About South Africa, but not about long-haul travel

This is what life is like in what is supposedly Africa’s richest country. The figures speak for themselves:

The economy in perpetual stagnation. According to the OECD, GDP growth has averaged just 0.7 per cent over the last ten years.
Official unemployment stands at 4%!!! This is particularly true for young people (aged 15–34), 58% of whom are affected. They remain outside the labour market. This high unemployment rate contributes to crime. STATS SA reports that 64 murders per day were committed in the first quarter of 2025.
A large proportion of 10-year-olds cannot read with understanding; the same applies to more than 4 million adults. Although three-quarters of the population have access to the internet, most are unable to use it for more complex tasks.
Public debt is not only a financial challenge but also a social one, and is set to exceed 78 per cent of GDP by the end of 2025. The high cost of servicing this debt is limiting the government’s ability to fund social spending and public investment.
The energy shortage is another problem that is hampering economic activity and undermining the quality of life in the country. According to the OECD, power cuts reduced economic growth by 1.5% in 2023, when 289 days of outages were reported, compared with ‘only’ 69 days in 2024. The energy crisis is closely linked to the inefficiency of distribution management by the operator Eskom, which is effectively a monopoly in the field of energy supply in South Africa, where coal still accounts for almost 80 per cent of the mix. Eskom is constantly having to contend with criminals who vandalise distribution stations and steal transformers

Visit Kruger National Park, see Cape Town and Table Mountain, and be back in Europe in no time!

About Mexico, but not about football

Perhaps the United States of Mexico should split up, for, just like the states in America, they have less and less in common. California is the richest, and the Midwest or rust belt states like Pennsylvania are unlikely ever to catch up with this high-tech hub. Just as in Europe hardly anyone can compete with Switzerland, so the enclaves of economic growth in Mexico, such as the Bajío, are more the exception than the rule. Even if the government in the capital introduces reforms, the main obstacle to Mexico’s economic development in the less industrialised states remains the weak rule of law, which manifests itself in institutional inefficiency and a business-unfriendly environment, exacerbated by a lack of public safety. The reforms of the Mexican government, which is constantly running up excessive debt, are based on the fact that it collects tax aggressively and, in return, does not refund VAT, which forces companies participating in the IMMEX programme (Manufacturing, Maquiladora and Export Services Industry – the support programme for industry and exports) to retain capital reserves instead of investing free funds in development.

In social terms, Mexico’s opportunity lies in tackling crime. Given the level of corruption, this is hard to believe. The economic opportunity, on the other hand, lies in the automotive sector, which accounts for 25% of Mexican exports. It is capable of meeting the stricter production requirements, including those relating to wage conditions under the USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement). In the past, such regulations have led to greater regional integration. The US’s aggressive stance on tariffs towards the rest of the world gives Mexico a relative advantage by continuing and capitalising on the USMCA trade agreement. In addition to the agreement, Mexican industry has other advantages: it is located close to the US, has low operating costs, is well-equipped and has a skilled workforce. In the Central American region, there is currently no alternative to the products manufactured in Mexico.

The World Cup is unlikely to be of much help to either the government or the Mexican economy. What matters is Mexico’s geopolitical balance between China, which is quietly investing in the country, and the US, the big brother from the north – a situation that applies, incidentally, to all developing countries.

Every gift discarded, every device rejected

Such is the final symbolic act of the American state visit to Beijing (13-15 May 2026). Nothing gifted by the Chinese diplomatic counterparts was allowed on board Air Force One. The measure of mistrust just cannot be higher. The ostentatiousness of the act boggles the mind. The symbolic failure of the gesture cannot be overestimated.

Gifts may be poisonous. No doubt about that. Think about the cell phones that Palestinian leaders purchased, the cell phones that were tampered with by the Israeli secret services, the cell phones that were detonated, killing or maiming the users of those cell phones.

Think about the notorious infected blankets that the European conquerors of North America presented to the Indians. The purpose was to do away with the indigenous peoples in a surreptitious and efficient way. Or, for that matter, think about the alcohol generously sold to the same Indians for the purpose of weakening their health and paralysing their will.

