Author

admin

Browsing

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., wants Congress to take a more active role as a check on the Trump administration’s use of military force following the surprise weekend operation in Venezuela, and he plans to force a vote on legislation that would halt further military action in the country without lawmakers’ approval.

Kaine joined a chorus of congressional Democrats who were frustrated at President Donald Trump’s decision to strike Venezuela’s capital of Caracas, and subsequent capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife without oversight or approval from Congress.

Congressional Democrats have long been frustrated at Congress’ diminished role in decision-making since Trump took office last year, particularly over continued strikes in the Caribbean ahead of Operation Absolute Resolve on Saturday.

Kaine argued on a call with reporters that Congress has the constitutional authority to weigh in on military action and was frustrated throughout Trump’s second term that the check and balance was being bowled over.

‘It’s time for Congress to get its a– off the couch and do what the Constitution mandates that we do — the Constitution we take an oath to,’ Kaine said over the weekend. ‘We have to put this before the American people, not just in private settings, but in public hearings by the key oversight committees, Intelligence, Armed Services, Foreign Relations in both houses, and explore whether the United States should enter into yet another war with unforeseen consequences.’

Kaine again plans to bring a war powers resolution for a vote in the Senate, which is expected to come to the floor this week.

It’s not the first time he has tried to reassert Congress’ authority when it comes to the administration’s use of military action. Kaine earlier this year forced a vote on a war powers resolution following Trump’s strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. That resolution failed on a largely party-line vote, save for Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who joined all Senate Democrats in support.

The Virginia Democrat’s latest effort would prevent further military action in Venezuela without congressional approval.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who is a co-sponsor on the latest war powers resolution along with Kaine and Paul, said he would ensure the measure would get ‘adequate floor time so we could debate and discuss this.’

Schumer is also pushing for hearings to investigate the strikes and capture of Maduro and noted that he spoke with top Democrats on several committees who contended their Republican colleagues ‘have expressed a lot of troublesome comments about what Trump is doing and the way he is doing it.’

‘We’re going to be pushing our Republican colleagues to stand up for the American people, to get this done,’ Schumer said. ‘Congress should not be sidelined as the Trump administration gets sucked into another nation-building quagmire, and we’re going to hold them accountable, protect American lives, to protect America’s interests.’

Another issue that many congressional Democrats have is that lawmakers weren’t notified of the strikes until after the fact. Secretary of State Marco Rubio argued over the weekend that it would have been risky to notify lawmakers in advance given the sensitive nature of the operation. Trump charged that Congress was kept in the dark because lawmakers leak. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., who didn’t receive notification of the operation until afterward, said that he was ‘comfortable’ with the timing. 

‘They didn’t tell me ahead of time,’ Thune said. ‘But I think there’s a reason why, like I said, before notification of Congress in advance of really critical and hypersensitive missions, to me, seems ill-advised anyway.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Switzerland announced Monday that it has frozen assets held in the country tied to Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his associates following the U.S. capture of the leader in Caracas. 

‘On 5 January 2026, the Federal Council decided to freeze any assets held in Switzerland by Nicolás Maduro and other persons associated with him with immediate effect,’ the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA) said. 

The decision, which will remain in effect for four years, aims to prevent the transfer of assets amid concerns that the funds were acquired illegally through a regime long accused of widespread corruption, according to the agency. The freeze does not apply to members of the current government, and Reuters reported that the order will affect 37 people. 

Should future legal proceedings ‘reveal that the funds were illicitly acquired, Switzerland will endeavour to use them for the benefit of the Venezuelan people,’ the FDFA said.

The council added that the asset freeze builds on existing sanctions against Venezuela, first imposed in 2018 under the Embargo Act, which includes restrictions on economic resources, travel, and specific goods. 

The new measure, enacted under the Foreign Illicit Assets Act (FIAA), now targets prominent individuals who were not covered in previous Swiss sanctions and are perceived as supporting the Venezuelan regime.

According to the FDFA, the decision was not made based on Maduro’s capture nor the legitimacy of his removal but amid concerns that his home country or others could launch legal action later to recover the potentially illegally acquired assets. 

Freezing the assets now acts as a ‘precautionary measure’ meant to preserve them for potential future proceedings, according to the Swiss authorities. 

‘The reasons behind Mr Maduro’s fall from power do not play a decisive role in asset freezes under the FIAA,’ the Federal Council said in a statement. 

‘Nor does the question of whether the fall from power occurred lawfully or in violation of international law. The decisive factor is that a fall from power has occurred and that it is now possible that the country of origin will initiate legal proceedings in the future with regard to illicitly acquired assets.’

Authorities added that the government is monitoring the situation closely and is calling for the peaceful de-escalation of the ‘volatile’ situation.

‘The situation is volatile, and several scenarios are possible in the coming days and weeks,’ the FDFA said. ‘Switzerland is closely monitoring the situation in Venezuela. It has called for de-escalation, restraint and compliance with international law, including the prohibition of the use of force and the principle of respect for territorial integrity. Switzerland has also repeatedly offered its good offices to all sides in order to find a peaceful solution to the situation.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

A select group of lawmakers received their first closed-door briefing on Capitol Hill on Monday following the Trump administration’s weekend military strikes in Venezuela and the capture of President Nicolás Maduro — a meeting that quickly divided along political lines.

