He warned her to “stay in her New Zealand lane and stick to domestic monetary policy”.
The precise impetus for this group letter was the opening of a criminal inquiry into Powell’s alleged mishandling of the refurbishment of the Federal Reserve’s headquarters in Washington DC and his testimony to congress.
For some time, Trump has been trying to remove Powell from the top job, notwithstanding the fact Trump in his first term had appointed Powell, a former investment banker.
Powell’s term as chairman of the Fed ends in May but he is entitled to remain on the board until 2028. (Typically, former chairs do not take up this option.)
Certainly, Trump’s attempts to influence the outcomes of the Federal Reserve’s decisions on official interest rates have lacked any subtlety. Indeed, Trump’s personal attacks on Powell have involved calling the chairman a “numbskull” and “being too stupid”.
The President became particularly annoyed when Powell pointed out the potentially inflationary impact of raising tariffs. Understandably, Trump is a fan of low interest rates, given his background in property development. The fact US government debt is so large and rising – fiscal restraint is not one of Trump’s strengths – adds strong impetus to his preference for lower interest rates.
Did anyone else enjoy that "Certainly"?
Certainly, in the pond's world, that would pass for a small billy goat butt, as the reptiles introduced a snap of the victim of King Donald's bullying, For some time, Donald Trump has been trying to remove Jerome Powell from the top job. Picture: AP
Dame Groan might have done a little tut-tutt, but it's important when seeing a victim of street crime to just keep walking by, perhaps a little more quickly ...
What should we make of this international war of words related to central bank independence?
The first thing to note is that Trump’s behaviour towards Powell and the Fed more generally is impossible to justify. Powell was Trump’s appointment and it’s appropriate that the former be allowed to get on with the job at hand. Confected criminal charges related to the refurbishment of a building are just bizarre.
(Interestingly, the Reserve Bank of Australia’s building in Martin Place, Sydney, also has been undergoing a significant refurbishment. It has not gone well. The costs have blown out and the completion date has been extended several times. No one is blaming the governor, Bullock, or her predecessor for this unfortunate outcome.)
The first thing to note is that Trump’s behaviour towards Powell and the Fed more generally is impossible to justify. Powell was Trump’s appointment and it’s appropriate that the former be allowed to get on with the job at hand. Confected criminal charges related to the refurbishment of a building are just bizarre.
(Interestingly, the Reserve Bank of Australia’s building in Martin Place, Sydney, also has been undergoing a significant refurbishment. It has not gone well. The costs have blown out and the completion date has been extended several times. No one is blaming the governor, Bullock, or her predecessor for this unfortunate outcome.)
Uh oh, time for another billy goat butt, dressed up as "having said this", celebrating head in sand time ...
Having said this, it’s probably not appropriate for central bank governors, including Bullock, to be signing group letters. It makes a certain mockery of independence, the attempt to interfere.
There is also an implication that these other central banks are supremely independent and their decision-making is, and has been, close to perfect. In Australia’s case, for instance, the presence of the secretary to the Treasury as a full voting member on the board of the RBA is hard to square with the notion of full independence from government.
There was a case for this arrangement to be terminated with the recent restructuring of the bank to form the monetary policy board and a corporate board. But the Treasury secretary remains a member of the important monetary policy board.
Recall also that the restructuring undertaken by the Treasurer had all the hallmarks of an attempt to replace the existing board members with individuals known for their more dovish attitudes to interest rates. In the end, the existing board members were retained but the political rationale for tactic was reasonably transparent.
While Chalmers will often remark that decisions about interest rates are made by the bank alone, his economic commentary is not irrelevant.
His description of interest rates “smashing the economy”, a comment he made in September 2024, arguably crossed a boundary.
A more independent-minded governor would have responded by presenting a speech – or sending out one of her deputies – to the effect that the economy was not being smashed and the bank was firmly committed to seeing inflation return to the target band.
Bullock’s timidity to call out the role that excessive government spending has played in prolonging the inflationary cycle is also significant.
There is also an implication that these other central banks are supremely independent and their decision-making is, and has been, close to perfect. In Australia’s case, for instance, the presence of the secretary to the Treasury as a full voting member on the board of the RBA is hard to square with the notion of full independence from government.