Why, think about China itself, about the opium that was forcibly sold to the Chinese in the 19th century. Two protracted wars were waged over the right of the Europeans to bless the indigenous people with this good!

Think about the Trojan Horse. Legend or no legend, the principle was known and well established in antiquity. Gifts may be dangerous, and oftentimes they are.

Hence an interesting development of the meaning of the German word Gift, whose initial sense overlapped with that of the English word gift, but with time came to denote… poison!

Think about drug dealers who gift or give freely the first few doses of a drug to hook the person on the substance, to make him addictive.

Also the English language has an expression showcasing the troublesomeness of receiving gifts. The expression is to receive a white elephant, i.e. to get a gift that costs a lot to maintain but provides no usefulness (white elephants were considered sacred, hence one could not use them for any kind of work, but one, obviously, needed to feed them).

So, who knows, the Chinese may have concealed spying malware or whatever malicious things in their gifts, down to biological material. The American delegation acted verbatim on the old maxim: Timeo Danaos et dona ferentes, which in our context would be: Timeo Sinae et dona ferentes, meaning: I fear the Chinese, even those bearing gifts (The Aeneid, Book II).

How should that act on the part of the American delegation be construed? A message of mistrust of the Chinese? Real, palpable fear of being threatened by Chinese technology? How was that gesture perceived by the managers of the Middle Kingdom?

Almost a century back the Chinese were American allies in Washington’s fight against Japan. After the war came a split: Americans backed Chiang Kai-shek, the leader of China’s nationalists, against Mao Zedong, the leader of China’s communists. Chiang Kai-shek lost to the communists and found refuge on the island of Taiwan. Americans recognized Taiwan as ‘China’ and tried to ignore mainland China in the hope of reversing the historical process. Nothing came out of it. Communist China, poor and backward as it was, showed no signs of disintegration, so much so as it was backed by the Soviet Union. But then the fate smiled at Americans: Nikita Khrushchev, the USSR’s leader, fell out with Mao Zedong, which later even culminated in border skirmishes. That was something that Americans had been waiting for. Washington reversed its political course and did its best to win Beijing over to its side against Moscow. Americans withdrew recognition for Taiwan and recognized mainland China as… China proper. Much later came the years of economic cooperation in that American businesses were for a large part outsourced to China. The fall of the Soviet Union – history’s another gift for the United States – seemed to seal the fate of the globe: the United States emerged as the only dominant power, Russia – the Soviet Union’s political heir – was assigned the role of the provider of resources, while the Middle Kingdom was supposed to happily accept the role of the world’s manufacturer.

Things may have stayed that way till this day but for America’s greed and arrogance. Gradual military encirclement of Russia in terms of expanding NATO and engineering unrest in the post-Soviet area (Ukraine, Belarus, Armenia, Georgia, Kazakhstan) along with a simultaneous political assault against China as America’s most dangerous political and economic rival pushed Moscow and Beijing in their mutual embraces. Khrushchev’s political mistake has been corrected: Moscow and Beijing have begun to cooperate against the West, against the United States, though openly no such declaration has been issued.

The political sine wave for the United States could be traced something like this: from friendly China (Chiang Kai-shek) to unfriendly China (Mao Zedong), to friendly China again (Prime Minister Zhou Enlai), and again to a rather unfriendly China (Xi Jinping). The discarded gifts and the rejected devices merely illustrate the current state of affairs.