The roughly two-hour meeting deep in the bowels of Congress featured top administration officials providing a classified briefing to congressional leaders and the chairs and ranking members of the armed services, intelligence and foreign relations committees. 

None of the Trump officials, who included Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Attorney General Pam Bondi, CIA Director John Ratcliffe, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chair Gen. Dan ‘Raizin’ Caine and Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, spoke after the meeting. 

But a handful of lawmakers did, and questions still lingered about what exactly would come next for U.S. involvement in the country, if other similar operations would be carried out across the globe, and who exactly was running Venezuela.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said that there was no expectation that the U.S. would be on the ground, nor would there be any ‘direct involvement in any other way beyond just coercing the interim government to to get that going.’

‘We are not at war,’ Johnson said. ‘We do not have U.S. armed forces in Venezuela, and we are not occupying that country.’

‘This is not a regime change,’ he continued. ‘This is a demand for change of behavior by a regime. The interim government is stood up now, and we are hopeful that they will be able to correct their action.’

House Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Brian Mast, R-Fl., echoed Johnson, and reiterated that the operation was a ‘specific law enforcement function that took place that took a significant obstacle out of the way for the Venezuelan people to go chart a new future.’ 

He didn’t expect further military action from the Trump administration in the country, either. 

‘These things are done before breakfast,’ Mast said. ‘They don’t do protracted war operations.’

However, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., countered that the lengthy meeting ‘posed far more questions than it ever answered.’ 

One growing point of contention among lawmakers is just how directly involved the U.S. will be, given that Trump said that the U.S. would govern the country until a proper transition of power happened. 

Schumer said that the plan presented behind closed doors or the U.S. running Venezuela ‘is vague, based on wishful thinking and unsatisfying.’

‘I did not receive any assurances that we would not try to do the same thing in other countries,’ he said. ‘And in conclusion, when the United States engages in this kind of regime change and so called nation building, it always ends up hurting the United States. I left the briefing feeling that it would again.’

Schumer, along with Sens. Tim Kaine, D-Va., Adam Schiff, D-Calif., and Rand Paul, R-Ky., plan to force a vote later in the week on a war powers resolution that, if passed, would require the administration to get congressional approval before taking further military action in Venezuela. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said that he was satisfied with the briefing and that ‘it was a very comprehensive discussion.’

Lawmakers will get another bite at the apple later in the week when Trump officials again return to Congress to provide a full briefing to lawmakers on Operation Absolute Resolve. 

Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., and the top-ranking Democrat on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, lauded the military for a ‘brilliant execution’ of the mission, and noted that the region was better off without Maduro.

But, like Schumer, he was still searching for the next step. 

‘The question becomes, as policymakers, what happens the day after,’ Warner said. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

House Freedom Caucus leaders are drawing battle lines as lawmakers return to Capitol Hill for the second half of the 119th Congress.

The conservative group’s board of directors is sending a seven-page letter to Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., outlining proposed policy goals on a vast array of topics from American elections, to immigration, to federal spending, taking on ‘rogue’ judges, and housing affordability.

It comes ahead of a policy forum that Johnson is hosting on Tuesday to lay out the House GOP’s agenda for 2026. Republicans are expected to huddle from 9:30 am to 6 pm at the Trump Kennedy Center, where they’ll hear from committee leaders and President Donald Trump.

Trump’s remarks are expected to rally Republicans around passing their legislative goals for the year, but several people told Fox News Digital they also anticipate him focusing heavily on the U.S. government’s recent operation in Venezuela.

The first policy goal listed by the Freedom Caucus is forcing the Senate to take up the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which passed the House early last year.

They’re also calling on Congress to pass legislation limiting early voting and reforming the census to only count American citizens.

On fiscal year (FY) 2026 appropriations, conservatives are calling on the House to ‘reduce or — at bare minimum keep flat total federal discretionary spending levels’ according to the document first obtained by Fox News Digital.

The recently released $174 billion spending bill that the House is expected to vote on this week would reduce current funding levels for the agencies it covers if were to pass.

Congress has yet to release information on six of its 12 remaining spending bills, however, while lawmakers face a Jan. 30 deadline to avert a government shutdown.

The Freedom Caucus is also urging Congress to crack down on the recent fraud scandal taking over Minnesota’s social programs by eliminating ‘all programs exposed as rampant with fraud and place punitive measures on states such as Minnesota that have allowed rampant fraud.’

‘Federal prosecutors have estimated that widespread fraud in Minnesota tied to Somali day care centers, COVID-era meal programs, housing, and special needs assistance programs alone could exceed $9 billion,’ the document said. ‘These revelations are startling, but just a drop in the bucket for a federal government that’s estimated to lose between $233 and $521 billion annually to fraud, according to government watchdog agencies.’