There was a case for this arrangement to be terminated with the recent restructuring of the bank to form the monetary policy board and a corporate board. But the Treasury secretary remains a member of the important monetary policy board.
Recall also that the restructuring undertaken by the Treasurer had all the hallmarks of an attempt to replace the existing board members with individuals known for their more dovish attitudes to interest rates. In the end, the existing board members were retained but the political rationale for tactic was reasonably transparent.
While Chalmers will often remark that decisions about interest rates are made by the bank alone, his economic commentary is not irrelevant.
His description of interest rates “smashing the economy”, a comment he made in September 2024, arguably crossed a boundary.
A more independent-minded governor would have responded by presenting a speech – or sending out one of her deputies – to the effect that the economy was not being smashed and the bank was firmly committed to seeing inflation return to the target band.
Bullock’s timidity to call out the role that excessive government spending has played in prolonging the inflationary cycle is also significant.
For some reason the reptiles slipped in a reminder of that demented coupling, now being used by the King's personal DoJ to take Jerome out, Donald Trump has repeatedly criticised Fed Chair Jerome Powell, calling for low interest rates and attacking his decisions. Picture: AFP
And then, with the consummate lack of irony and self-awareness she's always shown, the inveterate lane crosser, meddler and interferer suggested it was time to stay in lane ...
The lack of independence of the bank was on show by its decision in February last year to cut the cash rate by 25 basis points. This was the first cut in four years. It also was only months away from a federal election. It created the clear impression of the start of a rate-cutting cycle.
The fact was that the underlying inflation rate had not reached the annual target band of 2 to 3 per cent. The December consumer price index 2024 print had recorded a 3.2 per cent increase in the underlying rate and the bank also referred to the uncertain outlook.
It’s not as though the decision-making of the RBA has been faultless across a long timeframe. For many years inflation failed to meet the target band on the low side. The bank then probably overcooked its response to the Covid restrictions, including the facilitation of excess government spending through its policy of quantitative easing. The advocacy of higher infrastructure spending and high rates of immigration also can be questioned.
The bottom line is this: the independence of central banks should be measured in degrees, not in absolute terms. After all, governments make the most important appointments to central banks and this process itself will have consequences. Having the Treasury secretary as a member of the interest-setting board is a strange (and unusual) arrangement for a supposedly independent bank.
In any case, independence does not guarantee perfect performance. Our bank has made mistakes, both big and small, through the years, even with its relative independent status. To be sure, the empirical evidence shows that direct government determination of monetary policy settings leads to very poor economic outcomes, but this includes countries we would never wish to emulate.
The real message is that all parties should stick to their lanes.
The fact was that the underlying inflation rate had not reached the annual target band of 2 to 3 per cent. The December consumer price index 2024 print had recorded a 3.2 per cent increase in the underlying rate and the bank also referred to the uncertain outlook.
It’s not as though the decision-making of the RBA has been faultless across a long timeframe. For many years inflation failed to meet the target band on the low side. The bank then probably overcooked its response to the Covid restrictions, including the facilitation of excess government spending through its policy of quantitative easing. The advocacy of higher infrastructure spending and high rates of immigration also can be questioned.
The bottom line is this: the independence of central banks should be measured in degrees, not in absolute terms. After all, governments make the most important appointments to central banks and this process itself will have consequences. Having the Treasury secretary as a member of the interest-setting board is a strange (and unusual) arrangement for a supposedly independent bank.
In any case, independence does not guarantee perfect performance. Our bank has made mistakes, both big and small, through the years, even with its relative independent status. To be sure, the empirical evidence shows that direct government determination of monetary policy settings leads to very poor economic outcomes, but this includes countries we would never wish to emulate.
The real message is that all parties should stick to their lanes.
All good ...
Then for a little fantasy, the pond wound back the reptile clock a little ... because in its time it made for a bigly splash ...
The read wasn't that bigly, more an idle fantasy ...
The source: Business The Wall Street Journal
The header: A look back at the war that is about to begin; The crucial precipitating factor that led to World War III was the brief and – or so it seemed initially – stunningly successful US victory in the Battle of Greenland in early 2026.
The author: Gerard Baker
The clock, proving the reptiles snuck this one in on the pond late yesterday arvo: January 20, 2026 - 5:21PM
The caption for the snap before the doomsday scenario begins: Donald Trump and the Greenland PM Jens-Frederik Nielsen.
