Reflections on the political book 'Destination Autonomy', by the Leader of the Conservative Party of Quebec (PCQ), Mr. Éric Duhaime, April 2026

By Rodrigue Tremblay, emeritus professor of Economics, Université de Montréal and former minister

"Teachers are teaching nationalism in schools. They tell their their students that Quebec is a state [État], and that's false. Quebec is a province, a township, indistinct."

Pierre Elliott Trudeau (1919-2000), Liberal Prime minister of the Canadian federal government, (remarks made in 1994, as reported by Michel David in Le Devoir, October 29, 2016).

It is not easy to relive history.

In essence, the leader of the Conservative Party of Quebec, Éric Duhaime, is right in adopting a Quebec autonomy platform for his party. (1) 

In so doing, he wants to return to an ad hoc approach in the relations between the government of Quebec and the Canadian federal government. This method has yielded positive results in the past, such as the repatriation of income tax in 1954 and the adoption of the Quebec Pension Plan, separate from the federal tax system in other Canadian provinces, in 1964.

Éric Duhaime is doing what PQ leaders could have done after their two referendum defeats, in 1980 and 1995, if they had conducted a proper analysis of the geopolitical reasons forf their losses. Indeed, these two successive defeats contributed to the loss of significant powers of the Quebec Parliament, powers which were transferred to federal judges appointed and paid by the federal government. Politically, this has sent Quebec back to the pre-1867 era.

Without saying so explicitly, the leader of the PCQ would undoubtedly like the Canadian federal government to redress the enormous wrongs done to Quebec with the passage of the Constitution Act of 1982, adopted without the consent of the Quebec government and without having been approved in a public referendum.

It is true that Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau (1919-2000), and other politicians in Ottawa, knowingly or unknowingly misled the electorate during the May 20,1980 referendum, by subtly leading Quebecers to believe that a "No" vote was "not a vote for the status quo". In fact, many voters understood that a "No" vote would be a vote in favor of the "No" camp's explanatory Beige Paper, a manifesto entitled "A New Canadian Federation". This manifesto proposed seven constitutional amendments as an alternative to the 'Yes' camp's White Paper, a manifesto entitled "On Equal Terms", which proposed bilateral negotiations to grant Quebec the status of Sovereignty-Association. (2)

The seven constitutional proposals in the Beige Paper were:

̣̣̣̣̣1- Adoption of a Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the integration of the French and English languages into the Canadian Constitution (in addition to extending it to the provinces of Ontario and New Brunswick).

2- Guarantee of the right of every individual to allow their child to study in English or French "where numbers warrant it".

3- Abolition of the Senate.

4- Creation of a Federal Council composed of delegations from the provinces (with 25% of delegates from Quebec) whose mandate would be to oversee federal government initiatives that could "alter the fundamental balance of the federation". The Council would also establish a joint committee (French-speaking and English-speaking) focusing specifically on language issues.

5- Creation of a dual bench (equal representation of Canada and Quebec) on the Supreme Court for all constitutional cases.

6- Transfer of residual powers to the provinces.

7- Transfer to the provinces of powers over education, subsidies and scholarships, radio and television programming, social reintegration programs, workforce training, and the reception and integration of immigrants.

The Beige Paper was the work of Claude Ryan, leader of the Liberal Party of Quebec (PLQ) and head of the "No" side.

On May 20, 1980, the "No" side garnered 59,56% of the votes cast, partly because its Beige Paper of proposals of federal decentralization was popular.

But PQ leaders said that the population had "said No to itself", which was an anti-democratic interpretation.

Indeed, in the 1980 and 1995 referendums, the only constitutional option on the ballot was the proposition advanced by the government: negotiating sovereignty-association for Quebec (1980) or Quebec independence (1995). In both instances, this was therefore a plebiscite, not a genuine referendum, and not a choice between a few constitutional options.

[Definition of a plebiscite: "A consultation by which a government asks all citizens to express their confidence by voting yes or no on a proposal."]