The document called for the denaturalization and deportation of ‘anyone who has committed fraud against the American taxpayer,’ specifically naming Minnesota’s Somali community, though doing so would likely require court intervention.

Conservatives’ policy roadmap also called on Congress to ‘freeze all immigration to the U.S., except for (very) temporary tourist visas’ for a temporary amount of time in order to revamp the U.S. immigration system as a whole.

In a section called ‘Stop Rogue, Activist Judges,’ the House Freedom Caucus urged the House to move forward on impeaching U.S. federal Judge James Boasberg ‘such as Judge Deborah Boardman, for reducing the sentence of a man who plotted and took steps to kill a Supreme Court Justice due to her indefensible views about transgenderism.’

An earlier push by conservatives to impeach Boasberg failed to gain traction among the wider House GOP conference, though the chamber passed ‘The No Rogue Rulings Act’ to limit the ability of district judges like Boasberg to issue nationwide injunctions.

The policy roadmap also called to radically shift America’s global priorities by completely removing the U.S. from the United Nations and halting all funding to the international body.

‘The UN is openly hostile to the United States, yet we remain its biggest source of funding. President Trump has significantly reduced wasteful spending on dangerous UN entities like UNRWA, and now Congress should go even further by enacting legislation such as H.R. 1498, the DEFUND Act, to completely withdraw the United States from the United Nations (UN) and end all funding and participation,’ the passage read.

Another section calls for banning stock trading for members of Congress, which Johnson said he would be in favor of last year.

The push to ban stock trading has gained rare bipartisan support among both Republicans and Democrats, but no such bill has yet seen a House floor vote.

Banning Sharia Law in the U.S. is also listed as one of the group’s policy goals, an effort that’s been led by Texas-based Freedom Caucus members like Reps. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and Keith Self, R-Texas, so far this Congress.

While it was founded as a group that was frequently adversarial to Republican leaders for not being conservative enough, the House Freedom Caucus has gradually gained influence within the House GOP during the 119th Congress.

Its chairman, Rep. Andy Harris, R-Md., has frequently stood alongside Johnson in his push for conservative legislative goals.

Johnson notably spoke at the group’s 10th anniversary celebration late last year. Harris and Roy also made a public show of unity alongside House GOP leaders during the recent government shutdown.

Republicans are going into this year, however, grappling with a razor-thin House majority and what’s expected to be a tough November election cycle.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

A deepening political realignment across Latin America came into focus over the weekend at a summit of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States, or CELAC, and sharpened further Monday at the United Nations Security Council, where governments publicly split over the U.S. role in the capture of Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro.

At CELAC, several leftist governments attempted to push through a joint statement condemning Maduro’s detention. The effort failed after a bloc of countries consisting of Argentina, Bolivia, Paraguay, Peru, Ecuador, El Salvador, Panama, the Dominican Republic, and Trinidad and Tobago blocked consensus, preventing the regional body from issuing a unified defense of the Venezuelan leader, Merco Press agency reported.

The breakdown exposed growing fractures within what has long been a left-leaning regional forum and underscored the erosion of automatic solidarity with Caracas.

Melissa Ford Maldonado, director of the Western Hemisphere Initiative at the America First Policy Institute, said the fractures reflect a broader regional reckoning with the consequences of socialist and narco-authoritarian rule.

‘We are witnessing a regional awakening across Latin America,’ Maldonado told Fox News Digital. ‘The failure of socialism, communism and narco-authoritarian rule has become impossible to ignore.’

The shift is increasingly visible at the ballot box, where voters in several countries — last month alone in Chile and Honduras — have moved away from entrenched left-wing governments and toward right-of-center leaders campaigning on themes of security, sovereignty, border control and law and order — messages that echo aspects of President Donald Trump’s political approach in the United States.

‘The developments at CELAC this weekend reflect that reality,’ Maldonado said. ‘The fact that several governments blocked a collective defense of Nicolás Maduro shows how divided the authoritarian left has become. Venezuela has become a cautionary tale.’

That division carried over into the Security Council on Monday, where Latin American and Caribbean states took sharply different positions, with some openly backing Washington and others denouncing the U.S. action as a violation of international law.

Argentina emerged as the most forceful regional supporter of the United States, praising President Donald Trump and framing Maduro’s capture as a decisive blow against organized crime.

‘The Government of the Argentine Republic values the decision and determination demonstrated by the President of the United States of America and his government, and the recent actions taken in Venezuela that resulted in the capture of dictator Nicolás Maduro, leader of the Cartel of the Suns,’ Argentina’s representative Francisco Fabián Tropepi told the council, adding the Maduro regime ‘has not only constituted a direct threat to the citizens systematic violation of human rights in the state appropriation of the country’s resources and destruction of democratic institutions, but also to the entire region by leading and exploiting its networks of drug trafficking and organized crime.’