The header: A look back at the war that is about to begin; The crucial precipitating factor that led to World War III was the brief and – or so it seemed initially – stunningly successful US victory in the Battle of Greenland in early 2026.
The author: Gerard Baker
The clock, proving the reptiles snuck this one in on the pond late yesterday arvo: January 20, 2026 - 5:21PM
The caption for the snap before the doomsday scenario begins: Donald Trump and the Greenland PM Jens-Frederik Nielsen.
It was only a four minute read, but the pond was puzzled.
Apparently nobody had bothered to explain to Baker of the WSJ how his kissing cousins at Faux Noise had facilitated, enabled and generally egged on mad King Donald, and were, at this very moment, doing it, so that the Murdochian bank balance could keep growing.
So it's a bit too late for this kind of hysteria. And it's way too easy to run this sort of line, as if that absolves the power hungry Murdochians who kowtowed, tugged the forelock and bent the knee ...
Historians differ about the real origins of World War III.
Some think its roots lay in the disastrous US interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan in the early 2000s, which weakened American authority in the world, emboldened rivals, and sapped domestic support for assertive military projection overseas.
Some cite Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the first major land offensive in Europe since World War II, breaking an 80-year taboo on armed conflict for territorial advantage.
Some argue that the rise of China from the 1990s onward made conflict more or less inevitable, the world falling again into the Thucydides Trap of an emerging power posing an existential threat to the strategic hegemon.
Some think its roots lay in the disastrous US interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan in the early 2000s, which weakened American authority in the world, emboldened rivals, and sapped domestic support for assertive military projection overseas.
Some cite Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the first major land offensive in Europe since World War II, breaking an 80-year taboo on armed conflict for territorial advantage.
Some argue that the rise of China from the 1990s onward made conflict more or less inevitable, the world falling again into the Thucydides Trap of an emerging power posing an existential threat to the strategic hegemon.
The reptiles interrupted the snap with a still, Danish soldiers disembark at Nuuk airport, Greenland. Picture: AFP
Baker returned to his fantasy, a poor person's Fail Safe, or heaven forfend A House of Dynamite (the pond refuses to mention Dr Strangelove in this abysmal company):
But there’s general agreement about the crucial precipitating factor that led to the third global conflict in a little over a century: the brief and – or so it seemed initially – stunningly successful US victory in the Battle of Greenland in early 2026.
It wasn’t much of a battle, to be sure. President Trump, fresh off his swift and effective intervention in early January to topple and bring to trial in the US Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela and his wife (who were later pardoned by President JD Vance and now run a chain of retail cocaine stores based in Palm Beach, Florida), doubled down on his “Donroe corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine.
He insisted that the US needed to annex Greenland for its own security and that of the wider Western Hemisphere and initially sought to pressure Denmark, the Arctic island’s sovereign authority, to sell it. Deploying his favourite diplomatic tool, import tariffs, Mr Trump – not unreasonably – expected the Europeans to cave, as they typically did when confronted with the reality that decades of dependency and complacency had left them powerless in the face of strength.
But the Danes, a proud people whose soldiers had fought and died alongside Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, refused. When Mr Trump ordered US forces to seize the island, Denmark enlisted a handful of nations to help with the resistance – a coalition of the willing, but not very able.
It wasn’t much of a battle, to be sure. President Trump, fresh off his swift and effective intervention in early January to topple and bring to trial in the US Nicolas Maduro of Venezuela and his wife (who were later pardoned by President JD Vance and now run a chain of retail cocaine stores based in Palm Beach, Florida), doubled down on his “Donroe corollary” to the Monroe Doctrine.
He insisted that the US needed to annex Greenland for its own security and that of the wider Western Hemisphere and initially sought to pressure Denmark, the Arctic island’s sovereign authority, to sell it. Deploying his favourite diplomatic tool, import tariffs, Mr Trump – not unreasonably – expected the Europeans to cave, as they typically did when confronted with the reality that decades of dependency and complacency had left them powerless in the face of strength.
But the Danes, a proud people whose soldiers had fought and died alongside Americans in Iraq and Afghanistan, refused. When Mr Trump ordered US forces to seize the island, Denmark enlisted a handful of nations to help with the resistance – a coalition of the willing, but not very able.
