Without question, this year's World Economic Forum in Davos proved the most "spectacular" in decades, featuring not only sharp confrontations among high-level politicians but effectively announcing a rupture with the global political and economic rules that have governed international relations for years.
The annual World Economic Forum, or WEF, gathering in the Swiss ski resort brings together leaders from business, politics, academia, and media to discuss the world's most pressing challenges, serving as a barometer for political and economic trends around the world.
Trump's address delivered his characteristic mockery and humiliation of America's traditional European allies, claiming Denmark surrendered to the Nazis after just six hours of resistance and declaring that without America, European leaders would now be speaking German mixed with Japanese. He proclaimed Europe was destroying itself and announced America would no longer provide open markets and military protection to "free-riding" European allies.
Though the content reflected typical Trump rhetoric, delivering these remarks at this venue—the largest WEF in history with 70 national leaders and nearly 1,000 CEOs in attendance—effectively declared that the postwar global political and economic system established under American leadership would no longer receive U.S. support under the Trump administration.
"We are here at Davos to make one thing crystal clear: With President Trump, capitalism has a new sheriff in town," Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick bluntly announced.
European responses proved remarkably weak. French President Emmanuel Macron's speech referenced preferring "respect over thugs" and the "rule of law over violence," condemning "new imperialism or neo-colonialism."
German Chancellor Friedrich Merz criticized America's "complete reshaping of its foreign and security policy" and the Trump administration's dangerous "might makes right" approach. Neither leader offered concrete strategies to counter Trump's bullying.
Another significant development emerged when Trump joined 19 nations, primarily from the Middle East, in signing an agreement establishing a Board of Peace. Ostensibly proposed by America to oversee Gaza's reconstruction under theauthorization of the UN, this commission's significance likely extends far beyond its stated mandate. International legal scholars believe Trump intends to use this mechanism to sideline or replace UN functions, as the commission's jurisdiction appears to expand to virtually all international affairs.
The greater controversy lies in Trump's structuring of the board as a personal foundation under his control. According to the organization's charter, Trump himself serves as chairman, rather than the U.S. President. Even after leaving office in three years, he would retain the chairmanship with sweeping powers: no one may join or be expelled without his approval, all decisions rest with him, and he appoints his own successor.
Trump's ambitions are unlikely to be realized, as major powers such as France, Germany, Britain, Russia, China, India, and Japan have not yet joined and are unlikely to do so. In an era of renewed great power politics, relying solely on current small and medium-sized member states limits the Peace Commission's ability to extend beyond Gaza reconstruction into broader international affairs. Moreover, political reality dictates that when Trump leaves office in three years, even currently eager Middle Eastern participants will likely lose interest without presidential backing.
（Related：
China’s Top Generals Fall as Xi Tightens Grip on the PLA—and Tests Its Crisis Readiness
｜
Latest
）
As Trump announced the end of the existing global political and economic system at WEF, others pointed toward alternative paths. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney delivered a widely praised speech acknowledging that countries like Canada have prospered under the rules-based international order for decades.
However, he warned that the era of globalization andmultilateral institutions on which middle powers depend for survival may be drawing to a close.
Carney's response was to call on middle powers to unite against Trump's America, "because if we're not at the table, we're on the menu." The effectiveness of this approach remains to be seen.
Amidst WEF's spectacular confrontations, China kept a low profile, appearing more like a stable, predictable great power as Trump's America seeks to overthrow the existing international order.
Ironically, the EU's original "de-risking" strategy, which aimed to reduce excessiveeconomic dependence on China in critical supply chains, now finds itself requiring recalibration toward America, exemplifying the inherent volatility of international politics.
