܀𓂃 Kaori Fujisawa 𓈒𓏸𑁍
@layla1988.bsky.social
Forensic and Litigation Consulting
Paralegal
Anti-Money Laundering Counter Fraud, Risk Compliance and Audit Analyst
Criminal Intelligence Analyst
Junior Cyber & Electronic Warfare Modeling & Simulation Engineer
Electronic Warfare Test Engineer
Paralegal
Anti-Money Laundering Counter Fraud, Risk Compliance and Audit Analyst
Criminal Intelligence Analyst
Junior Cyber & Electronic Warfare Modeling & Simulation Engineer
Electronic Warfare Test Engineer
Pinned
I respect everyone's different political positions, beliefs, political ideas, and I will listen
—I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
—I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Honestly?
Given the entire week of Trump-era chaos, contradictory messaging, and Washington scolding allies while selling H200 to Beijing…
This one clean, unambiguous “Our commitment to Japan is unwavering” line from U.S. State Department is so absurdly out of sync with reality that yes—
Given the entire week of Trump-era chaos, contradictory messaging, and Washington scolding allies while selling H200 to Beijing…
This one clean, unambiguous “Our commitment to Japan is unwavering” line from U.S. State Department is so absurdly out of sync with reality that yes—
December 10, 2025 at 10:02 AM
Honestly?
Given the entire week of Trump-era chaos, contradictory messaging, and Washington scolding allies while selling H200 to Beijing…
This one clean, unambiguous “Our commitment to Japan is unwavering” line from U.S. State Department is so absurdly out of sync with reality that yes—
Given the entire week of Trump-era chaos, contradictory messaging, and Washington scolding allies while selling H200 to Beijing…
This one clean, unambiguous “Our commitment to Japan is unwavering” line from U.S. State Department is so absurdly out of sync with reality that yes—
The Kremlin likely never imagined that the United States would go this far. The proposal itself will lead nowhere, but it may only deepen the sense of frustration and distrust among the allies.
December 10, 2025 at 8:52 AM
The Kremlin likely never imagined that the United States would go this far. The proposal itself will lead nowhere, but it may only deepen the sense of frustration and distrust among the allies.
This is outsourced deterrence + outsourced appeasement at the same time.
No alliance in the world can function under these conditions.
No alliance in the world can function under these conditions.
U.S. → Allies:
“You must carry more of the defense burden.”
Step 2:
U.S. → China:
“We will help you modernize your military-AI systems — for a fee.”
Step 3:
Allies → ??
“So we must deter the PLA while you finance PLA acceleration?”
“You must carry more of the defense burden.”
Step 2:
U.S. → China:
“We will help you modernize your military-AI systems — for a fee.”
Step 3:
Allies → ??
“So we must deter the PLA while you finance PLA acceleration?”
December 10, 2025 at 7:14 AM
This is outsourced deterrence + outsourced appeasement at the same time.
No alliance in the world can function under these conditions.
No alliance in the world can function under these conditions.
1/
Why should Japan or the Netherlands take political and economic pain
to block SME exports
when Washington is openly profiting from chip exports?
2/ You cannot outsource deterrence while funding the adversary’s capabilities
This is the contradiction that destroys allied trust.
Why should Japan or the Netherlands take political and economic pain
to block SME exports
when Washington is openly profiting from chip exports?
2/ You cannot outsource deterrence while funding the adversary’s capabilities
This is the contradiction that destroys allied trust.
December 10, 2025 at 6:49 AM
1/
Why should Japan or the Netherlands take political and economic pain
to block SME exports
when Washington is openly profiting from chip exports?
2/ You cannot outsource deterrence while funding the adversary’s capabilities
This is the contradiction that destroys allied trust.
Why should Japan or the Netherlands take political and economic pain
to block SME exports
when Washington is openly profiting from chip exports?
2/ You cannot outsource deterrence while funding the adversary’s capabilities
This is the contradiction that destroys allied trust.
Everything in this post relies on one unproven assumption:
The United States would actually go to war with China over Taiwan.
There is zero explicit commitment from Washington.
In fact, recent U.S. behavior creates greater uncertainty:
1/Retrenchment signals
2/Burden-shifting rhetoric
The United States would actually go to war with China over Taiwan.