The reptiles interrupted with another snap: A large (not for) sale style sign in the Nuuk city centre. Picture: AFP
Mr. Baker continued with the apocalyptic hysteria, as if aiming for his apocrypha to be included in the Murdochian bible:
It was never a contest. In addition to Danish and Greenlandic forces armed for winter warfare, the allies included a shipload of British Royal Navy admirals; a Canadian armoured detachment hand-picked in compliance with the nation’s strict commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion; a German fleet of battery-powered armoured fighting vehicles that had to be abandoned when the only charging stations in Nuuk, the territory’s capital, broke down; and a Dutch infantry battalion that was forced to withdraw because of a shortage of ammunition, and discovered that shouting “bang-bang,” as they had been trained, was of little effect in battle.
Humiliated, the Europeans and Canadians retreated but regrouped, committed to do whatever they could to retaliate. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation was formally dissolved in late 2026. Europe expelled American troops. Deprived of its forward operating bases there, from which vital missions had been conducted across the world over the last 75 years, the US tried to strike deals with Arab governments for bases in those countries. But domestic popular hostility to American military deployment, and continuing tensions over the US alliance with Israel, meant there was to be no Middle Eastern replacement for Ramstein or Lakenheath.
The European Union escalated the economic warfare. It banned all American imports; US-produced technology was regulated to within an inch of its life and eventually blocked completely. Baidu, TikTok and BYD replaced Google, Instagram and Tesla in European homes and businesses. Military procurement from US defence contractors ended. Only loyal Hungary agreed to take a couple of F-35s – on generous financing terms. The iconic McDonald’s restaurant on the Champs-Elysees became an interactive museum of American obesity.
Humiliated, the Europeans and Canadians retreated but regrouped, committed to do whatever they could to retaliate. The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation was formally dissolved in late 2026. Europe expelled American troops. Deprived of its forward operating bases there, from which vital missions had been conducted across the world over the last 75 years, the US tried to strike deals with Arab governments for bases in those countries. But domestic popular hostility to American military deployment, and continuing tensions over the US alliance with Israel, meant there was to be no Middle Eastern replacement for Ramstein or Lakenheath.
The European Union escalated the economic warfare. It banned all American imports; US-produced technology was regulated to within an inch of its life and eventually blocked completely. Baidu, TikTok and BYD replaced Google, Instagram and Tesla in European homes and businesses. Military procurement from US defence contractors ended. Only loyal Hungary agreed to take a couple of F-35s – on generous financing terms. The iconic McDonald’s restaurant on the Champs-Elysees became an interactive museum of American obesity.
There came a final AV distraction: U.S. President Donald Trump's intensified push to wrest sovereignty over Greenland from fellow NATO member Denmark has prompted the European Union to weigh hitting back with its own measures. Rachel Faber reports.
How is this helping? Well it conforms to a typical prepper fantasy, of the kind Ray Milland's family experienced in Panic in Year Zero!, as they fled town, a nuke going off in the car's rear vision mirror.
The trouble is, of course, is that we don't need this kind of silly American carry-on. The damage being done is more real, visceral, and immediate, and yet still Mr Baker's chums at Faux Noise suckle on the toes of the mad King:
The fallout did almost as much harm to the US as to Europe. The dollar sank, pushing up retail prices in America and causing a run on Treasury bonds that flattened mortgage lending and battered corporate finances. Seizing their opportunity, Russia and China demonstrated the value of allyship and pounced. Russia suspended its campaign in Ukraine and quickly moved on the Baltics. With NATO gone, Europeans were deeply divided about whether to offer support; but as a harsh winter descended, the desperate need for cheap energy soon forced them to assent to Russian control over large swathes of Eastern Europe.
China imposed a blockade on Taiwan. With US warships that once patrolled the strait now deployed chasing drug boats in the Caribbean and mopping up Inuit resistance on Greenland’s coasts, Taipei quickly capitulated. Then, in a devastating move, Beijing ordered the release for open-source access of all of its most sophisticated artificial-intelligence algorithms. The explosion of supply of the technology crushed the US market, cratering the valuations of the big US tech companies, which had been built on their supposed AI dominance.