After the referendum defeats of 1980 and 1995, it might have been possible to demand that the harm done to Quebec by the Constitution Act of 1982 be redressed, because the elected Quebec Parliament was placed under the arbitrary authority of unelected federal judges, named and paid by the federal government, for many of its democratically adopted laws. This was done against its will and against the will of the Quebec population, which was never consulted on such a political regression for Quebec.

The Conservative governments of Brian Mulroney (1939-2024) and Stephen Harper (1959- ) in Ottawa might have been more open to the demands of a more autonomist Quebec government to protect its language and culture.

However, we should't be too optimistic.

Indeed, we shouldn't be too optimistic, because the failure of the Meech Lake Accord on June 23, 1990, and the defeat of the Charlottetown Accord in the October 26,1992 federal referendum—which was rejected in both Quebec and in the rest of Canada—clearly demonstrated that constitutional changes in Canada are not easy. Indeed, under the terms of the Constitution Act of 1982, a constitutional amendment requires the approval either of unanimity of the federal government and of provincial governments, for a short list of institutional issues, or an approval by the federal government and 2/3 of Canadian provinces for most other amendments. But ad hoc agreements between Quebec and Ottawa are still possible.

As I explain in my 2018 book, "Quebec's Regression, 2980-2018", published by Éditions Fides, for an autonomist approach to have been adopted, the Parti Québécois (PQ) would have had to prioritize the nation over partisanship, and the government would have had to resign after the lost plebiscite of May 20, 1980.This could have stopped the Trudeau government's strategy of going ahead with unilateral constitutional changes to increase federal centralization, without approval by the Quebec government.

Indeed, there was a strong likelihood, then, that Claude Ryan, leader of the Liberal Party of Quebec (PLQ) and the winning leader of the No side in the referendum, could have been elected Premier of Quebec, and he was opposed to federal centralization.

If this had been the case, Pierre Elliott Trudeau could not have claimed that his option of a more centralized Canadian federation had prevailed in the Quebec referendum. The entire narrative would have been altered.

But that didn't happen, essentially because Premier René Levesque (1922-1987) chose not to respect the unequivocal vote of the Quebec electorate and clung to power for another full year.

Prime Minister Trudeau was then able to proceed, without Quebec's consent, with the repatriation of the British North America Act (BNAA 1867) from London, with the assistance of the Supreme Court of Canada, then presided over by Bora Laskin (1912-1984), and the governments of the provinces of Ontario and New Brunswick.

After what became known as the Night of the Long Knives, on November 4-5, 1981, Pierre Elliott Trudeau succeeded in having a Charter of Rights included in what became the Constitutional Act of 1982, after conceding to the insertion of a notwithstanding clause, at the request of the recalcitrant English-speaking provinces.

The Constitution Act of 1982 forcibly removed significant prerogatives and legislative powers from the Quebec Parliament and Quebec government, subjecting them to the judgements of federal courts, particularly in matters of language and culture.

Conclusion

I once wrote that the 1982 constitutional changes— imposed by force upon 

Quebec—made the province of Quebec a de facto domestic colony of English-speaking Canada. That situation is threatening Quebec's long-term survival as the only political entity in North America with a French-speaking majority.

______________________________________________

1. Mario Dumont, Éric Duhaime, Autonomist and Serious , Journal de Montréal, April 18, 2026

2. On June 12, 1978, Pierre Elliott Trudeau introduced Bill C-60 in the House of Commons, along with a white paper entitled "Time to Act", in which he proposed renewing Canadian federalism. He also proposed the adoption of a Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the replacement of the Senate with a House of the Federation, and the redefinition of the roles of the Governor General, the Prime Minister, and the Cabinet.

See, Claude-V. Marsolais, The Confiscated Referendum, Montréal, VLB Éditeur, 1992,

_____________________________________________________________

International economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book about morals "The code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles" of the book about geopolitics "The New American Empire", and of his recent book, in French, "La régression tranquille du Québec, 1980-2018". 