How to rule without ruling

One of the stories about the famous Battle of Cannae, 2 August 2016 BC, during which Hannibal, the Carthaginian chief general, routed the Roman army goes something like this. The famous outflanking and the ensuing encirclement of the Roman legions was not so much the result of the orders that Hannibal gave at the time of the struggle, but his ingenious arrangement of his troops. The Phoenician general placed weaker units at the centre and stronger units at the flanks and told them to simply fight. The Romans pressed against Carthaginians (and their allies) and naturally they began to push back the weaker centre. As the hours would pass the Romans would wedge deeper and deeper into the Carthaginian ranks, forgetting about their flanks. Meanwhile, the stronger Carthaginian flanks stood their ground. Without Hannibal issuing a single order, the Roman legions slowly but surely found themselves in a cauldron. A couple of hours more and the cauldron was closed: the Romans were encircled and killed to the last man. Consider it carefully: the resounding victory did not demand that Hannibal keep constant watch on the battlefield, nor did it demand that he give orders now and again. The particular arrangement of his troops – the weak at the centre, the strong at the flanks – did all the job automatically as it were. Hannibal’s ingenuity consisted in and was confined to the few initial decisions. All the ensuing events were the result of those few initial orders. Orders given at the time when the troops were in the fray would have been ineffective if only because they would not have reached their addressees due to the chaos and noise.

Such ingenious initial decisions are the tools with which the managers of the world rule the world. Who are the managers of the world? Yes, the very rich people, individuals whose fortunes are as large as budgets of many a small or medium-size state. Due to such enormous amounts of money, they obviously can influence the world’s politics, and they can shape the minds of hundreds of millions of human beings. How do they do it? They apply Hannibal’s strategy, which means that they set proper conditions and then let the events take their course. They may rest assured that the course that the events will take will be very much to their liking. An example.

A group of the managers of the world wishes to make people like, desire and – consequently – be influenced by a certain kind of art, type of movies, novels or whatever because these will shape the human minds the way the managers of the world wish them to be shaped. What do the managers of the world do to achieve that goal? Do they propagate the type of art, movies or novels with which they want to reshape the human minds? Nay. That would be suspicious to many, and we know that human psychology is such that it rebels against anything that is forcibly imposed. So, what do the managers of the world do? Say, they want you to admire and desire a work of art that you do not admire or desire. They organize an auction and buy that (kind of) work of art at a very, very high price. The impact it makes is enormous. All of a sudden, rich individuals who would have been otherwise uninterested in that kind of works of art begin to have second thoughts. If a work of art has been purchased for millions, it must be worth it. The nouveau riche businessmen, who rather do not have their own artistic taste, will flock to buy similar works of art. The events will take their due course: people will be oriented towards that particular type of art.

The same is true of novels or movies. Novels and especially movies shape the minds of hundreds of millions of people. If the managers of the world want to control those minds, they need to feed them on books and films that put across the views and ideas, beliefs and ideologies that the managers of the world profess. How to have millions of individuals select the right books and movies? That’s where awards come into play. People just love reading the books and watching the films that have been awarded prizes. The bigger the prize, the more attractive the novel or the motion picture is. The power of prizes is twofold: they not only attract readers and viewers but also guide book and screen writers. All aspiring creators follow the many contests and competitions, and they learn which book or movie – or, to put it better – which content has been awarded. The aspiring authors will necessarily follow suit and create such content that suits the managers of the world or else they will never gain national or international recognition. The right content in turn (especially if repeated and replicated in hundreds of popular books and movies) will shape the minds of the millions.

Just as you cannot hope to make a political career without having somebody’s powerful financial support, so you won’t make a career as a writer or a filmmaker without somebody’s powerful financial support. It’s as simple as that.

The managers of the world are even better than Phoenician General Hannibal: while both Romans and Carthaginians knew who set the military conditions for the victorious battle, present-day men and women have no idea who rules over them. Some (majority or minority?) even tend to think that they are ruled by presidents or prime ministers, and some think that their ballot paper decides all. Yes, it does, but the choice that a voter makes has been conditioned for years by the arrangement of social, cultural, political and economic balances and checks which in turn have been and continue to be set by present-day anonymous Hannibals.