Paraguay echoed that framing, claiming Maduro’s continued presence ‘was a threat to the region,’ adding that ‘the removal of the leader of a terrorist organization should immediately lead to the restoration of democracy and the rule of law in Venezuela, making it possible for the will of the people, expressed at the ballot box, to become the foundation for the country’s reconstruction,’ its representative Marcelo Eliseo Scappini Ricciardi said.

Other CELAC members took the opposite view, condemning the U.S. action and warning that it set a dangerous precedent.

Brazil ‘categorically and firmly’ rejected what it called armed intervention on Venezuelan territory, describing the capture of Maduro as ‘a very serious affront to the sovereignty of Venezuela and an extremely dangerous precedent for the entire international community.’ 

Mexico denounced the operation as a violation of the U.N. Charter, arguing that external efforts to impose political change historically worsen conflicts and destabilize societies. Chile also condemned what it called unilateral military action and warned against foreign interference, while Cuba and Nicaragua delivered blistering denunciations of Washington, accusing the United States of imperial aggression and calling for Maduro’s immediate release.

The split at the U.N. mirrored the breakdown at CELAC, where governments increasingly appear unwilling to speak with one voice on Venezuela, even as they stop short of endorsing U.S. military force.

According to Maldonado, ‘Governments are increasingly forced to choose between defending failed autocracies, corruption and repression or responding to their own citizens,’ she said. ‘More governments are unwilling to carry that burden.’

Maldonado described Maduro’s capture as a break with decades of U.S. restraint in the region, ‘It shows that the United States is deadly serious about defending itself and the hemisphere, about stopping the flow of drugs, dismantling cartel-state alliances and about fighting back against the influence of China, Russia and Iran in our neighborhood.’

She argued that the regional reaction, split though it is, reflects a broader ideological shift.

‘There is a clear rightward shift underway in the region, and it is a healthy one,’ Maldonado said. ‘It reflects a growing alignment around the core principles of freedom, liberty, personal responsibility, national sovereignty and prosperity.’

While critics at the U.N. warned that U.S. action risks undermining international law, supporters argue the status quo had already collapsed under the weight of Venezuela’s humanitarian and security crisis.

‘Venezuela’s collapse has taught the region what happens when the state becomes your everything,’ Maldonado said. ‘When the state controls your job, your housing, your healthcare, your education, your courts and your information, freedom becomes conditional.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

The lithium market heads into 2026 after one of its most punishing years in recent memory, shaped by deep oversupply, weaker-than-expected electric vehicle (EV) demand and sustained price pressure.

In 2025, lithium carbonate prices in North Asia sank to four year lows, forcing production cuts and project delays as the industry grappled with the consequences of years of aggressive supply growth.

The second half of the year saw a rebound as lithium carbonate began a slow ascent. By December 29, prices had risen 56 percent from their January start position of US$10,798.54 per metric ton to US$16,882.63.

While volatility and brief price rallies highlighted the market’s sensitivity to sentiment and policy signals, analysts increasingly see the sector’s first-half downturn as an inflection point. With high-cost supply under strain and inventories gradually tightening, expectations are building that 2026 could mark the start of a rebalancing phase, supported by long-term demand tied to electrification, energy storage and the broader energy transition.

Battery energy storage systems to drive lithium growth

Energy storage is emerging as the fastest-growing pillar of battery demand, with major implications for the lithium market heading into 2026. Indeed, according to Benchmark Mineral Intelligence’s Iola Hughes, growth in this segment is accelerating well ahead of the broader battery market.

“We’re expecting about 44 percent growth (in 2025),” she said. That’s compared with roughly 25 percent growth across total battery demand. As a result, energy storage is set to account for about a quarter of total global battery demand in 2025, a share that is rising rapidly. The shift is even more pronounced in the US, where Hughes expects storage to make up a significant “35 to 40 percent of battery demand in the next few years.”

That growth is being driven by falling costs and the growing role of lithium iron phosphate (LFP) chemistry, which Hughes described as the dominant technology in stationary storage.

“It very much is the story of LFP right now,” she said, pointing to recent innovation and lower costs, which have helped to make LFP “the best chemistry” for most storage applications.

Globally, deployment remains highly concentrated. China and the US account for roughly 87 percent of cumulative grid-scale storage installations, but new markets are emerging quickly.

Saudi Arabia, Hughes noted, has surged from effectively zero to the world’s third largest market in a matter of months, deploying around 11 gigawatt-hours in the first quarter alone. “That really goes to show just how early this market is in its story,” she said; it also indicates how quickly new sources of battery demand can materialize.

Cost declines sit at the core of the expansion. Fully integrated storage systems in China are now approaching, and in some cases falling below, US$100 per kilowatt-hour. Hughes said this has fundamentally changed the economics of storage, making deployments viable even as policy support tightens. “The prices are so much cheaper, the economics are a lot stronger, even in a normal, unsubsidized environment,” she said.

In the US, growth remains concentrated in a handful of states — led by California and Texas — but Hughes stressed how early stage the market still is. New Mexico, now the fifth largest storage market, is built on just a few projects.

At the same time, the scale of energy storage projects is increasing rapidly. Giga-scale installations, defined as projects larger than 1 gigawatt-hour, are moving from novelty to norm.