There is zero explicit commitment from Washington.
In fact, recent U.S. behavior creates greater uncertainty:
1/Retrenchment signals
2/Burden-shifting rhetoric
The NYT keeps asking whether the U.S. military is ready for war with China over Taiwan.
But Washington has offered no indication it would actually fight such a war.
So why not ask the real question?
How does Taiwan defend itself in a world where U.S. intervention is uncertain?
But Washington has offered no indication it would actually fight such a war.
So why not ask the real question?
How does Taiwan defend itself in a world where U.S. intervention is uncertain?
December 10, 2025 at 1:48 AM
Everything in this post relies on one unproven assumption:
The United States would actually go to war with China over Taiwan.
There is zero explicit commitment from Washington.
In fact, recent U.S. behavior creates greater uncertainty:
1/Retrenchment signals
2/Burden-shifting rhetoric
The United States would actually go to war with China over Taiwan.
There is zero explicit commitment from Washington.
In fact, recent U.S. behavior creates greater uncertainty:
1/Retrenchment signals
2/Burden-shifting rhetoric
The NYT keeps asking whether the U.S. military is ready for war with China over Taiwan.
But Washington has offered no indication it would actually fight such a war.
So why not ask the real question?
How does Taiwan defend itself in a world where U.S. intervention is uncertain?
But Washington has offered no indication it would actually fight such a war.
So why not ask the real question?
How does Taiwan defend itself in a world where U.S. intervention is uncertain?
December 10, 2025 at 1:36 AM
The NYT keeps asking whether the U.S. military is ready for war with China over Taiwan.
But Washington has offered no indication it would actually fight such a war.
So why not ask the real question?
How does Taiwan defend itself in a world where U.S. intervention is uncertain?
But Washington has offered no indication it would actually fight such a war.
So why not ask the real question?
How does Taiwan defend itself in a world where U.S. intervention is uncertain?
Reposted by ܀𓂃 Kaori Fujisawa 𓈒𓏸𑁍
Global fund managers aren’t predicting a Chinese economic recovery — they’re begging for one.
They’re not bullish on China; they’re bullish on the idea that Beijing won’t wreck their trade again.
They’re not bullish on China; they’re bullish on the idea that Beijing won’t wreck their trade again.
December 9, 2025 at 10:51 PM
Global fund managers aren’t predicting a Chinese economic recovery — they’re begging for one.
They’re not bullish on China; they’re bullish on the idea that Beijing won’t wreck their trade again.
They’re not bullish on China; they’re bullish on the idea that Beijing won’t wreck their trade again.
This is delegated deterrence + subsidized adversary modernization — a formula that cannot coexist in any sane national-security doctrine.
December 9, 2025 at 10:21 PM
This is delegated deterrence + subsidized adversary modernization — a formula that cannot coexist in any sane national-security doctrine.
Reposted by ܀𓂃 Kaori Fujisawa 𓈒𓏸𑁍
EU missing Taiwan opportunity to avoid irking ‘big friend’ China, ex-envoy Roy Chun Lee says – Nikkei Asia: ‘“There is literally no trade agenda” between the two sides on securing supply chain resilience, coordination on economic security, technology competitiveness and autonomy, said Roy Lee’
EU missing Taiwan opportunity to avoid irking 'big friend' China: ex-envoy
Taipei's former representative in Brussels, Roy Lee, says US is 'investment black hole'
asia.nikkei.com
December 9, 2025 at 9:49 AM
EU missing Taiwan opportunity to avoid irking ‘big friend’ China, ex-envoy Roy Chun Lee says – Nikkei Asia: ‘“There is literally no trade agenda” between the two sides on securing supply chain resilience, coordination on economic security, technology competitiveness and autonomy, said Roy Lee’
December 9, 2025 at 3:53 PM
This video has exposed the core problem with Trump’s approach: he treats foreign policy not as statecraft, but as a tool for attacking domestic opponents. Instead of questioning why 🇨🇳is using soybean purchases as geopolitical leverage, or why 🇺🇸economic security is vulnerable to such manipulation,
Leavitt: "President Trump convinced President Xi to continue purchasing again American soybeans, which is something China wasn't doing under the last administration because they had no respect for President Biden or the country at the time."