Spirit is running low

The fuel shortage is becoming increasingly serious. Lufthansa has already cancelled 20,000 flights. Air France has increased prices for economy class tickets by 50 euros per return journey, and the Dutch airline KLM has suspended more than 160 flights. At the same time, the International Energy Agency has announced that Europe will only have enough aircraft fuel reserves to last six weeks. However, the problem is already affecting industries across the globe. All major airlines are currently making massive cuts, particularly Turkish Airlines, which has cancelled nearly 20 routes. There are already companies that simply haven’t been able to cope with the situation. One such company is the US carrier Spirit Airlines, which filed for bankruptcy a few days ago. Although the name of this carrier may mean little to many readers, it is worth looking at the figures. Last year, the company operated more than 300,000 flights, carried 30 million passengers and held a 3.5% market share among US airlines. It is therefore not a small airline, but a national giant with more than 17,000 employees.

If we break down the cost of a typical passenger flight into its main categories, we can see that airlines are heavily dependent on the price of aviation fuel. On average, this accounts for 30% of the total cost.

And that is why Europe finds itself in a particularly difficult situation. This is because up to 70% of the crude oil that is subsequently processed into Jet A-1 aviation fuel comes from the Gulf region. This primarily includes Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, as well as the United Arab Emirates and Qatar. This makes the situation very dangerous, as any further blockade of the Strait of Hormuz will exacerbate these problems on a daily basis. Furthermore, it should be remembered that the availability of aviation fuel affects not only passenger traffic but also freight transport, which in practice is the first to feel the impact of disruptions. This is because, unlike passenger transport, where part of the costs can be passed on to customers gradually, any change in fuel prices for cargo is almost immediately reflected in the freight rates for every kilogram of cargo.

So here’s a handy tip: if you’re planning to fly on holiday, book a package with a price guarantee, as travel agencies such as TUI or DERTOUR are entitled to charge us a so-called fuel surcharge. These are additional costs, in accordance with the rules, which they can impose on the customer 20 days before departure if travel costs rise significantly.

The Italian historical sample

Where is Italy and where is Russia?

Worlds apart.

If you glance at the map of present-day Europe, you’ll see a number of countries separating Italy from Russia. They include (travelling from Italy to Russia) Austria, Slovakia, and Ukraine or (taking a more northerly route) Austria, Czechia, Poland, and Belarus, or (taking a more southerly route) Slovenia, Hungary, and Ukraine. Quite a journey. What bone to pick can Italy and Russia have? What cause of conflict could there ever have been between Rome and Moscow?

And yet, within less than a century and a half, Italian troops fought against Russian troops, and there were many Italian casualties, many corpses covering Russian soil, and many cripples coming back to Italy.

Italy has sent its troops against Russia three times. First, during the time of Napoleonic wars. Some readers may tend to think that when Napoleon Bonaparte invaded Russia (1812), he led the French troops alone. No. He led almost the whole of Europe against the tsar, and those troops included lots of Italians. The men accustomed to Italy’s warm climate suffered frostbite and death somewhere between Moscow and Smolensk.

Then came the Crimean War of 1853-1856. It was the second time that Italy (to be precise, the Kingdom of Sardinia-Piedmont) sent its troops against Russia. That was how the Italians most likely wanted to liberate their country from… well, from what?

Then came the war of the Third Reich against the Soviet Union of 1941-1945. It was the third time that Italy sent its troops against Russia to support Germany. Again, Italian troopers experienced frostbite and death, far away on the Volga.

Three consecutive times Italians (or rather their governments) let Italian blood flow copiously far, far away from their home country for God knows what purpose.

Since Napoleon and Hitler lost the war to Russians, neither could Italians gain anything from their participation in them. While the Crimean War was successful for the Anglo-French coalition, Italians as their allies, could gain something from it. Italy’s international stance somewhat increased. Also, Italy’s alliance with France led to a later Franco-Italian war against Austria (1859), the country that stood in the way of Italian unification. Ok, that was a gain, but still the question rankles the mind: why fight against Russia when Austria happens to be your opponent?

Strange are the intricacies of history, are they not?