Hughes said nine such projects are expected to come online this year, accounting for about 20 percent of battery demand, with more than 20 in the pipeline for next year, representing close to 40 percent.

Policy remains a key variable. While investment tax credits for storage remain in place in the US, Hughes warned that tighter sourcing and eligibility rules are reshaping supply chains, particularly for LFP. The pipeline of announced LFP gigafactories has grown sharply this year — up more than 60 percent — led largely by Korean manufacturers.

“We’re in a much better position when it comes to sourcing of cells for energy storage than we were even three months ago,” she said, though challenges remain around production tax credits and heavy reliance on Chinese cathode supply.

Underlying the storage boom is a broader shift in electricity demand.

After more than a decade of stagnation, US power demand is rising again, driven by data centers, AI, electrification and reshoring of manufacturing. Hughes said estimates now point to electricity demand rising 20 to 30 percent by 2030, placing energy storage at the center of energy security planning. “Storage has become a central topic in the energy security conversation,” she said, adding that its role will only grow.

Looking ahead, Hughes said LFP is likely to dominate shorter-duration storage, while sodium-ion and other battery technologies compete in longer-duration segments.

For the lithium market, the message is clear: as storage scales up in size, geography and strategic importance, it is becoming one of the most powerful demand drivers shaping the sector’s outlook for 2026 and beyond.

Lower costs driving LFP adoption

Howard Klein, RK Equity co-founder and partner, argued that falling costs remain a central driver of LFP battery adoption, reflecting a familiar economic dynamic: as prices decline, demand accelerates.

While lithium is a key input, he suggested that ongoing manufacturing efficiencies and economies of scale are likely to continue pushing LFP battery costs lower over time, potentially offsetting upward pressure from higher lithium prices.

Klein emphasized that even if LFP costs rise modestly, battery storage will remain highly competitive as a source of grid power. Compared with conventional generation options such as gas or coal, storage already offers a compelling cost and performance proposition, he said, and does not rely solely on subsidies to remain economically viable.

Geopolitical instability on the rise

Critical minerals are increasingly at the center of US foreign policy, and that shift is set to reshape the lithium value chain through 2026, according to Klein. He noted that geopolitics now underpins many of Washington’s strategic priorities, from Eastern Europe to Africa and the Arctic.

“The entire foreign policy agenda is largely being driven by critical minerals,” Klein said, citing regions including Ukraine, Russia, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Greenland and Canada.

China’s willingness to weaponize its dominance in key supply chains has sharpened that focus.

On that note, Klein pointed to Beijing’s renewed rare earths export restrictions in October, noting that these measures were applied globally, not just against the US.

“They showed that they wield a significant negotiating stick, and they’re willing to use it,” he said.

In Klein’s view, that move has triggered a forceful response from western governments. “I think they’ve overplayed their hand to some degree, because now you’ve had this very big reaction from the US.”

That reaction is translating into a renewed push to localize and reshore critical mineral supply chains — an effort that has gained rare bipartisan backing in Washington.

“Unlike so many other things in America, which are hyper-partisan, both sides agree we need to resolve this,” Klein said, adding that the policy momentum will continue to shape the lithium industry.

While rare earths remain the immediate pressure point, Klein said the policy lens is widening. The US recently added 10 minerals to its critical minerals list, which now stands at a total of 60. Lithium, he said, sits high on that agenda, not out of enthusiasm for the metal itself, but because of its role in batteries.

“It’s an understanding by the government that batteries and battery technology are very, very important, and the entire battery supply chain needs to be supported,” Klein said. That support extends beyond lithium to graphite, manganese, nickel, cobalt and battery components such as anodes and cathodes.

The approach is increasingly coordinated across western economies. Klein described it as “a G7 effort,” with the EU and Canada aligned alongside the US through a mix of bilateral and multilateral initiatives.

That coordination is already translating into capital flows. He pointed to US-backed progress at Thacker Pass, EU funding for Vulcan Energy Resources (ASX:VUL,OTC Pink:VULNF) and a 360 million euro grant for European Metals Holdings (LSE:EMH,ASX:EMH,OTCQB:EMHLF) as early examples. Canada, he added, is also ramping up support.

“Canada announced C$6 billion over 26 investments,” Klein said, adding that more announcements are likely by the time the Prospectors & Developers Association of Canada convention rolls around in March.

Klein sees geopolitics, industrial policy and supply chain security converging into powerful lithium tailwinds. “This is a super hot topic,” he said, and one that is likely to drive increased lithium-related activity well into 2026.

Should the US build a strategic lithium reserve?

To dilute China’s grip on the sector, Klein is advocating for a strategic lithium reserve in the US as a more effective and market-neutral alternative to company-specific subsidies. He argues that the industry’s core challenge is not demand, but extreme price volatility caused by global oversupply and what he describes as non-market behavior, which has driven prices below sustainable levels and distorted investment signals across the sector.

“The problem in lithium is volatile prices — prices below the marginal cost, catastrophically low prices that put companies out of business,” he said, pointing to persistent oversupply as the primary distortion.

