Trump’s Funeral speech on the US’s withdrawal from the leadership position of “planetary leader”

President Trump, in his most recent speech, focused on three key points of the ongoing war against Iran.

  • The first important thing he said was that the US would disengage from the war by the end of April.
  • The second that he does not intend regime change, never intended (!?) and
  • the third that there will be no ground intervention.

He did not say this last one, but he avoided even indirectly mentioning the deployment of troops on Iranian soil. Of course, the troop deployment has not been canceled, units are headed to Iran, including the Nevada National Guard (?) for some strange reason…

Another point, central to Trump’s speech, was the statement that “the straits will open at some point, when Iran needs the money from oil sales”. This extremely careful sentence has a lot of depth.

The US President clearly accepts that Iran will open the straits! It will not be the US or anyone else. He automatically accepted that Iran has -at this moment- the initiative in the war. That is, whoever can close and open the straits has the initiative…

And just like that, the dithyrambic statements are thrown out the window: we dismantled them, we flattened them, they don’t even shoot at us, we won, etc. If this were true, then the US would open the straits! On the contrary, Trump informs the world that the straits will open when Iran decides to, for reasons of economic interest.

The rest of his speech, however, is even more interesting. He said verbatim:

“the countries in the world that are supplied by the Strait of Hormuz must take care of this passage, they must seize it and take care of it, they can do it easily, we will be assistants, but they must take the initiative and protect the oil that they so desperately need; so to these countries that have so far refused to participate in the beheading of Iran, I have a suggestion:
1) buy oil from the US, we have a lot and plenty of it, and
2) develop a little belated courage and go to the straits and just take it, use it, protect it.”

These words are revealing!

The first thing Trump does, probably driven by his wounded narcissistic psyche, is accuse his allies of a lack of courage and therefore of the failure of the operations so far and at the same time ask them again (?) to review and intervene! The man known as the “deal artist” has just been dethroned!

Instead of arguments, he uses a Middle Eastern language of insults and threats to secure support. Trump, who would end the war in Ukraine “in twenty-four hours,” has acquired the mentality of a Zelenskyy impostor!

Iran opens the Straits of Hormuz to France

At the same time, Iran opens the Straits of Hormuz to France, with strategic intelligence dropping a bomb on the West, further widening the gap of opinion between the EU and the US regarding the necessity of the war on Iran.

On April 3, 2026, the French CMA CGM Kribi became the first Western European ship to transit the Strait of Hormuz since the beginning of the war crisis in the region, faithfully following the route along the Iranian coastline between the islands of Qeshm and Larak.
This passage was not accidental; it is a clear sign of Tehran’s support for France, following Paris’ decision to block, together with Russia and China, Bahrain’s attempt to secure UN Security Council approval for military action in the region.

France’s decision to prevent the Bahraini proposal from being voted on highlights an intention for Europe’s strategic independence from US pressure. The text of the Bahraini proposal provided for the authorization to “use all necessary means to ensure the passage and to prevent any attempt to close or obstruct international navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.”

In practice, this wording would mean military intervention against Iran by the Gulf states. However, analysis leads us to point out that the proposal was more symbolic than substantive. The military capabilities of the Gulf countries are limited and dependent on American support. Their experience in confrontation with the Iranian military is minimal, making the proposal more of a political message to the United States than a practical military plan.

The US is now withdrawing from its leadership position as “planetary leader”

The second and extremely important issue he raises with these words is that the US is now withdrawing from the leading position of the “planetary ruler”. The empire is officially, what officiality is not made by the lips of the “emperor”, over.

Let others take the initiative; that is, we are withdrawing. Let others open the Straits of Hormuz; that is, we are weakening.

Of course, this does not mean at the same time that the US has been relegated to some weak country. Of course not. They remain a very powerful global power.

But it does mean the end of the unipolar world!

Who is Trump addressing when he asks them to “go grab the straits”?

Logically, it does not refer to the European powers. It is a common secret that they do not have the military or economic power to do so. The pro-NATO policy after World War II, that is, the lack of ethnocentric welfare and submission to the dictates of the US, has made the European powers militarily weak. Europe was essentially never liberated after the end of the world war, as were Japan, South Korea and the countries of Southeast Asia in general. The occupation army remained in the bases and in large numbers; it is simply American. And it is still here.

Let us note that the opponent in World War II, Germany, at that time had a population of approximately 90 million including the annexations and at the height of the war reached an army of approximately 15 million. Today, Iran has a population of about 92 million and can therefore certainly recruit about 10 million if necessary. And the European powers did not achieve victory in World War II alone. Also, Iran’s geography is extremely difficult for attacking ground units.

So logic says – and yes, this is an estimate but very likely – that he is addressing China! And of course China has the military potential to face such a scenario but also the great need for oil, natural gas and fertilizers for its huge daily production, which is the main artery of its economy.

So what is Trump doing? He is sending a message of despair to the main competitor of the US, China. He is telling it, I will back down or maybe even help, come on, you take over.

Trump knows that Chinese policy is not decided on the fly! That there is deep study and preparation in what China does. But his “Zelenskaya” desperation does not let him not make a last-ditch effort to assign China the role of “planetary leader” in a doomed hope of breaking up the Russia-China axis.

The so-called “Western world” was essentially entrenched after World War II. All countries, some more or less, that accepted servitude to the US, had one basic axis in their thinking: the US will protect us.

The same applies to the Gulf kingdoms. They made many, many billions of investments in the US, in exchange for the protection that they thought their bases offered. In the end, however, it turned out that they were simply expendable targets on the altar of Israeli expansionism.

The US, started a war, apparently carried away by its “special” relationship with Israel and as a direct result was the closure of the Strait of Hormuz (!) transmitting economic misery to all its allies. They immediately accused the allies (!!) of lacking courage and urged them to open the straits themselves…

Such diplomacy, such a policy, could not exist even in a bad Soviet propaganda film, but it exists today inside the White House!

The conflict for the change from a unipolar to a multipolar world, is evolving on battlefields, economically, militarily, diplomatically, but it is mainly a clash of cultures.

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 *