December 9, 2025 at 3:09 PM
This video has exposed the core problem with Trump’s approach: he treats foreign policy not as statecraft, but as a tool for attacking domestic opponents. Instead of questioning why 🇨🇳is using soybean purchases as geopolitical leverage, or why 🇺🇸economic security is vulnerable to such manipulation,
Colby’s thread presents the Trump NSS as a coherent doctrine of “strength,” “realism,” and “burden-sharing,” but the disintegrates the moment you compare the rhetoric with the practical implications.
December 9, 2025 at 2:44 PM
Colby’s thread presents the Trump NSS as a coherent doctrine of “strength,” “realism,” and “burden-sharing,” but the disintegrates the moment you compare the rhetoric with the practical implications.
Japan’s bureaucratic logic:
“Follow the U.S. position → maintain alliance stability.”
But this only works when the U.S. position is coherent, democratic, rule-based, and aligned with Japanese interests.
Under Trump, none of these apply.
“Follow the U.S. position → maintain alliance stability.”
But this only works when the U.S. position is coherent, democratic, rule-based, and aligned with Japanese interests.
Under Trump, none of these apply.
December 9, 2025 at 2:00 PM
Japan’s bureaucratic logic:
“Follow the U.S. position → maintain alliance stability.”
But this only works when the U.S. position is coherent, democratic, rule-based, and aligned with Japanese interests.
Under Trump, none of these apply.
“Follow the U.S. position → maintain alliance stability.”
But this only works when the U.S. position is coherent, democratic, rule-based, and aligned with Japanese interests.
Under Trump, none of these apply.
“China claims Japan is threatening it militarily.
Yet somehow the Japanese Self-Defense Forces remain inside their own territory, while the PLA is parked on everyone else’s doorstep.
Fascinating geography.”
Yet somehow the Japanese Self-Defense Forces remain inside their own territory, while the PLA is parked on everyone else’s doorstep.
Fascinating geography.”
December 9, 2025 at 11:26 AM
“China claims Japan is threatening it militarily.
Yet somehow the Japanese Self-Defense Forces remain inside their own territory, while the PLA is parked on everyone else’s doorstep.
Fascinating geography.”
Yet somehow the Japanese Self-Defense Forces remain inside their own territory, while the PLA is parked on everyone else’s doorstep.
Fascinating geography.”
The letter repeatedly implies that the current administration is:
Not defending Japan appropriately
Penalizing Japan through tariffs at the exact moment Japan is being coerced
Sending a dangerous signal that U.S. allies are on their own
Not defending Japan appropriately
Penalizing Japan through tariffs at the exact moment Japan is being coerced
Sending a dangerous signal that U.S. allies are on their own
December 9, 2025 at 11:00 AM
The letter repeatedly implies that the current administration is:
Not defending Japan appropriately
Penalizing Japan through tariffs at the exact moment Japan is being coerced
Sending a dangerous signal that U.S. allies are on their own
Not defending Japan appropriately
Penalizing Japan through tariffs at the exact moment Japan is being coerced
Sending a dangerous signal that U.S. allies are on their own
U.S. lawmakers literally wrote:
“Support our ally in the face of PRC coercion.
Reconsider tariffs on Japan.”
That is a humiliating thing to have to say to a U.S. president — it means the president is treating China better than he treats Japan.
“Support our ally in the face of PRC coercion.
Reconsider tariffs on Japan.”
That is a humiliating thing to have to say to a U.S. president — it means the president is treating China better than he treats Japan.
December 9, 2025 at 10:49 AM
U.S. lawmakers literally wrote:
“Support our ally in the face of PRC coercion.
Reconsider tariffs on Japan.”
That is a humiliating thing to have to say to a U.S. president — it means the president is treating China better than he treats Japan.
“Support our ally in the face of PRC coercion.
Reconsider tariffs on Japan.”
That is a humiliating thing to have to say to a U.S. president — it means the president is treating China better than he treats Japan.