He holds a Ph.D. in international finance from Stanford University.

Please visit Dr. Tremblay's site or email to a friend here.

Posted Friday, May 1, 2026.

*** To receive new postings of Dr. Tremblay's articles, 

please send Subscribe to jcarole261@gmail.com

To unsubscribe, please send Unsubscribe to jcarole261@gmail.com

To contact the author, please send to this address: rodrigue.tremblay1@gmail.com

______________________________________________________________

© 2026 Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay

 

What is Best for the World: Chaos, Wars and Destruction, or Order, Peace and Prosperity?

Professor Rodrigue Tremblay

"As democracy improves, the role of president increasingly represents the soul of the people. On some great and glorious day, the plain folks of the land will reach their heart's desire and the White House will be adorned by a downright moron."

H.L. Mencken (1880-1956), American journalist and political commentator (in the Baltimore Evening Sun, July 26, 1920.

"The object in life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane."

Marcus Aurelius (121-180 CE), Roman emperor and Stoic philosopher, (in 'Meditations, a handbook of stoic philosophy', 161-180 CE).

"We do not live [in the United States] in a constitutional Republic any more. We live in a state of soft tyranny. You may not like it but it's true. We vote, but the state runs us, we don't run it. Our government redistributes our wealth in a way that is criminal, and we do nothing to stop it."

Chuck Wooley (1941- ), American actor and game show host, (in a post on Twitter (X), March 26, 2018).

"When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object, evinces a design to reduce them [the people] under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

American Declaration of Independence, (1776).

World peace and international order are extremely fragile nowadays, and this is very concerning. Indeed, in just a few years, the system of international laws and rules seems to have been replaced, in international relations, by unilateral and mostly improvised arbitrariness, based on brute force. This has created a dangerous situation of global chaos that threatens the peace and prosperity of nations.

In reality, such a legal anarchy and confusion stems from a major flaw in the Charter of the United Nations, which was adopted and signed in San Francisco, on June 26, 1945.

In fact, the U.N. Charter includes a clause that grants a veto power to the five permanent members of the Security Council (United States, Russia, China, Great Britain, and France), which also has ten other non-permanent members. A single negative vote (the right of veto) from one permanent member is enough to reject a Security Council resolution to maintain peace. (Article 27 of the Charter).

In practice, such a provision allows a permanent member state to launch a war of aggression against another country (or to protect a non-permanent member state that is doing so), irrespective of the provisions of the Charter specifically designed to maintain international peace and security.

Ironically, nowadays, it is one of the founding members of the U.N., namely the United States under the administration of President Donald Trump, that most frequently uses its veto power in the U.N. Security Council to launch wars of aggression around the world with near complete impunity.

This does not mean that the United States government, a signatory to the U.N. Charter, is not bound to respect the spirit and the letter of Article 2.4, which obliges all member states to refrain "in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."

However, if the government of one of the five permanent members of the Security Council wishes to act in bad faith, it can use its veto power to circumvent the basic U.N. principles.

I) The U.N. can be de facto paralyzed in its mission of world peace

The last war of aggression to date that the U.N. Charter has failed to prevent is the joint war launched by the American and Israeli governments against Iran, on Saturday, February 28, 2026.

Indeed, it was on this date that an unprovoked and illegal military bombing campaign against Iran was launched, in defiance of international law, by U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. This regional war could open a Pandora's box from which all sorts of misfortunes could flow.

Indeed, history shows that it is not always the country that starts a war that ends it. In this particular case, the Israeli government appears to have a regional and questionable long-term military plan, but the Trump administration seems to have been pushed into that improvised war by short-term partisan considerations, without any medium- or long-term planning whatsoever.

Moreover, according to a recent Reuters/Ipsos poll, 59 percent of the American people strongly oppose Trump's illegal war against Iran, which is being waged without clear motives or objectives. Similarly, Trump's overall approval rating is at a record low of 36 percent, and falling, as more and more Americans get informed about what is really going on.

So far, besides bringing much destruction, this war has killed as many as 3,492 people, including more than 175 innocent schoolgirls and school staff who lost their lives in a direct American missile strike on a girls' school in Minab, southern Iran. According to the Washington Post, about 1,500 civilians have been killed in Iran since the beginning ot U.S.-Israel bombing on February 28, 2026.

II) Economic and financial consequences

Moreover, the economic damage is enormous, with the shock of energy shortages around the world pushing oil prices and interest rates up, and provoking serious declines in financial markets.

For instance, the Israeli-U.S.-Iran war makes Japan especially vulnerable among industrialized economies, because it imports 95 percent of its oil consumption. This puts pressure on the yen to depreciate, forcing the Bank of Japan to sell U.S. Treasury bonds in order to have enough liquidity to sustain its currency.

This could trigger a domino effect, resulting in a major global economic and financial crisis. Indeed, when 10-year U.S. Treasury yields rise due to the sale of U.S. bonds, coinciding with a global surge in oil prices, the latter fuels inflation in many countries and causes financial markets to plummet. A widespread slowdown in economic activity inevitably follows. The overall result could be a severe global economic recession, possibly worse.

III) The role played by Donald Trump in the current disorder in the United States and the world

Since his first election to the American presidency, in 2016, tycoon Donald Trump has demonstrated that he is an autocratic, impulsive, and cunning politician, who often has uncontrolled fits of anger.

He has been a creator of chaos and of systematic destruction through verbal, economic, and military warfare, both abroad and within his own country. In the latter case, his ICE-Gestapo-style domestic police keeps adding new concentration camps.

Donald Trump has also shown himself to be dishonest intellectually, acting as a pathological liar who often makes things up out of thin air, to glorify himself and to humiliate, intimidate or destabilize his political opponents. People need to be on their guard because most of the time when that politician opens his mouth, he lies.

Moreover, business mogul Donald Trump is a politician with a highly controversial past. He has demonstrated himself to be a warmonger, a bully, and a predator. In fact, that is what he has done all his life, and he has transposed into politics the predatory one sided practices he developed in his private business dealings, as a builder of hotels, casinos, and golf courses.

Furthermore, Donald Trump is also an individual with a long list of misdeeds. In fact, his record is that of a con man, convicted on numerous occasions for criminal offenses.

Indeed, it has been reported in detail by Wikipedia that Donald Trump, in his business and personal legal affairs, from 1973 and until 2016, has unbelievably been involved in over 4,000 legal cases of numerous business litigations, personal defamation lawsuits, tax disputes, and cases of sexual misconduct.

Once in power, Donald Trump has been systematically abusing the pretext of 'emergency powers' to violate the U.S. Constitution. He often undermines the courts of justice by attacking judges who rule against his autocratic whims, calling the U.S. Supreme Court 'stupid'! Moreover, he played a leading role in the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol, when he tried to illegally overturn the 2020 presidential election results. In other words, Donald Trump is a threat to American institutions.

This is on top of his numerous and varied accusations of fraud and corruption, including one for accepting the gift of a $400 million luxury Boeing 747 from the foreign government of Qatar, and obvious manipulation of markets by some investors close to power and privy to inside information. The list is very long.

— All things considered, D. Trump is a politician who is vulgar and who has no class. He is often malicious, petty and obnoxious, like blocking the opening of a newly built bridge, or rejoicing callously when a person dies.

In fact, D. Trump does not project the image of the head of a competent and legitimate government, but he rather behaves like the head of a crime syndicate, who is constantly making aggressive ultimatums that can't be refused.

· The illegal cover-up of the Epstein files continues

Meanwhile, the Trump administration is pursuing its on-going cover-up of Donald Trump's role in the politico-sexual Epstein pedophilia network, which was responsible for having enslaved more than one thousand underage girls, from various countries, and which served many wealthy and influential individuals, and even involved the assistance of some intelligence agencies.

It was also an international sex trafficking ring that received more than one billion dollars from various sources.

All this is not widely known, in violation of a law passed nearly unanimously by Congress, the 'Epstein Files Transparency Act', adopted on November 18, 2025, requiring that the Trump administration release the totality of the documents in the Epstein files, and which is still far from having been done.

IV) How come a candidate as unprepared as D. Trump was elected to the U.S. Presidency?

Future historians will probably wonder about what unusual political circumstances made it possible for such a flawed candidate, convicted of 34 felony counts by a court, with an unstable character bordering on dementia, and who is known to have been deeply involved in the international sex ring of J. Epstein, trading in underage girls, to be elected president of the United States.

They could have trouble explaining how such an individual remained in office many years, without being impeached or removed from office, according to either one of two articles of the U.S. Constitution.

· Art. II, sec.4: ("The President... of the United States shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.")

· 25th Amendment, Sec.4: (Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments... transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.")

Both articles were designed to remove a rogue or sick president from office.

Indeed, on the health front, it increasingly appears that Donald Trump, 79, is being treated currently for Alzheimer's disease and dementia, like his father. Congress should take notice.

Indeed, over the last few months, Donald Trump has become a loose canon and is a global threat. He has been on an insane war path around the world.

Not only has he attacked militarily the country of Venezuela to steal its oil resources and launched another unconstitutional and illegal war of aggression against Iran, in order to steal its oil facilities, but—like a cruel tyrant—he has stooped so low as to impose an illegal oil embargo against Cuba, a small fuel-starved country in need of electricity.

Conclusion

According to numerous doctors, neuroscientists and psychiatrists, American businessman Donald Trump, 79 years old, and currently President of the United States, is rapidly declining and even getting worse on a daily basis, both in physical and mental health. This makes Donald Trump not only sick but also unfit to be head of any government.

Indeed, the sitting American president's questionable and weird behavior, improvised remarks and insults all around, and disruptive and sometimes very dumb policies, indicate that he is most unqualified and too dangerous to be president of the United States.

Moreover, his widespread ignorance causes him to constantly change his mind, which brings him to improvise and to shift positions, depending on the last person with whom he has spoken. His macro-economic policies are insane and improvised and have been condemned by virtually all renowned economists, while his justifications for illegally launching hubristic, destructive and costly wars against other countries have been strongly criticized.

The current political, economic, and war chaos in the world is largely attributable to Donald Trump and his unbridled interventions. This foreshadows not only humanitarian catastrophes, but also a severe worldwide economic recession. It also heralds a significant decline in the United States' reputation in the world.

Therefore, the elected members of the U.S. Congress, and especially the Republican majority in both the House and the Senate, should take concrete steps to put an end to D. Trump's daily political circus. They should stop him from launching unconstitutional wars of aggression and economic warfare against other countries.

Furthermore, as the Nuremberg Tribunal clearly ruled, military officers have the responsibility not to comply with unlawful orders to commit war crimes and atrocities.

___________________________________________________________

International economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book about morals "The code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles" of the book about geopolitics "The New American Empire", and of his recent book, in French, "La régression tranquille du Québec, 1980-2018". 

He holds a Ph.D. in international finance from Stanford University.

Please visit Dr. Tremblay's site or email to a friend here.

Posted Thursday, April 2, 2026.

*** To receive new postings of Dr. Tremblay's articles, 

please send Subscribe to jcarole261@gmail.com

To unsubscribe, please send Unsubscribe to jcarole261@gmail.com

To contact the author, please send to this address: rodrigue.tremblay1@gmail.com

______________________________________________________________

© 2026 Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay

 

The True motives Behind the United States and Israel's bombings of Iran and their foreseeable consequences

Professor Rodrigue Tremblay

"Without a debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed —and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First Amendment —the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution —not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and sentimental, not to simply 'give the public what it wants' —but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold educate and sometimes even anger public opinion."

John F. Kennedy (1917-1963), 35th U.S. President, 1961-1963, (in a speech before the American Newspaper Publishers Association, on April 27, 1961).

"Stability and peace are not built with mutual threats nor with weapons that sow destruction, pain and death, but only through a dialogue that is reasonable, authentic and responsible. Faced with the possibility of a tragedy of enormous proportions, I address... a heartfelt appeal to assume the moral responsibility of halting the spiral of violence before it becomes an irreparable abyss."

Pope Leo XIV  (1955- ), (words spoken in St. Peter's Square, Sunday, March 2, 2026, following the illegal military attacks by the United States and Israel against Iran, which notably killed Ayatollah Ali Khamenei).

"We are finally putting America First. Our policy of war, regime change and nation-building is being replaced by the pursuit of American interests... It is the job of our military to protect our security, not to be the policemen of the world."

Donald Trump (1946- ), Republican candidate, (in a speech during the presidential campaign of 2024).

"The time will arrive when you will learn to judge for yourself of what is going on in the world, without trusting to the gossip of others. Believe nothing you hear, and only one half that you see."

Edgar Allan Poe (1809-1849), American writer, (in his 1845 short story "The system of Dr. Tarr and Prof. Fether").

On Saturday, February 28, the U.S. Trump administration and the Israeli Netanyahu government launched unlawful, joint and unprovoked missile attacks against the country of Iran (pop. 93 million), on the basis of a series of shifting, false or unproven claims. Such military attacks have ignited a wider conflict in the Middle East, created economic disruptions worldwide, and could lead to a Third World War.

So far, there have been almost 2,000 deaths, including Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and more than 175 school girls, aged 7 to 12, and their teachers, when their all-girl Tayyebeh School, in the town of Minab in Southern Iran, was completely destroyed by a U.S. missile. Such barbarous acts could one day lead to accusations of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

More often than not, U.S. mainstream media rarely go deeper than the official narrative and propaganda, when they do not reinforce the latter. It is easier for them, with some worthy exceptions, to reproduce literally the government's lies and omissions and to ignore the politicians' misdeeds at home and abroad, especially those they commit abroad and which lend themselves to bursts of patriotism.

However, it is a fact that wars of aggression are expressly unlawful under Article 39 of the United Nations Charter, which both the United States and Israel governments have signed. [Art.39: The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken. in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.].

Moreover, it is also a fact that the U.S. government has used its veto more than 50 times at the 15-member U.N. Security Council to give diplomatic and legal protection to Israel for its crimes and violations of the terms of the U.N. Charter.

Last year, on September 18, 2025, the Trump administration cast its 6th veto against a resolution demanding a ceasefire in the Palestinian enclave of Gaza and that Israel lift all restrictions on aid deliveries to its inhabitants. It's as if Israel were the 6th country to have a veto right in the Security Council!

It is difficult to know if it is Israel and the important Zionist political donors in the U.S. who control the U.S. government, or if it is the American government that uses Israel as part of its foreign policy in the Middle East.

I) President Donald Trump's close association with Israel and rich campaign donors is a danger for the United States and for the world

Politician Donald Trump's huge financial support by rich American Zionists is well documented. During the 2016 U.S. presidential election and during Donald Trump's first term, superrich casino owner Sheldon Adelson is reported by Newsweek to have contributed to the Republican candidate's election over $424 million. After Adelson's death in 2021, according to Forbes News, his widow Miriam Sheldon gave $95 million to the pro-Donald Trump 'Preserve America' Political Action Committee (PAC).

Indeed, since its January 2010 controversial decision on 'Citizens United v. FEC', the U.S. Supreme Court opened wide the floodgates of nearly unlimited amounts of campaign money that ultra rich individuals, corporations and unions can spend during an election.

This has made it easier for lobbyists and wealthy private interests to elect candidates to high office who can be receptive to their demands for lower taxes, deregulation and targeted public expenditures, in the military sector, among others.

It is a power that the rich American oligarchy has on a daily basis, while ordinary Americans can only exert influence when they vote, every two years... if they think it's still worth the trouble to go vote.

II) American elections, when big money flows freely

U.S. elections do not matter much anymore because the real issue is which political party can get the most money from the very rich and lie about defending the lower and middle classes against the very rich.

That is pretty much what real estate mogul Donald Trump did during the last three electoral campaigns. He has collected huge sums of money from very rich donors and made false promises to lower and middle-income voters.

III) The Israeli government, D. Trump and the Epstein international pedophilia sex ring

Recent history shows that Neocon advisors have had great success in persuading some incumbent presidents, low in public polls, to launch an unlawful war of aggression abroad, to stir up patriotism among the least informed part of the electorate, and thus to rise in the polls.

In a George W. Bush-like decision to go ahead with a war of choice against Iraq in March 2003, (under false pretenses), Donald Trump could also believe, in 2026, that a war of aggression against Iran could help him rise in the polls and solidify his support among Republican Congress members. Moreover, this could simultaneously help him drown out his involvement in the Epstein political-sexual scandal under a barrage of war news.

Indeed, now that the so-called 'withheld by accident' Epstein Files and FBI documents about Trump's perversion with young girls have finally been made public, this could explain why the current American president would like to assume the posture of a 'commander-in-chief' and why he is doing everything in his power to cover up his involvement in the sex scandal of the century.

Moreover, other documents of the Epstein Files about the international network of sexual exploitation of underage girls have also revealed that this was a front in order to compromise, blackmail and extort money and other advantages from a powerful group of politicians and wealthy individuals in several countries, with the help of Israel and people connected to its intelligence facilities and to other intelligence agencies.

It will take more time, possibly years, before the entire Epstein saga and all its fallout might be completely known.

Conclusion

The unlawful war of aggression, launched jointly against Iran by the American and Israeli governments, on Saturday, February 28, 2026, and in defiance of international law, is yet another example of military excesses, which undermine world peace and world order, create chaos, violate national sovereignty and devastate the global economy.

However, without the active military participation of the U.S. Trump government and its defense of Israel at the U.N. Security Council, such an unprovoked military attack against Iran, which could escalate into a global military conflict, could not have occurred or would not have had the same scope.

Indeed, after only a year and a few months in power, it is as if someone had suggested to Donald Trump, at the beginning of his second term, the rogue project of destroying everything, (American democracy, world peace, international trade, etc.), and that this would be good for his personal glory!

On the one hand, domestically, Trump has violated his oath of office by imposing an autocratic administration, in defiance of the U.S. Constitution and the constitutional powers of the elected Congress.

On the other hand, internationally, Donald Trump has made mafia-boss-like threats and launched illegal military attacks against many countries, in his insane quest for world dominance, in addition to adopting destabilizing economic policies that have been condemned by the vast majority of economists.

The consequences are clear for everyone to see: 1- a deep political division currently reigns in the United States, with some citizens being killed while simply exercising their right to protest; and 2- the global economy could regress 100 years and could be plunged into another global economic depression, like that of 1929-1939.

In such a context of domestic, external and general political, economic and military chaos, the primary responsibility of Democratic and Republican elected officials in the U.S. Congress should be to take concrete steps to put an end to the authoritarian and disastrous orientation that has taken hold in their country.

___________________________________________________________

International economist Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay is the author of the book about morals "The code for Global Ethics, Ten Humanist Principles" of the book about geopolitics "The New American Empire", and of his recent book, in French, "La régression tranquille du Québec, 1980-2018". 

He holds a Ph.D. in international finance from Stanford University.

Please visit Dr. Tremblay's site or email to a friend here.

Posted Tuesday, March 10, 2026.

*** To receive new postings of Dr. Tremblay's articles, 

please send Subscribe to jcarole261@gmail.com

To unsubscribe, please send Unsubscribe to jcarole261@gmail.com

To contact the author, please send to this address: rodrigue.tremblay1@gmail.com

______________________________________________________________

© 2026 Dr. Rodrigue Tremblay