In Klein’s view, a reserve would act as a counterweight by creating steady, large-scale demand that stabilizes prices within a sustainable range. “The main focus is to stabilize price … not at a super high level, but at a level where companies can make an economic return,” he said. That stability, he added, is essential to incentivize investment in mines, processing and conversion facilities across the US, Canada and allied jurisdictions.

Unlike targeted government support, Klein said a reserve would allow the market to determine which projects succeed.

“I want the market to decide which projects and companies are the best, not necessarily the government,” he said, noting the diversity of competing lithium resources, from US clay and brine projects to Canadian hard-rock deposits.

A more predictable price environment with fewer large swings would lower the cost of capital and give private investors greater confidence to finance viable projects.

Klein stressed that a lithium reserve should not be confused with a stockpile.

“People use ‘stockpile’ and ‘reserve’ like they’re the same thing, and they’re not,” he said. While a stockpile focuses on availability for emergencies, a reserve is designed as a market-stabilizing mechanism that can buy and sell material to smooth volatility. Availability, he said, is a secondary benefit.

He sees the concept as most relevant for mid-sized, fast-growing markets like lithium, graphite and other battery materials that lack deep futures markets and long-term hedging tools.

“Those are the markets that could be amenable to a reserve,” he said, contrasting them with large, liquid commodities like copper or very small, niche minerals tied mainly to military use.

Looking longer term, Klein said a lithium reserve aligns closely with the growth of EVs, energy storage, data centers and grid electrification, as well as geopolitical efforts to diversify supply chains away from China.

“This is no longer just a renewables or EV thing — this is national security, clean energy and building an electro-state,” he said, arguing that reducing volatility would make it easier for automakers, utilities and manufacturers to commit capital without fear of being caught on the wrong side of wild price swings.

North American cooperation key for lithium

Gerardo Del Real, publisher at Digest Publishing, also highlighted the impact of geopolitics on the lithium value chain, emphasizing the need for North American coordination to reduce reliance on dominant producers like China.

“I think this is the path towards that. It has to happen,” he said, noting that collaboration between the US, Canada and potentially Mexico could strengthen regional supply security and reduce vulnerability to global disruptions.

Del Real framed the issue in broader energy terms, pointing to the strategic value of domestic resources: “If we are serious as a country and as a region in being somewhat independent from China and from the Russians … we have a luxury of resources in the US, in Canada … there could be a very powerful path forward.”

On market dynamics, he suggested investors are focused on timing and catalysts, with policy shifts, demand surprises or supply disruptions likely to drive sentiment in 2026.

He also warned that the market may be underestimating the importance of coordinated regional supply initiatives as a factor shaping pricing and project economics.

Securities Disclosure: I, Georgia Williams, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

President Donald Trump’s bold decision to capture, arrest, and bring Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro to trial for drug-related offenses is far bigger than Operation Absolute Resolve itself. It resets the global chessboard. Here are ten reasons why.

First, the Venezuelan operation proves that American military and intelligence capabilities aren’t just better than anybody else’s — they operate in a wholly different dimension. 

Russian President Vladimir Putin has thrown his entire military at Ukraine in hopes of establishing Russian domination and killing President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. The bloody war has dragged on for three years, costing hundreds of thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars, while draining both countries. And still, that war grinds on.

President Trump sent a small group of special forces into Caracas. Within three hours, they had captured President Maduro and his wife, transporting them to New York to face justice in a U.S. court. No Americans were killed.

Operation Absolute Resolve, like Operation Midnight Hammer, which destroyed Iran’s nuclear capabilities in a matter of hours, was carefully planned, flawlessly executed, and 100% successful. Nobody but America could do that — and leaders around the world know it.

Second, as President Trump says, if you kill Americans, you will be held accountable. Maduro and the drug cartels have killed tens of thousands of Americans with drugs. Not only have we now secured our borders and stopped the flow of fentanyl, but we are bringing drug cartel leaders — including the Maduro family — to face justice.

Third, President Trump has just reversed decades of failed American foreign policy. For years, American leaders of both parties ignored the importance of the Western Hemisphere. They dismissed the growing threats from the countries themselves and from anti-American powers seeking to establish footholds in our hemisphere. American leaders turned a blind eye to drug smuggling and human trafficking. The Biden administration, for its own political purposes, actively encouraged a mass invasion across our border by illegal aliens. 

Operation Absolute Resolve, like Operation Midnight Hammer, which destroyed Iran’s nuclear capabilities in a matter of hours, was carefully planned, flawlessly executed, and 100% successful. Nobody but America could do that — and leaders around the world know it.

While we were focused on the forever wars in the Middle East and the dogma of climate change, three groups were moving into South and Central America — the Chinese, the cartels, and the communists.

Trump’s new national security strategy puts the Western Hemisphere at the center of our foreign policy. Trump allies and reformers now govern Argentina, Chile, Paraguay, and El Salvador — and potentially Venezuela. His long-term vision is a North and South America united by similar economic and governance systems, working in harmony for peace and prosperity.