America’s strategic superiority was constrained by the limitations of the new geopolitical realities, and it had no intention of starting a nuclear war. Instead, along with its remaining three allies – El Salvador, Qatar and Senegal – it struck an uneasy peace, a tripartite charter that replaced the American-denominated global order with a condominium of Russia, China and the US dominant in their respective regions.
Still, we’ll always have Greenland.
The Wall Street Journal
The fallout did almost as much harm to the US as to Europe. The dollar sank, pushing up retail prices in America and causing a run on Treasury bonds that flattened mortgage lending and battered corporate finances. Seizing their opportunity, Russia and China demonstrated the value of allyship and pounced. Russia suspended its campaign in Ukraine and quickly moved on the Baltics. With NATO gone, Europeans were deeply divided about whether to offer support; but as a harsh winter descended, the desperate need for cheap energy soon forced them to assent to Russian control over large swathes of Eastern Europe.
China imposed a blockade on Taiwan. With US warships that once patrolled the strait now deployed chasing drug boats in the Caribbean and mopping up Inuit resistance on Greenland’s coasts, Taipei quickly capitulated. Then, in a devastating move, Beijing ordered the release for open-source access of all of its most sophisticated artificial-intelligence algorithms. The explosion of supply of the technology crushed the US market, cratering the valuations of the big US tech companies, which had been built on their supposed AI dominance.
America’s strategic superiority was constrained by the limitations of the new geopolitical realities, and it had no intention of starting a nuclear war. Instead, along with its remaining three allies – El Salvador, Qatar and Senegal – it struck an uneasy peace, a tripartite charter that replaced the American-denominated global order with a condominium of Russia, China and the US dominant in their respective regions.
Still, we’ll always have Greenland.
The Wall Street Journal
And the Murdochs will always have Faux Noise?
Here's hoping that whole rotten empire gets taken out ...
And why is the pond being forced to read Baker of the WSJ? Where is the bromancer, why isn't he to hand to utter soothing words and tell the pond that everything's going to be okay?
Mmm, must make sure there's enough water and rice under the house for a long stay ... as the immortal Rowe was on hand to celebrate the wasteland ...
One thing that today’s offerings has made abundantly clear is that the Baker Boy should stick to reactionary bloviating in the WSJ; he has zero talent for satire.
ReplyDeleteFar better to get one’s jollies from Dame Groan, who manages to produce scathing satire without even being aware of it.
Meanwhile, in this Land of Oz, help is on the way. Skipping across possible sources of news (but ones that do not have 'news' in their title) - up popped Barnaby, all inflated from THAT poll, saying that PHON would gather-up the Division (yes, that is the term) of Maranoa, on the way to becoming the government at the next election. That alternative source of 'news' added comment about the, um, relationship between Barnaby and Littlejoh (I do miss Tony Windsor, but X is a bridge tooooo far), but did not mention Barnaby's own effort to insinuate himself into Maranoa a few elections back.
ReplyDeleteVery much doubt that Barners would consider the brave thing, trying for a seat in the House - he is pretty sure of getting a Senate gig, and he does need the money. Quite how he and Pauline will transition from the Senate to the House, to become PM and Deputy PM remains to be seen, but Pauline has a habit of losing members elected in her name, often within days of the poll being declared, so there should be a couple of seats available for both of them, in the House, in good time to wait upon the Governor General.
Oh - at the last election, Maranoa's final two-candidate preferred result was Littlejoh 70%, PHON 30%.
Would we miss him if those numbers reverse? Well, you would have to think of something he has actually done for the electorate, and, right now - nup, memory is not delivering anything on that.
We do live in interesting times.
Dame Groan: "The costs have blown out and the completion date has been extended several times."
ReplyDeleteWhat again were those questions I was asking about the Bondi RC ?
Groaning again: "Our bank has made mistakes, both big and small, through the years...".
ReplyDeleteOh wau, does that mean our bank is populated by ordinary, fallible and somewhat ignorant human beings ? Just like the rest of us ?
I have often wondered what, given that we homo saps saps have been around for at least 190,000 years but have only in the last 10,000 or so begun to make any visible intellectual progress, have we been up to for about 180,000 years ?
Evolving and mutating enough to score an average 100 on an IQ test ?