Japan buying rice is NOT proof of a strong alliance — it’s proof Trump sees Japan as a customer, not a partner.
Japan buying American rice ≠ alliance strength.
It equals appeasement of Trump’s domestic political needs.
Japan buying American rice ≠ alliance strength.
It equals appeasement of Trump’s domestic political needs.
December 9, 2025 at 10:41 AM
Japan buying rice is NOT proof of a strong alliance — it’s proof Trump sees Japan as a customer, not a partner.
Japan buying American rice ≠ alliance strength.
It equals appeasement of Trump’s domestic political needs.
Japan buying American rice ≠ alliance strength.
It equals appeasement of Trump’s domestic political needs.
Pandas eating bamboo
December 9, 2025 at 6:59 AM
Pandas eating bamboo
Colby:
“Japan must clarify its role in a Taiwan crisis.”
Japan (Takaichi):
“Here is our clear position.”
Takaichi took political risk domestically and internationally to provide the strategic clarity 🇺🇸 requested.
Trump’s response?
No endorsement.
No reinforcement.
No strategic coherence.
“Japan must clarify its role in a Taiwan crisis.”
Japan (Takaichi):
“Here is our clear position.”
Takaichi took political risk domestically and internationally to provide the strategic clarity 🇺🇸 requested.
Trump’s response?
No endorsement.
No reinforcement.
No strategic coherence.
December 9, 2025 at 6:23 AM
Colby:
“Japan must clarify its role in a Taiwan crisis.”
Japan (Takaichi):
“Here is our clear position.”
Takaichi took political risk domestically and internationally to provide the strategic clarity 🇺🇸 requested.
Trump’s response?
No endorsement.
No reinforcement.
No strategic coherence.
“Japan must clarify its role in a Taiwan crisis.”
Japan (Takaichi):
“Here is our clear position.”
Takaichi took political risk domestically and internationally to provide the strategic clarity 🇺🇸 requested.
Trump’s response?
No endorsement.
No reinforcement.
No strategic coherence.
The DOJ arrested Americans for smuggling H200 chips because they “determine military AI superiority”… and then, on the same day, legalized H200 exports to China for a 25% cut.
This is self-inflicted strategic disarmament for cash.
This is self-inflicted strategic disarmament for cash.
December 9, 2025 at 4:42 AM
The DOJ arrested Americans for smuggling H200 chips because they “determine military AI superiority”… and then, on the same day, legalized H200 exports to China for a 25% cut.
This is self-inflicted strategic disarmament for cash.
This is self-inflicted strategic disarmament for cash.
It’s clearance sale on🇺🇸military advantage
H200s are literally described by DOJ as determining AI superiority
Trump—Perfect.Let’s ship them to 🇨🇳But only if I get a cut.
It’s Pawn Shop Geopolitics
Allies like look at this and say:
You just deregulated the PLA’s access to frontier compute for cash
H200s are literally described by DOJ as determining AI superiority
Trump—Perfect.Let’s ship them to 🇨🇳But only if I get a cut.
It’s Pawn Shop Geopolitics
Allies like look at this and say:
You just deregulated the PLA’s access to frontier compute for cash
December 9, 2025 at 2:34 AM
It’s clearance sale on🇺🇸military advantage
H200s are literally described by DOJ as determining AI superiority
Trump—Perfect.Let’s ship them to 🇨🇳But only if I get a cut.
It’s Pawn Shop Geopolitics
Allies like look at this and say:
You just deregulated the PLA’s access to frontier compute for cash
H200s are literally described by DOJ as determining AI superiority
Trump—Perfect.Let’s ship them to 🇨🇳But only if I get a cut.
It’s Pawn Shop Geopolitics
Allies like look at this and say:
You just deregulated the PLA’s access to frontier compute for cash
Trump's New Motto
The ol' "if they're going to nuke us with our own technology, we might as well make some money off them first" argument.
The ol' "if they're going to nuke us with our own technology, we might as well make some money off them first" argument.
December 9, 2025 at 1:52 AM
Trump's New Motto
The ol' "if they're going to nuke us with our own technology, we might as well make some money off them first" argument.
The ol' "if they're going to nuke us with our own technology, we might as well make some money off them first" argument.