Fourth, President Trump has reestablished the Monroe Doctrine, which forbids foreign powers from operating in the Western Hemisphere. Two hundred years ago, President Monroe warned European powers against interfering in the Americas. Sixty years ago, President Kennedy used the Monroe Doctrine to keep Soviet missiles out of Cuba. Forty years ago, President Reagan used it to stop the Soviet Union from establishing military bases in the Caribbean. The Monroe Doctrine was a foundational principle of American foreign policy, establishing the Western Hemisphere as an American zone of influence.

The Obama administration abandoned the Monroe Doctrine. Secretary of State John Kerry unilaterally declared it dead. The Biden administration also abandoned the Monroe Doctrine by looking the other way while Russia, China, and Iran established footholds in several countries.

By sending the American armada into the Caribbean, President Trump reinstated the Monroe Doctrine and declared, ‘American dominance in the Western Hemisphere will never be questioned again.’

The new Monroe Doctrine is not an effort to keep our southern neighbors down; it is intended to keep malign powers out.

Fifth, President Trump uses not only military might but all aspects of American power — especially trade, finance, and technology — to influence world events. Before he dispatched special forces to capture Maduro, Trump put massive economic pressure on Venezuela. Maduro relied on a ghost fleet of unregistered tankers to illegally ship oil abroad, especially to China.

These transactions were sanctioned but never enforced. Oil sales brought Maduro about $200 million a week, which he used to bribe and blackmail Venezuelan kleptocrats and pay his military. President Trump enforced those sanctions and seized the oil tankers. By cutting off his main source of funding, it was only a matter of time before Maduro ran out of money.

Sixth, critics are quick to accuse Trump of the policies he once criticized — regime change, nation-building, and forever wars. They’re wrong. President Trump has learned from the failures of the past — he doesn’t want to repeat them. President George W. Bush overthrew the Iraqi and Afghan governments, fired government technocrats, and imposed U.S. occupations that were doomed from the beginning. He tried to impose Western-style democracies on countries that were neither suited for it nor wanted it. He got us tangled in decades of wars we couldn’t win, with massive losses in blood and treasure.

President Obama made the opposite mistake. He helped topple dictators during the Arab Spring but then walked away from the ensuing chaos, under the misguided assumption that these countries would immediately embrace democracy on their own.

President Bush tried to do too much. President Obama did too little. Both failed.

If critics had listened carefully to President Trump’s press conferences and statements, they would realize he aims to chart a different course. Trump said the U.S. would ‘run’ Venezuela until governance could be turned over to the Venezuelans. That’s a far cry from decades of occupation and nation-building.

Until Maduro and his predecessor, Hugo Chávez, seized power, Venezuela had a long tradition of democracy, with regular elections, a free press, and an independent judiciary. Trump isn’t trying to run Venezuela forever. He is already negotiating with remaining members of the Maduro government and political opposition groups for a smooth and quick transfer of power to the Venezuelan people, overseen by the U.S.

Seventh, the oil. The future, in both manufacturing and artificial intelligence, belongs to countries with technological superiority and inexpensive, abundant energy resources. Venezuela has the world’s largest known oil reserves but needs investment to modernize production. American companies have a long history of working with Venezuelan oil companies, and we can do so again. It will be a win-win for the U.S. and Venezuela.

But there is a secondary effect of increased Venezuelan oil production: over time, it will drive down global prices. Russia and Iran rely on oil sales to fund their governments. More oil worldwide means lower prices, which means less income for our enemies.

Eighth, corrupt, incompetent, America-hating dictators should take note. With American help, Maduro is now gone. If the United States and Venezuela, working together, succeed in establishing a new government that restores capitalism and democracy, it will succeed.

If so, could Venezuela be the spark that ignites other democratic reform movements? Cuba is kept alive by Maduro’s drug money. What happens when that money runs out? What happens to the pro-Maduro Colombian government once a new Venezuelan government is formed?

Ninth, the world will now see firsthand what the American legal system looks like. Maduro will be tried in the U.S., in a public courtroom, with the world watching. The Justice Department has worked for years to build a solid case against Maduro for narcoterrorism, drug trafficking, and money laundering. It will show Maduro’s personal connections to drug cartels and human trafficking. It may also shine a light on malign foreign involvement by Iran, Russia, and China.

Finally — and in some ways most importantly — President Trump has overcome the loser syndrome. For years, China has told the world that America is a nation in irreversible economic and moral decline. We fought and lost forever wars in the Middle East. Biden’s Afghanistan withdrawal was shambolic. We have been pushed around by our enemies and disrespected by our allies. Our own leaders have been corrupt, incompetent, and unresponsive.

That has now changed. Our economy is at the starting gate of significant growth. Trillions are being invested in American manufacturing. Our technology and energy sectors are unleashed. We have the most powerful and capable military in the world. Our leaders — especially President Trump — are decisive, confident, and unafraid. More and more people at home and abroad no longer see an America in decline but an America perhaps poised for a new Golden Age.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

To the surprise of no one, Democrats reflexively denounced Trump’s daring middle-of-the-night grab of Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro and his wife.  