Italy’s historical experience shows that twice the blood sacrifice was made in vain, once it brought some dividend: the unification of Italy brought about by the victorious war of the Franco-Italian coalition against Austria, the main hindrance to the said unification. France’s help was earned by Italy’s participation in the Crimean War, where France had its vested interests.

What hopes of gain do the European countries cherish while getting involved (again and again across the recent centuries) in the conflict against Russia? What “Austria” do they have in their crosshairs? Whose alliance and consequently whose political and military aid do they want to earn?

May 2026 – a look at some countries

USA

Trump’s greatest achievement is that he kills or kidnaps presidents. If he merely killed or kidnapped presidents, that would somehow be fair in the world of gangsters. But the fact that he kills primary school girls as collateral damage, causes inflation, lowers people’s standard of living across the globe through the energy crisis, and stubbornly sticks to his ideas is, to put it mildly, a sign of a penchant for dictatorship and the mindset that the best course of action is to turn everything upside down, without a second thought.

And so a void is emerging in the USA, because if the Democrats come to power again, America will once more be destroyed socially and spiritually, ethnic replacement will continue, and fentanyl will be made ever more popular. The Dems (read: the demons) will resume their gender and climate change nonsense, will incite hostility towards Russia, and so on and so forth. The void is emerging because people have no sensible candidate to vote for. I keep asking myself: how is it possible that such a great nation can produce something entirely new? OK, the big tech firms, AI and their achievements have been breathtaking, but Europeans, Asians, South Americans and, above all, North Americans are waiting for breathtaking new leadership in Washington.

UAE

The United Arab Emirates is leaving OPEC because:

their so-called friends, such as Saudi Arabia, did not come to their aid during the Iranian attacks;
they have the largest oil production capacities in the Persian Gulf and want to exploit them as quickly as possible before they run out of oil. They want to sell it now at the highest possible price, and today’s price levels of over $100 a barrel represent an opportunity for them to hoard money in a stagnant global economy.
they follow Trump’s lead: away from multilateralism. Participation in international alliances and cooperation is pointless. This may well be the start of a potential avalanche of withdrawals: the US from NATO, Eastern European countries from the EU, and so on.

Hungary

Peter Magyar’s victory delighted the Brussels elite, but they don’t understand people, and Magyar will disappoint them, because:

Magyar is not a pro-Ukrainian leader. Like Orbán, he opposes direct military support and the dispatch of weapons from Hungary. Furthermore, he is strongly opposed to a fast-track route for Ukraine’s accession to the European Union.
Likewise, the new Prime Minister supports the strict protection of Hungary’s borders and firmly rejects any mechanism for the compulsory resettlement of migrants within the EU.
The same applies to social policy, where pensions are not being cut in 2013 and 2014. Hungary’s budget deficit is therefore growing ever larger.
Although Magyar has expressed his desire to gradually move away from Russian oil, he is continuing his predecessor’s policy on nuclear energy. The new government has stated that it will not halt the controversial expansion of the Paks nuclear power plant, which is being carried out in close cooperation with the Russian state-owned giant Rosatom. The key to the issue of energy resources from Russia seems to lie in these words from Magyar: “Russia will be here, and Hungary will be here. We will try to diversify, but that does not mean we want to part ways.” Everything suggests that the new Hungarian Prime Minister is, in fact, a ‘light version’ of Viktor Orbán, which may seem surprising at first glance, but when a country is so heavily dependent on Russian energy supplies, the room for manoeuvre is truly limited.

Israel

The country under Zionist rule is waging a merciless war against other religions. The Zionists want to reach the Euphrates and, who knows, perhaps establish a thousand-year empire. Their targets are not only Islamists, whether Sunni or Shia, but also Christians. The demoralisation of Israeli soldiers has reached such a point that they are destroying and burning down entire villages. Recently, everyone was shocked by a photo of an Israeli soldier in southern Lebanon destroying a statue of Christ with a heavy hammer.

Source: X

The hatred and the scale of Israel’s attacks on Iran mean that Tel Aviv is already running short of air defence missiles. It seems that the Israelis are overplaying their hand and that this could end badly for them.