Tuesday, December 16, 2025

Nuclear “Time Bomb” On India-China Border! Garage Files Revive CIA’s Cold War Secret That Could Trigger Hell



Tuesday, December 16, 2025


Nuclear “Time Bomb” On India-China Border! Garage Files Revive CIA’s Cold War Secret That Could Trigger Hell


By Sumit Ahlawat
-December 16, 2025


Some stories refuse to die. In 2014, EurAsian Times reported on how the U.S. lost a Nuclear device in the Himalayas that was designed to snoop on China.

The story involved a Plutonium nuclear device lost at the roof of the world, which can be turned into a dirty atomic bomb, can leak radioactive material and poison the Ganges, India’s holy river that feeds millions of people, and can cause landslides, avalanches, and flash floods, it’s easy to understand why the story will not die its natural death, even after more than 60 years have passed.

A Plutonium-based nuclear device, after all, can last for centuries.

By now, the broad contours of the story are familiar.

In the haughty days of the Cold War, the CIA was losing sleep after Maoist China conducted a nuclear test in 1964. Caught off guard and determined to keep a tab on Beijing’s future nuclear and missile technology, the CIA came up with a bold plan.

To place a nuclear-powered snooping device on one of the Himalayas’ tallest peaks. There, sitting at over 25,000 feet and buried in many feet of snow, the device will quietly eavesdrop hundreds of miles into Tibet.

The CIA, however, could execute only half the plan. The nuclear-powered device was indeed sitting in the Himalayas, buried somewhere in the snowy peaks of Nanda Devi, but it was not placed there; the CIA lost it.

It was last seen in 1965. Since then, it’s not eavesdropping on China; instead, it is hanging like a ticking nuclear disaster in the Himalayas that could poison the water supply of millions, leak radioactive substances in the glaciers, or trigger landslides, avalanches, and flash-floods in an ecologically sensitive area.

The story first broke in 1978; since then, despite the best efforts of the US and Indian governments to bury the matter under the icy Himalayan sheets, it refuses to die and keeps raising its ugly head every few years.

The story resurfaced in 2021 when flash floods near Nanda Devi killed over 200, triggering fears that the nuclear device could have caused the glacier to burst.

Last week, it resurfaced again after a trove of files was discovered in a Montana garage, showing how a celebrated National Geographic photographer built an elaborate cover story for the CIA covert operation — and how the plans completely unraveled on the mountain.

Ironically, the celebrated National Geographic photographer Barry Bishop was also the source of the first leak in 1978, and now, nearly 50 years later, his newly discovered garage files show that he has told only half the story.

Though just like in 1978, the story has not lost any urgency or sensation.

However, the story is more than its sensation. Above all, the story of how the CIA lost a nuclear device in the Himalayas in 1965 represents an epoch.

The age of the Cold War, when all bets were off, and all spooky games, no matter how outlandish, seemed fair game.

The story, in its own weird ways, also represents the last vestiges of the imperial age. A post-colonial world that is still in its nascent stage, and where millions of lives in the Global South can be gambled by a few hawkish spies in the First World, having a bloated sense of their own importance and a misplaced faith in the superiority of their mission.


A Celebrated National Geographic Photographer Aka CIA Operative

By 1965, Barry Bishop was not only a celebrated photographer but also a widely respected mountaineer. In 1963, he had conquered Mount Everest.

Bishop met Gen. Curtis LeMay, the head of the United States Air Force (USAF), at a cocktail party. During the party, Bishop told Gen. LeMay that from Mount Everest, he could see hundreds of miles inside Tibet.

Soon after, the CIA summoned Bishop and told him of a bold plan. Several US mountaineers and secret agents would slip into the Himalayas, carrying surveillance equipment in their backpacks, and place it on a mountaintop to intercept radio signals from Chinese missile tests.

According to The New York Times, “Records found in November in Mr. Bishop’s garage in Bozeman, Mont., show that National Geographic granted him a leave of absence to pursue the mission in the Himalayas.

“The meticulously kept files also chronicle his deepening involvement: studying explosives, receiving intelligence on China’s missile program and mapping out the summit assault. His files included bank statements, phony business cards, photographs, gear lists and menus, down to the chocolate, honey and bacon bars that the climbers would eat.”

However, the CIA had a problem. How to power the listening device in the Himalayas for many decades. NASA had a solution—a portable generator powered by highly radioactive plutonium.

Bishop recruited Mr. McCarthy, an experienced rock climber, for the mission.

Mr. McCarthy said the CIA offered him $1,000 a month and presented the mission as urgent for America’s national security.

The US then shared the plan with India, which had just lost a war to China in 1962, and was equally anxious about China’s nuclear program.

India’s Intelligence Bureau tapped Captain Kohli, a decorated naval officer who had just made history leading nine Indian climbers to Everest’s summit.

In interviews with Indian newspapers, Kohli later recalled being struck by the CIA’s arrogance. “It was nonsense,” Captain Kohli said.

The first plan that the CIA hatched, he recalled, was to put the telemetry station on Kanchenjunga, the world’s third-highest mountain after Everest and K2.

“I told them whoever is advising the C.I.A. is a stupid man,” Kohli said.

Mr. McCarthy shared the sentiment.

“I looked at that Kanchenjunga plan and said, ‘Are you out of your mind?'” he remembered.

“At that time, Kanchenjunga had only been climbed once,” Mr. McCarthy said. “I told them, ‘You’re never going to get all that equipment up there.'”

Bishop made business cards, letterhead, and a prospectus, all emblazoned with “Sikkim Scientific Expedition.” It was all a cover.


Letters of support for Mr. Bishop and his expedition from the American Alpine Club and National Geographic. Courtesy Barry Bishop Estate via The NYT.


Finally, and thankfully, Indians rejected the Kanchenjunga idea, saying it was in an “acutely sensitive” military area, according to Mr. Bishop’s files.

After much deliberation, the Indians and the CIA finally settled on Nanda Devi, at 25,645 feet.

However, Captain Kohli still had his reservations.

“I told them it would be, if not impossible, extremely difficult,” he said. Once again, he said, his concerns were dismissed.

The Indian and US climbers then met in Alaska for a quick practice run.
The Fateful Climb

In September 1965, the team began their climb of Nanda Devi Peak, carrying a portable nuclear-powered generator, listening antennas, and cables.

They had to move quickly because September is already the fag end of the climbing season in the Himalayas, winter and its ferocious storms were just around the corner, but they did not want to wait till next year.

However, the climbers were in the dark about what they were carrying.

Plutonium 238 sheds heat. Unaware of the risks associated with it, the Sherpas used it to warm themselves.

The porters jockeyed with one another to carry the plutonium capsules, Captain Kohli and Mr. McCarthy said.

“The Sherpas loved them,” Mr. McCarthy said. “They put them in their tents. They snuggled up next to them.”

Remembering this, Captain Kohli said, “The Sherpas called the device Guru Rinpoche (a Buddhist saint) because it was so warm.”

“At the time,” he said, “we had no idea about the danger.”


99 Percent Dead

The NYT report quotes from Mr Bishop’s handwritten notes (discovered in the garage in November). The notes capture the hardships and the mission’s collapse.

Oct. 4: “High winds.” “Tent was lost.”

Oct. 5: “Short of food.”

Oct. 11: “Snows all day.”

Oct. 13: “Very discouraging evening.”

Oct. 14: “Jim tried again to move up but again developed a severe headache.”

Oct. 15: “Almost constant snow. Frostbite. Coming to a crux.”


Handwritten notes from Mr. Bishop’s files. Courtesy Barry Bishop Estate via The NYT.


On October 16, a blizzard hit.

Sonam Wangyal, an Indian intelligence operative who was also an experienced mountain climber and, by all accounts, a very strong one, was huddled near the peak.

“We were 99 percent dead,” Mr. Wangyal remembered. “We had empty stomachs, no water, no food, and we were totally exhausted.”

“The snow was up to our thighs,” he said. “It was falling so hard, we couldn’t see the man next to us, or the ropes.”

At this time, Captain Kohli ordered his men to leave the device at a secure location and return.

“The Indian climbers pushed the boxes of equipment into a small ice cave at Camp Four. They tied everything down with metal stakes and nylon rope. Then they scurried down as fast as possible.”

The climbing season had ended. The team had to wait until next year to search for the nuclear-powered generator.

However, when the team returned the following year, they found nothing. The nuclear device has been lost at the roof of the world.

Captain Kohli recalls that had he known they were nuclear capsules, he would have asked the team to bring them back at any cost.

Subsequent expeditions were sent in 1966, 1967, and again in 1968, but the device seems to have been lost forever.

“The team used alpha counters to measure for radiation, telescopes to scan the snow, infrared sensors to pick up any heat, and mine sweepers to detect metal. They found nothing.”

Mr. McCarthy believes it “buried itself in the deepest part of the glacier.”

“That damn thing was very warm,” he said, explaining that it would melt the ice around it and keep sinking.

Perhaps the nuclear device is still there at the bottom of a glacier, melting the ice, which could trigger avalanches and flash floods, or it could leak radioactive substances into the glacier, poisoning the waters of the Ganges.

However, despite the debacle, the CIA kept pushing to set up a mountaintop station to spy on China.

In 1967, a team of climbers finally managed to install a new batch of surveillance equipment, powered by radioactive fuel, on a flat ice shelf on a lower summit, near Nanda Devi.

But the device, due to its heat, kept sinking.

“That sputtering telemetry station was shut down in 1968, with the equipment retrieved and sent back to the United States, according to Indian documents.”

According to Kohli, who wrote a book on the topic, “Spies in the Himalayas: Secret Missions and Perilous Climbs,” another such device was set up in the Himalayas in 1973.

However, by then, the US had made significant advances in spy satellite technology, rendering these rudimentary, high-risk nuclear-powered devices in the Himalayas redundant.

The Nanda Devi story first broke in 1978, and Mr. Bishop was one of its sources. However, he requested not to be named, fearing it would muddy his legacy as a celebrated National Geographic photographer.


The Nanda Devi story was first published in Outside Magazine in 1978. Courtesy The NYT.


Incidentally, the US has also lost a pair of nuclear-powered generators off the Californian coast in 1968 when a weather satellite crashed.

“The government was so anxious to recover them that the Navy sent half a dozen ships and plumbed the ocean for nearly five months until they were found.”

Which raises the question, why was the US so lax about the lost nuclear device in the Himalayas?

Was it because it risked the lives of Indians and not the Americans?




Sumit Ahlawat has over a decade of experience in news media. He has worked with Press Trust of India, Times Now, Zee News, Economic Times, and Microsoft News. He holds a Master’s Degree in International Media and Modern History from the University of Sheffield, UK.


DAP, UMNO, PKR WHOEVER IS INTERESTED: MALAYSIA CPI GLOBAL RANKING VERSUS ELECTORAL PERFORMANCE 2005 - 2022

 

Tuesday, December 16, 2025



DAP, UMNO, PKR WHOEVER IS INTERESTED: MALAYSIA CPI GLOBAL RANKING VERSUS ELECTORAL PERFORMANCE 2005 - 2022

 

"Do not think that I have come to abolish the old UMNO policies or their leaders; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the old UMNO policies until all is DESTROYED" - retake from Mathew. 

 


 

I was doing some online research and was able to put this graph together.  The DAP clowns who just got their ass kicked 8-0 in the Sabah State polls better pay attention because this graph reflects upon the partners you are sleeping with. And also upon you.

Also bear in mind that in 2022 ALL OF YOU LOST THE ELECTIONS. 
IN 2022 THERE WAS NO WINNER.  
IN 2022 WE ENDED UP WITH A HUNG PARLIAMENT.  

Then in 2023 there were elections in the SIX States (Kelantan, Terengganu, Kedah, Penang, Negeri Sembilan and Selangor). Again the PKR and UMNO got their backsides kicked. DAP did not do as well either. 

SO WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN THE NEXT GENERAL ELECTIONS IN LATE 2026 OR 2027? THIS IS WHY YOU MUST PAY CLOSE ATTENTION HERE.

Here is a graph that maps UMNO's electoral performance against Malaysia's Global Corruption Ranking (taken from Transparency International) over the General Election years from 2004 until 2022. 

Why UMNO? For two simple reasons.

1. Simply because UMNO was the ruling coalition from 2004 until 2018. And then again from circa 2021 (Ismail Sabri) until today 2025 (unity gomen). So UMNO had/has the most to gain or lose.

2.  Regardless of whether UMNO was/is in power or not ALL THE FAILED UMNO POLICIES OF THE PAST 55 YEARS (FROM 1970) ARE STILL IN PLACE. "not an iota, not a dot" of UMNO's failed policies have been changed. 

The Bible says:  Matthew 5:17-18, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished

Rewording this to fit the policies of ALL the ruling parties in Malaysia from 1970 until today: "Do not think that I have come to abolish the old UMNO policies or their leaders; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the old UMNO policies until all is DESTROYED. 

Having said that, please look at the graph. The vertical blue colored bars chart the number of Parliamentary seats won by UMNO from the 2004 GE until 2022 GE. UMNO has gone from over 100 Parliamentary seats in 2004 to only 26 seats in 2022. In 18 years UMNO lost over 75% of their Parliamentary seats. It is so obvious that UMNO is a dead party. 

 


 

 

In 2004 Malaysia's Global Corruption Ranking was at 39. This was the first General Election under the brand new Abdullah Badawi gomen. Badawi had won over 104 seats for UMNO. Then things immediately started going bad.

By the 2008 General Election under Badawi, Malaysia's Global Corruption Ranking dropped EIGHT PLACES from 39 to 47. And in 2008, for the first time UMNO lost its 2/3 majority in Parliament.  But did they do anything? Did they change any of their obviously failed policies? No they did not.

Remember this No 47 Global Corruption ranking.  In 2008 UMNO suffered a serious  stroke at this number 47. 

In the next GE in 2013 there was a new PM, Najib Razak. Umno's fortunes saw an uptick but the BN as a whole lost even more seats.  And Malaysia's Global Corruption ranking became worse and worse. By 2013 our global corruption ranking dropped further to No. 53. Malaysia had dropped another SIX places from 47 in 2008 to 53 in 2013. Did UMNO change any of their failed policies? Did they try to wipe out corruption? No they did not.

Then came the disaster for UMNO/BN in 2018. UMNO suffered their fatal heart attack. In 2018 Malaysia's Global Corruption Ranking hit an all time low of no 61.  Malaysia's corruption ranking had fallen another EIGHT places from 53 in 2013 to 61 in 2018. For the first time Malaysia's global corruption ranking fell below 60th place. UMNO suffered a fatal heart attack at no. 61. UMNO/BN was kicked out of office.

Note: Corruption was not the single largest reason why UMNO/BN lost political power in 2018. They were just screwing everything up. But corruption played a large role in getting them kicked out of political power. 

In 2018 Dr Mahathir became prime minister again. Over 2019 - 2020 our Global Corruption Ranking improved significantly, we reached no. 51 in global rankings. Dr Mahathir had improved our corruption ranking by TEN places. 

But Dr Mahathir did not deliver any of the promises he made BEFORE the General Elections (except abolish the GST). So he lost popularity and was removed in 2020. Followed by Tan Sri Muhyiddin (till 2021) and Ismail Sabri (till 2022).

By the next General Election in 2022  Malaysia's Global Corruption ranking had deteriorated seriously again to 61.  This was the same fatal heart attack number as in 2018. And so in 2022 there was a hung Parliament. All the political parties lost the elections. NO one won a simple majority.

So remember these global corruption ranking numbers and the year:

  • In 2008  the global corruption ranking was 47, UMNO lost 2/3 majority.
  • In 2018 the global corruption ranking was 61, UMNO lost political power. 
  • In 2022 the global corruption ranking was 61, it was a hung Parliament. 

So based on this past historical data:

If you want to win a simple majority in Parliament, the Global Corruption Ranking must be 50 or below. (Under Dr Mahathir 2.0 circa 2019-2020 it had already improved to 51).

If you want to win a 2/3 majority in Parliament the Global Corruption Ranking must be 47 or lower.

CONCLUSION:

So I want to ask the DAP and your friends - can you take down the Transparency International's Global Corruption Ranking of Malaysia down to below 50 or to below 47 by next year (early polls in 2026) or latest by 2027 ?

Here is my short answer: NO WAY WILL THAT BE POSSIBLE.

Plus you have not done anything to change or abolish any of those really stupid and blood sucking UMNO/BN policies that have been in place in this country for decades now.   

Please read again my earlier post:   UPDATED: DAP's ROCKET EXPLODING?

It is so obvious that UMNO and all their foolish policies are dead.  So DAP if you still hang out with all these dead people, then in 2026 or 2027 you will also get kicked out.  

 


 

'Condolences': PAS says reformasi dead with PM still finance minister










'Condolences': PAS says reformasi dead with PM still finance minister


Published: Dec 16, 2025 5:18 PM
Updated: 8:30 PM



Following Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s announcement of a cabinet reshuffle, a PAS leader offered his “condolences”, mourning what he claimed was the death of reformasi.

PAS information chief Ahmad Fadhli Shaari’s macabre response was based on Anwar’s decision to retain the finance portfolio.

“The new cabinet has finally been announced. The prime minister is still the finance minister. The key promise of ‘reformasi’ has now been officially buried. Condolences,” the Pasir Mas MP said.

Harapan’s 2018 manifesto stated that the prime minister would not hold any other portfolios. This was also why Anwar’s predecessor, Dr Mahathir Mohamad, did not proceed with plans to helm the education portfolio after the 14th general election.

The coalition’s manifesto for the 2022 election did not include such a caveat. At the time, then-economy minister and Anwar’s second-in-command in PKR, Rafizi Ramli, defended the prime minister serving as finance minister as a “suitable move” given the “extraordinary circumstances” of his government.

“In my opinion, it was a tough decision to make, actually. Because it was likely that the various parties that form the government wanted the finance minister post to be on their side.

“For example, if someone from Harapan were appointed finance minister, it could be a problem for BN. And if it is someone from BN, Harapan might not be happy,” he said.

PM-ship not a porfolio

In the same year, Anwar said the prime minister and deputy prime minister holding ministerial portfolios is not a contradiction to the Harapan manifesto.

“I think it is not contradictory (to the manifesto). In my understanding, the prime minister is not considered a portfolio.

“The prime minister generally manages the country, and so does the deputy prime minister. This is not a portfolio,” Anwar told The Star.

Rafizi, who has since resigned from the cabinet after losing to Anwar’s daughter Nurul Izzah in the PKR polls, also expressed hope at the time that it would be a temporary arrangement.


Sabah and Sarawak will leave Malaysia - Koon Yew Yin


Koon Yew Yin's Blog


Sabah and Sarawak will leave Malaysia - Koon Yew Yin



Koon Yew Yin
Publish date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025, 06:17 PM


On 16 September 1963 Malaysia was officially formed, comprising Malaya, Sabah, Sarawak, and Singapore. Singapore later left the federation in 1965.




The result of Sabah State election (PRN17) on 29th Nov. has shaken the entire nation. The people of Sabah have decisively rejected PKR, DAP and Perikatan National (PN).

PKR preached reform, anti-corruption, meritocracy, and multiculturalism for over 30 years.

Yet when the moment came, Rafizi and the so called reformists were sidelined to make way for Nurul Izzah — classic nepotism. PKR has turned into a “father-and-daughter” party.

Out of 12 seats contested, PKR won only one and even that victory came from an imported candidate from another party.

DAP lost ALL 8 seats contested — every single traditional urban stronghold. In Luyang, Warisan crushed Dap with a 6,000-vote majority in a seat DAP once held by 18,000.

This is not just a defeat. This is the first tremor of a political earthquake coming for DAP in Sabah, and perhaps beyond. DAP treated non-Malay voters like your fixed deposit, DAP personal insurance policy.

Perikatan Nasional (PN) contested 41 seats and won only ONE.

Sabah, with more than 70% Muslim population, delivered a resounding rejection of Perikatan National’s brand of radicalism, racism, and religious extremism.

Even PAS candidate backtracked and dared not utter a word about banning alcohol, gambling, concerts, enforcing dress codes, or implementing hudud.

In Peninsular Malaysia, non-Muslims are PAS’ favourite punching bag — easy targets.

In Sabah, PAS didn’t even dare try.

Why? Because Sabah Muslims rejected PAS Semenanjung Taliban-style politics outright.

Sabahan Muslims are tolerant, respectful, progressive, and moderate. They do not weaponize race and religion the way PN does.

That is the true face of Malaysian Islam — and Sabah showed it to the entire country. Sabah is proving that a Muslim-majority state can firmly reject extremist politics.

The result of Sabah State election is reminding the nation what unity, maturity, and true Malaysian values look like.

The old chapter of “Sabah for Sabahans” must now evolve into the next chapter: Borneo for Malaysia.

Sabah and Sarawak — you are the original natives of this land. You have preserved the soul of Malaysia when the peninsula lost its way.

The only beacon of hope left is Borneo.

If Sabah and Sarawak stand united, you are no longer just kingmakers — You can be the architects of Malaysia’s renaissance.

The next Sarawak state election must be held by 10 April 2027 at the latest, but it could be called earlier — possibly in 2026 — if the state assembly is dissolved before its full term.

When Sarawak holds its state election, the people of Sarawak will follow the people of Sabah to vote out the Perikatan National’s brand of radicalism, racism, and religious extremism.

Why Sabah and Sarawak will leave Malaysia?

The 5% Royalty Issue

Sabah & Sarawak: They produce most of Malaysia’s oil and gas, yet under the Petroleum Development Act (1974), PETRONAS owns and controls all petroleum resources.

Royalty: States receive only 5% of gross revenue from oil and gas sales.

Discontent: Many in Sabah and Sarawak argue this is unfair, given their resource wealth and development needs.

On 16 September 1963 Malaysia was officially formed, comprising Malaya, Sabah, Sarawak, and Singapore. Singapore later left the federation in 1965. Based on the above facts, Sabah and Sarawak will soon leave Malaysia because the Government has taken the unfair advantage for too long.




China is very short of oil and currently is buying oil and gas from Russia, Iran and many countries in the middle east. If Sabah and Sarawak invite China to take over Petronas oil extraction, China will pay the full current price and not 5%.

In fact, China can save transport cost because Sabah and Sarawak are much nearer to China than countries in the Middle East.


Singapore’s rapid rise - Koon Yew Yin


Koon Yew Yin's Blog


Singapore’s rapid rise - Koon Yew Yin



Koon Yew Yin
Publish date: Mon, 15 Dec 2025, 04:33 PM


Malaysia was officially founded on 16 September 1963 with the formation of the Federation of Malaysia, which initially included:

Malaya (the 11 states on the peninsula) Singapore

Sabah (then called North Borneo) Sarawak

This union was created to bring together territories under one federation after independence from British colonial rule.


Timeline of Key Events



Why Singapore joined (1963): To gain independence from Britain while benefiting from a larger federation.

Why Singapore left (1965): Tensions over political representation, economic competition, and racial policies led to separation.

Bottom Line: Malaysia was founded on 16 September 1963 with Singapore included, but Singapore left just two years later on 9 August 1965 to become independent.

Singapore’s rapid rise from a poor, resource-scarce city-state in the 1960s to a global financial hub today is often explained by its guiding principles of Meritocracy, Pragmatism, and Honesty (MPH). These values shaped governance, economic policy, and social trust, enabling efficient leadership, disciplined development, and global competitiveness.


The MPH Formula Explained



How MPH Translated into Rapid Development

Economic Transformation: From a GDP per capita of less than USD 320 in the 1960s to over USD 60,000 today, about 190 times.

Global Trade Hub: Pragmatic policies turned Singapore into one of the busiest ports and aviation centres worldwide.

Education & Talent: Meritocracy ensured world class education and nurtured skilled professionals, fueling innovation.

Clean Governance: Honesty and anti-corruption measures made Singapore one of the least corrupt nations, boosting investor confidence.

Social Cohesion: Meritocracy and fairness helped maintain harmony in a multi-ethnic society.
Strategic Lessons

Adaptability: Pragmatism allowed Singapore to pivot quickly—e.g., from labour-intensive industries to high-tech and finance.

Trust Capital: Honesty built credibility, both domestically and internationally.

Talent Utilization: Meritocracy ensured that leadership and opportunities were based on competence, maximizing human capital.

Bottom Line: Singapore’s success story is not just about economic policies but about embedding MPH—Meritocracy, Pragmatism, and Honesty—into its governance and society. This formula created a virtuous cycle of trust, talent, and adaptability that propelled Singapore into first-world status within a few decades.


Ekonomi MADANI vs. Singapore’s MPH


Strategic Takeaways

Shared DNA: Both frameworks emphasize equity and pragmatism as pillars of resilience.

Governance Divergence: Malaysia’s model leans toward inclusivity and redistribution, while Singapore’s model leans toward efficiency and incorruptibility.

Global Positioning: Malaysia seeks to balance prosperity with fairness; Singapore prioritizes competitiveness and clean governance as its edge.

Bottom Line: Ekonomi MADANI and Singapore’s MPH formula share common ground in equity and pragmatism, but diverge in governance style—Malaysia focusing on inclusivity and redistribution, Singapore on efficiency and incorruptibility. Together, they illustrate two distinct pathways to national advancement in Southeast Asia.

Singapore consistently ranks as one of the least corrupt nations globally, scoring 84 out of 100 in Transparency International's 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI), placing it third behind Denmark and Finland, and first in Asia, highlighting strong public sector integrity.

This consistent high ranking makes Singapore a leading example of integrity in the Asia Pacific region.

On February 11, 2025, Transparency International (TI) announced that Malaysia scored 50 points (50%) and ranked 57th out of 180 countries in the Corruption Perceptions Index (CPI). This ranking and score remained unchanged from 2023.

Official Website: Prime Minister’s Office of Malaysia: General Contact Email (PMO): webmaster@pmo.gov.my

Official Website: Prime Minister’s Office Singapore: General Contact Email (PMO): contactus@pmo.gov.sg

Sabah’s untapped wealth: RM30b a year possible if constitutional entitlements honoured, says Jeffrey Kitingan





Sabah’s untapped wealth: RM30b a year possible if constitutional entitlements honoured, says Jeffrey Kitingan



STAR president Datuk Seri Jeffrey Kitingan said the RM6.43 billion revenue projected under the Sabah 2026 Budget was only a fraction of what the state is constitutionally entitled to, citing long-standing failures to implement key financial provisions under the Federal Constitution. — Bernama pic

Tuesday, 16 Dec 2025 12:43 PM MYT


KOTA KINABALU, Dec 16 — Sabah’s annual revenue could exceed RM30 billion if all constitutional entitlements owed to the state are fully implemented and collected, said Parti Solidariti Tanah Airku (STAR) president Datuk Seri Jeffrey Kitingan.

Kitingan said the RM6.43 billion revenue projected under the Sabah 2026 Budget was only a fraction of what the state is constitutionally entitled to, citing long-standing failures to implement key financial provisions under the Federal Constitution.

“In fact, Sabah’s revenue for 2026 could potentially exceed RM30 billion if all revenues belonging to Sabah under the Constitution are fulfilled and paid,” he said during the Sabah State Assembly sitting today.

He pointed to the long-delayed 40 per cent special grant under Articles 112C and 112D of the Constitution, as well as Sabah’s rights to collect import and excise duties on petroleum products and export duties on crude oil.


He said Sabah is entitled to collect import and excise duties on petroleum products under the Tenth Schedule of the Constitution, which could yield at least RM1 billion annually — compared to the RM120 million currently collected.

He added that Sabah also has the right to impose export duties on crude oil in lieu of oil royalties of up to 10 per cent ad valorem, which could generate about RM3.6 billion a year.

“This means the total could reach RM30 billion,” he said.


Kitingan also pointed out that Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had previously stated that the federal government collected RM10.2 billion from Sabah in 2023 — a figure he said was understated.

“If customs collections are correctly accounted for, the total collected from Sabah in 2023 would reach at least RM11.5 billion,” he said, adding that this did not include taxes paid by international oil companies, major palm oil corporations, or federal agencies operating in the state.

“I would like to ask whether these constitutional revenues can be included in the 2026 Budget, since they are Sabah’s rightful revenues and should be collected and accounted for,” he said, addressing the state finance minister.

Addressing claims that returning the 40 per cent share would bankrupt the Federal Government, he dismissed the argument.

“That money is Sabah’s own money. It is not federal money or money from other states,” he said.

The Tambunan assemblyman said one of the main reasons Sabah has failed to collect these revenues in the past was political weakness and reluctance to assert its rights.

Despite being labelled Malaysia’s poorest state, he said that Sabah was in fact resource-rich but had been systematically deprived of its rightful wealth.

“The reality is that Sabah and its people are actually wealthy. They have merely been impoverished and misled, and a large part of this is contributed by our own leaders,” he said.

He cited an October 17 High Court ruling which affirmed Sabah’s entitlement to the 40 per cent revenue collected by the federal government and found that mandatory reviews had not been conducted since 1974, underscoring that the right had always existed.

To secure Sabah’s financial rights, Kitingan proposed the creation of a new revenue collection mechanism, including a consolidated account in Sabah where all federal collections from the state would be deposited pending distribution under constitutional requirements.

Jeffrey concluded by urging the Sabah government to establish a special bipartisan MA63 Cabinet committee to oversee negotiations and safeguard the state’s constitutional rights.

“Given the importance of these issues, a special Cabinet committee comprising both government and opposition members should be formed to protect Sabah’s interests,” he said.

Going global: Penang’s Muslim-friendly eateries can expand with halal certification, says CM

 




Going global: Penang’s Muslim-friendly eateries can expand with halal certification, says CM



Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow said halal certification can open up more opportunities for food and beverage businesses, not only in Malaysia, but in South-east Asia, China, Europe and even the United States. — Bernama pic

Tuesday, 16 Dec 2025 12:37 PM MYT


GEORGE TOWN, Dec 16 — Muslim-friendly food and beverage establishments and producers in Penang have the potential of expanding into global markets if they look into obtaining halal certification, said Penang Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow.

He said halal certification can open up more opportunities for food and beverage businesses, not only in Malaysia, but in South-east Asia, China, Europe and even the United States.

“We cannot remain complacent in the current position especially with a larger market outside our country so food entrepreneurs must look at halal certification as an opportunity to break into the industry overseas,” he said.

He said Malaysia has the advantage of being known as a country with a trusted halal certification system.

“We have a good ecosystem so we can leverage on this advantage and if we don’t, other entrepreneurs from other countries will seize this opportunity to enter into this market,” he said in a press conference after officiating the FoodPreneur Expo 2025 at Setia Spice Convention Centre here.

Chow added that franchises from China such as Mixue are embracing halal certification because they know this will open the door to the global halal market.

“Penang has many Muslim-friendly restaurants with strong potential, but many have not yet obtained halal certification, often because the process is not fully understood or is seen as time-consuming,” he said.

He hoped that Jakim and Jabatan Hal Ehwal Agama Islam Pulau Pinang can continue to work closely with local food operators and find ways to reduce bureaucracy or “red tape” to ensure the certification process is efficient.

“This is so that more businesses can confidently enter the halal market which is expanding very rapidly both regionally and globally,” he said.

He said halal certification presents an opportunity to businesses as locally, the supply chain ecosystem is strong enough to support the industry from equipment to ingredients to packaging.

“We have a mature halal industry ecosystem to support growth in this industry so more food businesses should seize this opportunity to go into this industry.


When stories defeat truth in Malaysian politics











Thomas Fann
Published: Dec 16, 2025 6:00 PM
Updated: 9:08 PM




COMMENT | Malaysia does not lack information. We have news portals, social media, videos, podcasts, and endless WhatsApp messages.

Yet public debates over issues feel more emotional, more confused, and more divided than before. The problem is not ignorance. It is the weakening role of truth in public life.

It is a sad reality that modern societies do not run on facts alone. They run on stories and narratives. Stories about identity, fear, pride, and blame can mobilise large groups of people better than facts or truth.

Facts or truth are often slow, complex, uncomfortable, and, honestly, boring. On the other hand, stories are fast, simple, powerful, and newsworthy. When stories spread faster than facts, truth begins to lose its influence.

Many public debates are framed around race, religion, and loyalty instead of evidence or outcomes. Economic hardship is explained through ethnic stories. Policy failure is turned into a political threat.

Calls for reform are painted as naivety or worse, attacks on tradition. These stories work because they stir emotion and unite groups. But they also shut down honest discussion.




The long-running debate over the recognition of the Unified Examination Certificate (UEC) is a good example. Instead of a calm discussion based on facts - student outcomes, workforce needs, national unity, and education standards - the issue is often framed as a zero-sum fight over identity.

Supporters are accused of undermining the national language and identity. Opponents are accused of being anti-education, anti-merit, and ignorant. In the noise, basic questions are lost: What does the evidence say? What safeguards are needed? What serves the country in the long term?

Politics rewards emotion over policy

Policy debates suffer from the same reason. Issues like education quality, cost of living, corruption, and productivity require patience and trade-offs. They demand that citizens accept complex solutions, requiring sacrifices and patience.

Stories do not. They offer simple answers and clear enemies. In today’s media environment, simple messages almost always win.

Elections reflect this imbalance. Malaysia’s elections are competitive, but public debate during campaigns is weak. Voters hear many claims, but little clear comparison of policies or long-term impact.




Short clips matter more than election manifestos. Emotional messages spread faster than responsible factual statements.

Social media has made this problem worse. New tools allow messages to be generated quickly and shared widely. Outrage can be created on demand. False authority can look real. None of this requires truth. It only needs attention.

In such a system, truth is not banned. It is simply ignored. With the advent of AI, truth faces an existential threat.

Trust in institutions has also weakened. Courts, Parliament, universities, the civil service, and the media are meant to act as neutral referees.

But when people see them as biased or partisan, their words lose weight. Evidence becomes opinion. Accountability becomes persecution. Once referees are no longer trusted, public debate turns into a shouting match.

Restoring trust and reason

The deeper problem lies in education. For many years, our system has focused on exams and correct answers. We do not train students enough to question sources, test claims, or live with uncertainty.

Many grow up knowledgeable but not wise, emotional but not reflective. This makes society easy to divide and easy to mislead.




What strengthens truth in a democracy? Not censorship. Not fear. Not louder slogans.

Truth grows when institutions are fair, transparent, and consistent. When data is shared openly, even when it is uncomfortable. When schools teach how knowledge is tested, not just what to memorise.

When disagreement is allowed without turning into hatred. And when leaders resist the urge to score political points and start thinking of national interest and unity.

Malaysia is not collapsing. But we are at a crossroad.

If we choose stories alone, we will remain divided. If we rebuild respect for evidence, institutions, and honest debate, we can disagree without tearing the country apart.

Truth may be slow and quiet, but it is still our best guide. And with patience and courage, it can regain its place at the centre of our public life.



THOMAS FANN is a former Bersih chairperson and writes as a private citizen who still believes in ordinary Malaysians - whom he believes are decent, fair-minded, and share a common desire to live in peace and harmony.


Killing Toy Shops – How Trump’s Tariffs Stole Christmas





Killing Toy Shops – How Trump’s Tariffs Stole Christmas


December 15th, 2025 by financetwitter


Jennifer Bergman sat up in bed one morning in June 2025 and opened her laptop to the month’s bills. It was five months into America’s latest tariff war, and the numbers no longer added up. Rent was due in two weeks, and her suppliers wanted payment now. She called her landlord, saying – “I can’t do this any more.”


Her toy store, West Side Kids, was a beloved Manhattan shop that her mother had started in 1981 and a neighbourhood fixture where children still pressed their noses against the window each December. Her nightmare, just like many small businesses, was about to begin thanks to the President of the United States.



When the Trump administration announced a 10% tariff on Chinese imports in March 2025, she was at Toy Fair, an annual industry conference. Phones buzzed across the convention floor as buyers and manufacturers tried to make sense of what the new tax would mean. “Don’t worry,” suppliers told her. “We’ve got enough stock to last the year.” They would keep prices low, they assured their customers.



By April, however, that promise had vanished. Tariffs on Chinese goods climbed to 145% – a newly announced 125% plus a 20% tariff aimed at curbing the flow of fentanyl precursors into the US. This “fentanyl” tariff has been halved to 10%, at least temporarily, following US-China talks in October.



Each night, long after the last customer drifted out, Ms Bergman paced the aisles with a pricing gun. She peeled off tags and pressed on new ones as suppliers upped their prices. She had been negotiating to sell the business, hoping someone else might carry it forward. But after the tariff increase, two potential buyers vanished.



When no relief turned up, she began skipping her own pay cheques to cover her staff salaries. By June, she was at breaking point. “I realised I couldn’t pay my July rent,” she said. On July 31, she brought in pizza and said goodbye to her staff. Then she turned off the lights and let the silence swallow the store she had grown up with.




{ A Christmas Economy Split }

China remains the world’s largest producer and exporter of children’s products and toys, accounting for nearly 80% of global supply. No other country comes close to matching its scale or efficiency. When tariffs on Chinese goods soared above 100% in spring 2025, the shockwaves rippled through every corner of the market, from the factories of Guangdong to the shelves of small-town toy shops in Georgia.



Americans buy roughly three billion toys a year, supporting an industry that employs nearly 700,000 people, according to The Toy Association. Small businesses make up 96% of that ecosystem. But big-box retailers hold over 50% of the industry’s market share, and the tariffs did not hit all retailers equally. The bikes and scooters that line the toy aisles at retail giants Walmart and Target, for instance, are on sale for as little as US$14.





“Big-box stores have really deep pockets, hence they can plan much further ahead. They can store more than we can,” – said Ms Bergman, adding that small businesses also don’t get the tax breaks or lobbying power of the big industry retailers. In an April survey of more than 400 Toy Association member companies, nearly half of small and mid-sized toy makers said the tariffs were severe enough to threaten their survival.


Yet the same trade war that forced Ms Bergman to close her doors has barely dented toy prices at the industry’s biggest players, which buy in such volume that they can stockpile inventory and spread costs across dozens of product lines. The result is a Christmas economy split in two: one for the giants and another for the shopkeepers who once defined holiday shopping on Main Street.



In April, President Donald Trump declared “Liberation Day” as he unveiled sweeping double-digit tariffs around the world, arguing that the old trade order “disadvantaged U.S. workers” and drained the country’s finances. China was a key target. An initial 10% tariff launched in January ballooned to over 100%. China retaliated immediately, triggering a nearly year-long cycle of tit-for-tat escalation involving tariffs, sanctions and export controls.





Through it all, toy retailers had one thing on their minds – Christmas. While Washington and Beijing traded blows, shop owners leafed through wholesale catalogues with snow-dusted displays and piles of toys whose prices were rising by the day. Across Washington DC, from Capitol Hill’s wreath-covered row houses to the festive storefronts in Cleveland Park, the city was settling into its holiday rhythm even as small toy shops refreshed tariff alerts like weather reports.


The holiday season accounts for as much as a quarter of annual toy sales. To keep shelves stocked for 2025, independent retailers needed to place orders in the spring and summer, precisely when the trade war was at its most volatile. But Mr Trump dismissed their concerns. He said – “Maybe the children will have two dolls instead of 30 dolls, you know, and maybe the teo dolls will cost a couple of bucks more than they would normally.”



Fewer dolls and goods made their way into the country in the months that followed. By August, U.S. imports had sunk 5% to US$340 billion, government data showed, after new duties on goods and services from nearly 90 countries took effect.





{ Retail’s Growing Divide }

Mr Trump has wielded tariffs as a foreign-policy stick to push other countries to bend to U.S. demands, but the economic fallout hurts American businesses. Tariffs are paid by U.S. importers, not by the government being targeted – contrary to the president’s propaganda lies that China would pay for the tariffs. For the toy industry, that burden fell on small retailers.


“There is no ‘free tariff money’ from foreigners,” We Pay the Tariffs, a coalition fighting on behalf of small American businesses to end the tariffs, wrote in an open letter to Congress. “Years of hard work, late nights and sweat equity to build our businesses, create good jobs and contribute to our communities will be wiped out in the very near future. Waiting six or 12 months for a potential solution is not viable. Many of our businesses will no longer exist.”



Over the past 20 years, the gulf between big-box chains and independent retailers has widened dramatically, reshaping how Americans shopped long before the tariff war began. Consolidation accelerated in the early 2000s as companies like Walmart and Target expanded nationally, using scale to negotiate lower wholesale prices, invest in sophisticated logistics networks and offer year-round discounts that small stores could never match.





As these chains built sprawling distribution centres, they set new expectations for prices and convenience, gradually eroding the customer base of local shops that relied on steady foot traffic and more competitive margins. The rise of e-commerce deepened the divide, and expedite the death of small business owners.


Amazon’s rapid ascent in the late 2000s introduced a model built on ultra-efficient fulfilment, free shipping and near-limitless assortment. Consumers grew accustomed to comparing prices in seconds and buying products from their phones, often at a steep discount. Independent retailers, many without the capital or technical expertise to build e-commerce platforms, watched their businesses shrink. The tariffs only intensified the burn.



Even those who did adapt found themselves competing not only on price but on speed, convenience and online visibility, metrics where national chains and online marketplaces held the overwhelming advantage. Independent retailers pivoted to speciality products and community engagement, but by the mid-2010s, their market share had declined across nearly every consumer category.





In this transformed landscape, tariffs only widened an already lopsided playing field. Large chains entered the trade war with decades of built-in advantages – diversified supply chains, the ability to absorb cost shocks and the leverage to negotiate directly with manufacturers around the world.


“They have some flexibility in terms of where they adjust prices,” said economics professor John Horn of Washington University in St Louis, Missouri. “They are thinking about the entire amount that you spend when you walk in the store.”



A Target shopper who buys a toy might also leave with groceries, shampoo or cleaning supplies. That broad basket allows large retailers to raise prices in one aisle to subsidise discounts in another. Independent stores, selling a less diversified basket of goods, have none of those buffers. Small shops are forced to raise prices or cut products altogether.





{ Rubik’s Cube Maths }

Few products capture the growing divide between retail giants and independent stores better than the Phantom Rubik’s Cube, which is a spin-off of the classic children’s puzzle and whose colours appear only when touched. Ms Erica Card, the toy store’s purchaser, knew it was impossible to raise the price too much.


“We are debating – does it still make sense to carry the toy at this price, when Target is selling it for half of what we are?” she said. “We end up having to accept less of a margin than we normally would, in order to stay competitive and still service a customer with something that they like.” At Target, the same toy was on sale for less than US$10.





It’s a price gap that reflects the structural advantages, scale and sourcing power that small shops simply cannot match. Inside a Washington DC Walmart, Ms Mary Simpson, 60, browsed toys for her three grandchildren. “That’s cheap!” she said as she picked up a US$10 Barbie doll. But the relief doesn’t extend across the store, where she’s noticed prices climbing.



“It’s everything – clothes, food, especially food,” she said. She now waits for sales to afford what she needs. For Mr Maurice Hill, a 36-year-old screenwriter buying toys for his two young children, price stability is why he shops at Walmart. “At least I know what to expect,” – he said, examining FurReal toys for his six-year-old. “It’s consistent.”


{ The Cost Of Doing Business }

The effects of the trade war have not been limited to American retailers. Across the global supply chain, which may start from factory floors in Asia and end with distributors in the American Midwest, Mr Trump’s tariff regime is upending how people, companies and even governments choose to do business with the United States.





In August, more than 30 countries and several major shipping companies suspended or restricted parcel deliveries to the U.S. because of the tariffs, now forced even on small, low-value packages with the expiration of the US$800 duty-free “de minimis” rule. Manufacturers that once treated the American market as the cornerstone of their annual planning are rethinking their strategies, weighed by the cost of recalibrating month by month, adjusting quotes and renegotiating contracts to fit shifting tariff bands.



Some companies, especially those operating on razor-thin margins, may well put the brakes on their U.S. sales altogether, worried that a single policy change could erase a year’s profit or leave them with unsellable stock. Australian apparel company Apero Label stopped shipping to the U.S. in autumn, despite its U.S. sales representing a third of its overall revenue, until it could work out a delivery solution around the tariffs.


Others are quietly diversifying their customer base towards Europe, South-east Asia and Latin America. Mr Bjorn Gulden, chief executive of Adidas, said in a results call in May that the company will chase growth elsewhere, noting that “we can currently gain more momentum in other markets” and can “finance the losses” in the U.S. by outperforming abroad.




Across the Pacific, China’s enormous toy manufacturing machine, the engine behind nearly every product on U.S. toy shelves, was also feeling the strain. In Guangdong province, the traditional centre of the industry, factory owners said they felt “helpless” watching U.S. orders whipsaw with each tariff announcement. Some lost as much as a third of their US-bound business overnight. Others shortened work weeks or shifted workers to temporary contracts to avoid layoffs.



In Shantou’s Chenghai district, a hub for toy exporters, officials offered short-term relief like easier access to credit for factories impacted by the tariffs, and plans to boost domestic consumption. These measures softened the immediate shock but could not resolve the deeper problem of an unpredictable American market. Beijing, meanwhile, leaned into its own weighty economic leverage to signal that it would not be cowed.


In retaliation, China withheld soya bean purchases and threatened sweeping limits on rare-earth exports, minerals essential for smartphones, electric cars and US defence systems. These moves underscored its willingness to match Washington blow for blow. In October, President Trump met Chinese President Xi Jinping in Busan, South Korea, in a bid to halt the escalation.




In unusually pointed language, Mr Xi urged – or rather lectured – Mr Trump to learn from the “recent twists and turns” of the trade war. “Both sides should consider the bigger picture and focus on the long-term benefits of cooperation, rather than falling into a vicious circle of mutual retaliation,” Mr Xi said after the meeting.



After the talks, Mr Trump cut tariffs to 47% and called a truce on further escalation. China agreed to suspend restrictions on rare-earth mineral exports for one year, a move that largely restored the status quo while allowing both leaders to claim victory at home. But signs of strain were mounting in the U.S. economy.


Target lowered its annual profit outlook and warned of declining quarterly sales, citing shoppers squeezed by tariffs, rising living costs and layoffs. Consumer confidence fell to near-record lows in November, worsened by a prolonged government shutdown. Mr Trump’s approval rating plummeted to 38%, the lowest since his return to office.




Amid growing political pressure, the administration announced it would scrap tariffs on 200 agricultural goods, including beef, tomatoes, bananas, orange juice and coffee. The Trump administration announced a US$12 billion bailout fund for farmers on December 9, as the agricultural sector has been hard hit by tariff fallout But trade groups hoping toys would be spared were disappointed.



Some companies have turned to the courts for help. Family-owned educational toy maker Learning Resources, along with groups representing 700 other small businesses, sued the administration, arguing the tariffs were unconstitutional and causing widespread economic harm. Costco too is suing the Trump administration over its tariffs, arguing that the White House has exceeded its executive authority.


“Tariff volatility has meant job eliminations, company-wide furloughs and product delays and cancellations,” Mr Price Johnson, the chief operating officer of Cephalofair Games, a board game manufacturer, wrote in the filing. “We are a U.S. company. We have U.S. employees. We have U.S. families. We pay these US-imposed tariffs.”




The lawsuit contends that the US Constitution gives Congress, not the president, authority over trade and commerce. The case has reached the Supreme Court after three lower courts concluded the tariffs were unlawful, with a ruling expected in December. If the Supreme Court rules against Trump’s tariffs, it could force the U.S. to refund some of the billions it has collected.



{ Bringing Jobs Back To America }

Mr Trump was elected on a promise to revitalise American manufacturing and hoped to incentivise companies to bring more jobs back to U.S. shores. He got one – in China. Beijing reported a goods trade surplus of more than US$1 trillion for the year through November, while manufacturing output in the first 10 months of the year was up 7% compared with the same period in 2024.



In his January inauguration speech, he said tariffs would allow the United States to become a “manufacturing nation once again”. But the sector keeps shedding jobs. According to a study by the Center for American Progress, a policy research institute, the manufacturing sector lost 12,000 jobs in August 2025, bringing the total to 42,000 since April.



Convincing manufacturers to return production to the U.S. is a tough sell. Rebuilding supply chains would require years of planning, major capital investment, worker training and new infrastructure. For investors who do not know how long the tariffs will last, it is an expensive gamble. Mr Jay Foreman is the CEO of Basic Fun, a company that makes classic American toys like Tonka Trucks, Lincoln Logs and Care Bears.



He started his career working in a Brooklyn toy factory that made teddy bears and other stuffed animals. He was one of the first US.. industry players to go to China, months after the deadly demonstrations in Tiananmen Square in 1989. When Mr Trump was elected, Mr Foreman decided that no matter which policy decisions came about, he would stick with China.



“I really just sort of planted my flag and said, I’m sticking with China, I’ve been doing this too long,” – he said. But when tariffs climbed to 145%, he stopped shipping toys and put on a hiring freeze. The tariffs transformed what was supposed to be a record year for the company’s sales into a difficult one, and cut expected profits by 20%.



Mr Foreman believes Mr Trump’s plan to bring manufacturing back to the US would never work for toys. For one thing, the labour supply just isn’t there. Mr Trump’s immigration crackdown ensured that many of those willing to work a factory job were being kicked out of the country. “You’re not going to set up light, industrial, low-skill factories here and try to move people from high school into toy factories selling teddy bears or painting eyeballs on Barbie dolls.”



In China, Mr Foreman had watched the government help build factories from the ground up, but in the U.S., the support never materialised. In 2017, Mr Trump touted a US$10 billion manufacturing project with Foxconn, the world’s largest electronics manufacturer, promising 13,000 jobs. By 2021, the company had scrapped most of its plans.



“If we can’t make iPhones, we can’t make a teddy bear,” – Mr Foreman said. For small retailers, that reality has defined the past year. The tariff war rewired supply chains, inflated costs and wiped out shops like Ms Bergman’s, while the factories that were supposed to change stayed exactly where they were.



Her storefront is dark now, but the maths that crushed it still governs the industry – higher prices, unpredictable orders, margins shaved to the bone. Tariffs marketed as a way to burden Beijing instead destroyed the livelihood of people like Ms Bergman, small retailers with no leverage, lobbyists or room for error.



“I know it wasn’t my fault. I know I didn’t fail my mum,” – said Ms Bergman. To her, the blame lay squarely on the President’s shoulders. “It is just a money grab. They are gambling with our money.” But it’s too late to cry over spilled milk.