If Joe Biden, who offered a $25 million reward for Maduro’s arrest, had done what Trump did, these same politicians would be organizing a ticker-tape parade.  

Their condemnation of Trump has nothing to do with the law, although they pretend that it does. Instead, it is transparently driven by their contempt for a president that they despise.

Bereft of reason, they oppose whatever Trump does even if it conforms to their previously expressed beliefs.

Almost in unison, Democrats decried Trump’s action as ‘illegal,’ ‘unjustified’ and ‘unconstitutional.’ Many insisted that he was required to seek permission from Congress.  

None of that happens to be true. 

Inherent Constitutional Authority

The president is empowered by the U.S. Constitution as commander in chief of the armed forces to direct military action to protect Americans, fortify U.S. interests and defend our national security.  

The scourge of drugs emanating from Venezuela has long been poisoning our citizens. Our government estimates that roughly 200 to 250 metric tons of cocaine is shipped out of the Latin American country annually. America, by virtue of its prosperity, is a favored destination.  

On this basis alone, the incursion into Caracas was legal, justified, and legitimate.

For years, Maduro has led the notorious Cartel de los Soles, a violent drug cartel that is designated by the U.S. as a foreign terrorist organization responsible for murders, torture and crimes against humanity so egregious that even the United Nations recognized it.

Article II, Section 2 of our Constitution vests inherent powers in the president to unilaterally order armed forces into military actions. His command authority is supreme, and he may conduct campaigns and deploy operations by his own judgment.  

Short of a formal declaration of war, a president does not need prior authorization from Congress to act. That principle is embedded in our Constitution and has been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court since the early founding of our Republic.

In more modern times, the president’s authority over armed action has only expanded. Cases involving Truman, Clinton and Obama solidified presidential power to direct military operations without congressional consent. 

Trump had every legal and constitutional right to defend the United States against the transport of deadly illicit drugs and to arrest the man most responsible, who has been federally indicted for numerous crimes. 

And no, Trump did not violate the War Powers Act as some of his critics have alleged. The resolution that was passed in 1973 stipulates a reporting requirement to Congress within 48 hours of deploying forces into hostilities. It is not a prohibition to act.

Indeed, it implicitly recognizes a president’s inherent power to use military force without specific congressional approval. Every single American president has done so since the end of World War II.  Trump is no exception.  

The ‘Take Care Clause’

The president has another authority at his disposal. The ‘Take Care Clause’ in Article II, Section 3 of the Constitution mandates that the president ‘shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.’

To put it simply, Trump is duty-bound to ensure that all federal statutes are enforced. This includes the apprehension, arrest, and prosecution of wanted fugitives who are criminally charged with U.S. crimes and must be brought to justice.

Effectuating the arrest of Maduro qualifies as enforcing all laws. Just because the accused is the de facto head of state in another country does not afford him protection or immunity from the long arm of American law. That is written nowhere. 

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio described Maduro as ‘a fugitive of American justice.’ Given his armed protection, military troops were necessary to accomplish his arrest. According to Trump, the ‘operation was done in conjunction with U.S. law enforcement.’

This was also the case in 1990 under nearly identical circumstances.    

Then-President George H. W. Bush ordered the military to capture Manuel Noriega, the corrupt dictator of Panama who was indicted on drug trafficking charges and endangering U.S. citizens. After a surprise military operation in the country’s capital, he was taken into custody and spirited back to the U.S. for trial.

Noriega’s legal team of defense attorneys vigorously challenged both his arrest and America’s legal authority to try him. Those maneuvers failed, along with his various claims of immunity. He was convicted and imprisoned.

So, we’ve seen this movie before. Maduro’s lawyers will mount the same legal challenges. But if the past is prologue, there is little reason to believe that the ending will be any different.  

This leaves the rather vacant claim by Trump adversaries that his actions somehow violated the norms and customs of international law. It is a common accusation that is often lacking in substance.  

Some point to Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, which prohibits member nations from ‘the use of force against the territorial integrity’ of any state. However, the Charter provides an exception for self-defense.

As evidenced by the charges stated in Madura’s indictment, his actions as a narco-terrorist flooding the U.S. with deadly drugs fully justifies Trump’s actions as defensive in nature. Continued drug trafficking posed an imminent threat to the lives of American citizens.

If a conflict of American versus international law exists, our president’s obligations under Article II of the Constitution takes precedence and priority over Article 2 of the U.N. Charter. Members of the United Nations can complain all they want, but the U.S. has veto power in the UN Security Council.           

Most Venezuelans seem relieved that the long nightmare of tyranny, oppression and death at the hands Hugo Chavez and Nicolas Maduro is finally over. Their land is rich with the world’s largest oil reserves.

If free and fair elections are held, as they should be, the impoverished citizens of this proud nation can share in a brighter future of freedom, economic recovery and financial prosperity.

They will have President Trump to thank for that.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS