A toast by Thanos Kalamidas

I have tried quite consciously, to avoid the Happy New Year editorial these last few years. It feels like a ritual that has outlived its honesty. After twenty-two variations of the same text, published only in Ovi, and with decades now pressing on my shoulders rather than lining up politely behind me, “Happy New Year” has acquired new semantics. Heavy ones. Almost cynical ones. Words that once carried hope now limp along like tired slogans dragged out of storage once a year because tradition demands it.

And how exactly does one wish a Happy New Year after 2025?

After a year soaked in wars broadcast live, in hunger turned into statistics, in death reduced to scrolling numbers, in thousands of refugees transformed into political inconveniences, and because reality always insists on satire, Donald Trump once again in power, a bad sequel nobody asked for. In such a context wishes for health, prosperity, and peace sound embarrassingly small. Poor words. Underfed words. Words trying to do humanitarian work with empty pockets.

We say “peace” while financing war.
We say “prosperity” while normalising obscene inequality.
We say “health” while treating human beings as disposable units.

So yes, forgive me if I find the ritualistic optimism of the New Year editorial hollow. Not wrong ...just insufficient. Like offering a plaster for a haemorrhage and congratulating yourself for your compassion.

And yet, refusing empty optimism does not mean surrendering to despair. Cynicism is not intelligence; it is laziness in a black turtleneck. And this is where contradiction enters, because despite the global mess, despite the political farce, despite the industrialisation of suffering, 2025 has been quietly, stubbornly, a good year for Ovi magazine.

Not a spectacular year. Not a triumphant year with fireworks and self-congratulation. A solid year. A honest one.

New contributors joined us, not because Ovi is fashionable, profitable, or algorithmically seductive, but because they still believe words matter when written without permission. Writers who are allergic to obedience. Thinkers who refuse to polish reality until it becomes harmless. People who understand that culture is not decoration; it is resistance with better grammar.

The Ovi History eMagazine, an idea born out of my ...stubbornness more than strategy, seems to have found its readers. Not the mass audience addicted to intellectual fast food but those who still prefer slow reading, uncomfortable questions, and historical context that doesn’t flatter modern arrogance. History, when done properly is not nostalgia, it is an accusation. And accusations, apparently still have an audience.

Readership is moving up. Slowly. Unevenly. Not yet back to what it once was. We are still some distance from Ovi’s former self, but for the distance feel measurable, not infinite. I feel confident, not because optimism is fashionable, but because persistence has its own quiet logic.

This matters.

Not because Ovi is special in a narcissistic sense but because independent platforms surviving in this climate is a political act. In an era where discourse is either monetised, weaponised, or infantilised, simply continuing to publish thoughtful, uncomfortable material is a form of dissent. We are not competing with noise; we are refusing to become it.

And let’s be clear, culture and democracy are under attack. Not dramatically, not with tanks, but with boredom, algorithms, and moral cowardice. Nuance is treated as weakness. Complexity as elitism. Thoughtfulness as delay. The world doesn’t want opinions anymore; it wants slogans that can be worn like football jerseys.

Ovi does not do jerseys.

So no, this is not a Happy New Year editorial in the traditional sense. I am not here to sprinkle optimism like confetti over a burning building. But I will say this, as long as there are people willing to write without fear, read without shortcuts and think without supervision, the year is not lost.

2025 has reminded me of something ...unfashionable, progress is not always loud. Sometimes it just refuses to die.

Raise no champagne glass for this. Just keep your eyes open, your pen sharp, and your tolerance for bullshit low.

That, at least, would be an honest wish for the New Year.


#eBook The Informant by Richard Stanford

The phone started up again. One…Two…Three rings. Not another conversation. His throat was dry. His ear felt like it was pressed flat against his skull. Four…Five.

The still humid air, the sweat dripping down his back, the thought of standing up was painful. Nine-thirty. Through the open windows he heard the idle chattering from Market Square where couples walked in slow-motion under the glittering streetlamps. Six…Seven, screeching now. The teletype machines joined in, clattering bulletins from London and Paris.

His notebook was full of shorthand transcripts of phone conversations. It had been one of those ‘nothing-is-ready-days’, panic to deadline, reporters lost in traffic. But they had managed to put the late edition to bed.

Richard Stanford, "When I’m not writing short stories and essays or producing documentary films in Montréal, I can be found mucking about in my gardens trying to create the perfect eggplant."

Ovi eBooks Publishing January 2026

The Informant

Read it online or download HERE!
Read it online & downloading it as PDF HERE!
Or enjoy reading it online & downloading it as PDF HERE!
All downloads are FREE!


For more eBooks check Ovi eBookshelves HERE!

Manish Zodiac Predictions for January 2026 #Horoscope by Manish Kumar Arora

Aries ( 21 March – 19 April ) – The urge to develop your personality, appearance and personal skills brings a greater need to be more successful and independent. A strong, healthy self-image makes you more productive, which in turn encourages you to treat others with more generosity and sensitivity. Networking will pay off and your increased drive to attain personal goals will be very useful. Pleasures are bound to be more deeply felt, although a certain light-heartedness may be missing.The charm of your personality, willingness to cooperate with others and sense of humour will make a big difference in the way things turn out.Favorable Dates :Jan 1, 2, 10, 11, 19, 20 Favorable Colors : Red & Yellow

Taurus ( 20 April – 20 May ) - Expect a big career move this month. Financial priorities will be high and some powerful forces are acting on your income and long-term plans. You'll need to control wastefulness and lost energy, be wary of perverted moral attitudes and avoid the lure of those who find success in evil deeds. This especially applies to negotiations, the law, partnership issues and dealings with those with whom you are intimately involved.You can explore and develop inner strengths and gain a deeper understanding of your childhood conditioning, subconscious mind, fears, and dreams. Favorable Dates: Jan 1, 7, 10, 16, 19, 27 Favorable Colors : White & Green

Gemini ( 21 May – 20 June ) - You can develop inner strength and power through expanding your psychic energy, intuitive ability and overcoming hidden fears and worry. The maturity and experience behind your actions is the key to their successful outcome.Circumstances may require you to discuss, or perhaps even defend or reassess your priorities and values.You can grow into a more mature, productive individual with a definite idea of where you need to go.You must face your fears and worries, resolve issues from the past that continue to weaken you and deal responsibly with loss and disappointment. Favorable Dates: Jan 3, 7, 12, 16, 21, 27 Favorable Colors : White & Blue

Cancer( 21 June – 22 July ) - This time will bring a need for a thorough reassessment of your personal priorities and value system. If you have been thinking about a new business venture or achieving some physical goal, you are likely to put plans in motion.Creative juices flow during this time and romantic notions, inspiration and imagination spark artistic endeavours. Activities related to children claim your time and attention. Partherships and marriages will take on a more open aspect, with the potential to take great strides in spiritual development. Affairs in distant, romantic places are quite likely too. Favorable Dates: Jan 3, 4, 12, 13, 21, 22 Favorable Colors : Red & Yellow

Leo  ( 23 July – 22 August ) Formal agreements, diplomacy, contracts or other legal matters produce long-lasting, successful results. Your efforts to bring organisation and stability to social groups will not go unrewarded. This period shows a fabulous potential for romance. If you are already involved with a loving partner, you can deepen the relationship and overcome some of the deeper obstacles that may have been bugging you recently. Love relationships from the past can intrude in some way. Religious or spiritual issues will be thrown into prominence, bringing increased personal interest and progressive changes in these areas. Favorable Dates : Jan 1, 5, 10, 14, 19, 23 Favorable Colors : Red & Blue

Virgo( 23 August – 22 September ) - You are apt to be more of a doer than a thinker-- eager to turn your ideas into physical reality, more than ready to speak your mind. If words will not suffice, you will not hesitate to use physical means to express yourself. Romance and friendships now are based on mutual commitment and responsibility, along with love and affection. Others are attracted to your maturity and accomplishment.Greater spiritual awareness, loftier ideals and inspiring cultural pursuits come to the fore. New roles may suddenly begin, while old ones abruptly come to an end.  Favorable Dates: Jan 2, 5, 11, 14, 20, 23 Favorable Colors : Red & Yellow

Libra( 23 September – 22 October ) - This is a time for sweeping away the debris and making a new beginning. If you have been thinking about a new business venture or achieving some physical goal, put such plans in motion.Energy and enthusiasm for your career or other long range goals is overflowing.Your social contacts are more intense, while romantic and sexual encounters are most fascinating, especially from the standpoint of the psychological motivations involved.You may become interested in the activities of charitable organizations, hospitals, prisons and institutions concerned with minorities and the underprivileged. Favorable Dates: Jan 3, 7, 12, 16, 21, 23 Favorable Colors : Red & Yellow

Scorpio ( 23 October – 21 November ) - This is a period to look for opportunities that expand your spiritual and artistic awareness and allow you to develop and use your intuitive abilities.Any benefits or gains you make during this period may be hidden, or at least not obvious to others.Expect some troubles with your health, which doctors may not adequately be able to deal with to your satisfaction. Emotional problems will arise, especially through relations with women. Romantic escapades will be troublesome and damaging to partnerships and close relationships; joint financial speculation will be very risky, though potentially profitable. Favorable Dates: Jan 5, 8, 14, 17, 23, 26 Favorable Colors : Red & Green

Sagittarius( 22 November -21 December ) - The influence you exercise over other people and your ability to elicit their cooperation occupies your mind. Physical efforts turn to financial and business matters, bringing more organization to your bank and financial papers.  Gaining personal power and greater control is the object of this period and there is no better place to start than by gaining a deeper understanding of yourself.Romantic notions are apt to be physically carried out. Artistic endeavours are inspired and imaginative.Joining organizations and participation in group activities can be very rewarding.Favorable Dates : Jan 3, 4, 12, 13, 21, 22 Favorable Colors : Blue & White

Capricorn ( 22 December – 19 January ) -Good fortune comes to you, both in relationships at work and a financial turn for the better. Your career moves in a happier direction and hard work begins to pay off.Energy and enthusiasm center around partnership and other alliances, cooperative efforts and interaction with others in general. Others stimulate you to physical action. You get the attention of others by emphasizing whatever is most attractive about yourself: physical beauty, artistic talent, or a charming personality.Your recuperative powers, should you need them, are at a high level. Favorable Dates : Jan 1, 3, 10, 12, 19, 21 Favorable Colors : White & Red

Aquarius ( 20 January – 18 February ) - It is an auspicious time to initiate projects geared toward bringing benefits at a later time in your life. If you have been thinking about a new business venture, or achieving some physical goal, this is a time when you are likely to put such plans in motion.The physically energized atmosphere surrounding you brings more than the usual volume of communications and activities, especially with siblings and neighbours. Swamped with information and ideas, you can come up with an increasing number of your own. Favorable Dates: Jan 7, 9, 16, 18, 25, 27 Favorable Colors : Yellow& Red

Pisces ( 19 February – 20 March ) - Your schedule may become overloaded, making it necessary to place some restraints on the number of activities and people you decide to accommodate. You are also likely to be concerned with legal matters, contract negotiations of one kind or another, public relations, the income of a relative, and various situations in which you must seek as well as offer cooperation. Matters that you thought were securely concealed may pop up to haunt you and secret activities or clandestine relationships will be troublesome at this time.Favorable Dates: Jan 1, 2, 10, 11, 19, 20 Favorable Colors : White & Red


Happy New Year #Poem by Jan Sand

 

Round and round this planet twirls
Without a sound in frantic orbit desperate
To flee the horrid flaming Sun in run
To find itself each January
Back where it had begun.

Each year, each twitch of time, can appear
Appareled in white snow, clean to be besmirched
Again by fear that this might be the final one
Wherein this most eternally furious beast
Would toss its angers to the sky in dumb profusion
To initiate that final thunderous conclusion.

The clusters of stars entertain these days of longest night
Lit in celebrations of glowing galaxies and glints on Christmas trees
To defy this current fragility of a future ballet balanced on one toe,
Poised in hope to dance on crystal wishes for, perhaps, a few years
More for this gifted planet to restore its loveliness and delight.

Berserk Alert! #111 #Cartoon by Tony Zuvela

 

Tony Zuvela and his view of the world around us in a constant berserk alert!
For more Berserk Alert! HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!


AntySaurus Prick #122 #Cartoon by Thanos Kalamidas

 

Dino is a vegetarian virgin dinosaur and his best friend is Anty,
a carnivorous nymphomaniac ant.
They call themselves the AntySaurus Prick and they are still here
waiting for the comet to come!

For more AntySaurus Prick, HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!


The year of corruption by Thanos Kalamidas

By the time a year crawls toward its last page, publications feel the ritual itch; crown a person, an event, a moment that “defined” the months we survived. It’s a harmless tradition when history is polite. But 2025 was not polite. It was blunt. It was loud. And it had no interest in symbolism. If you insist on naming the thing that marked this year, scratched into every capital, every battlefield, every budget spreadsheet, every smiling press conference, call it what it was: corruption, exposed and emboldened.

Yes, the usual suspects were waiting in line. Donald Trump haunts headlines like a rerun nobody asked for, a reminder that politics can become a reality show with nuclear codes. The war in Ukraine remains a grinding, obscene wound, proving that cruelty scales well when funded properly. Pick up almost any “Year in Review” and you’ll find those names polished and framed. But they are symptoms, not the disease. Corruption is the connective tissue. It is the language everyone speaks fluently while pretending not to understand.

In 2025 corruption stopped bothering with subtlety. It stopped whispering in corridors and leaned comfortably into microphones. It learned that accountability is optional, consequences negotiable and public outrage a renewable resource that exhausts itself faster than power ever does. From the White House to the Ukrainian front, from El Salvador to Japan, corruption didn’t just happen, it strutted.

Let’s get something straight: corruption is not just brown envelopes and offshore accounts. That’s the cartoon version, the one we show students so we can pretend the problem is solvable with a few arrests. Real corruption in 2025 wore better suits. It arrived as “policy,” “security,” “economic necessity,” “national interest.” It justified itself with think tanks and legal teams. It wrapped itself in flags and emergency language and dared anyone to object without being labelled naïve, unpatriotic, or dangerous.

War made this easier. War always does. Ukraine’s suffering is real and immense, and that reality has been exploited ruthlessly. Where there is urgency, there is opacity. Where there is fear, there is profit. Billions move quickly when bombs are falling, and nobody asks too many questions when the word “existential” is stamped on every decision. Corruption doesn’t care which side of a border it’s on; it only cares that the border exists. It feeds on reconstruction contracts, weapons procurement, aid pipelines, and the moral shield of “now is not the time.”

Meanwhile, democracies congratulated themselves for being better than the alternatives while quietly hollowing out their own credibility. In 2025, transparency became a branding exercise. Ethics committees became decorative furniture. Politicians learned they could survive scandals as long as they controlled the tempo of outrage. Apologize badly, deny reflexively, counterattack aggressively, wait it out. The cycle is now muscle memory.

Authoritarian regimes, of course, didn’t bother with the pretence. El Salvador’s strongman aesthetics, order over law, spectacle over justice, continued to sell the fantasy that corruption is acceptable if it’s efficient. Japan, long allergic to public scandal, reminded us that corruption doesn’t need chaos to thrive; it can live quietly inside consensus, seniority, and institutional silence. Different styles, same rot.

And then there’s the global marketplace of corruption, the part we pretend is too complex to understand. Corporations talk about values while bribing reality into submission. Financial systems lecture the poor about responsibility while laundering fortunes with immaculate paperwork. Media outlets expose corruption selectively, depending on who owns the printing press or the server farm. In 2025, everyone knew. That was the difference. Ignorance was no longer plausible.

What made this year especially obscene was the collapse of shame. Corruption used to require some embarrassment, some effort to hide. Now it performs. It tweets. It dares investigators to keep up. It files lawsuits against its critics. It frames itself as a victim of “witch hunts” and “political persecution.” And disturbingly often, it wins not because it’s innocent, but because it’s exhausting to fight something that never sleeps and never apologizes.

The public is not blameless. Outrage has become performative too. We share, we rage, we scroll. We demand resignations knowing full well they won’t come. We consume scandals like episodes then complain the plot never changes. Corruption thrives not only on power, but on fatigue. In 2025, fatigue was everywhere.

So if this year must be named, don’t reduce it to a man or a single war. Call it the year the mask slipped. The year corruption stopped pretending to be an exception and revealed itself as a system. A system that adapts faster than laws, speaks louder than ethics, and survives every election cycle with a smirk.

This is not a call for despair. It’s a call for accuracy. You cannot fight what you refuse to name. And 2025 made the name unavoidable. Corruption didn’t just mark the year. It dared us to notice and to decide whether noticing is where our courage ends.


The endless calls that always favour Moscow by Emma Schneider

There is a strange rhythm to today’s diplomacy, a circular choreography of phone calls and photo ops that pretends to move history forward while quietly dragging it backward. Volodymyr Zelenskyy meets Donald Trump. They smile, shake hands, and float a peace plan. Trump then calls Vladimir Putin and emerges with a different peace plan. Zelenskyy, alarmed, reaches out to Friedrich Merz. Emmanuel Macron joins the conversation. Trump adjusts the plan. Putin calls back. The plan changes again. Around and around it goes, a diplomatic carousel that never stops spinning and never seems to land anywhere except where the Kremlin wants it.

This is not negotiation; it is erosion. Each call sands down Ukraine’s position, not with bombs or tanks, but with “pragmatism,” “realism,” and the seductive language of ending a war quickly. Peace becomes a moving target, constantly redefined, always just one compromise away. And every compromise, conveniently, seems to ask Ukraine to give something up first.

The illusion is that everyone has equal leverage. They do not. Putin enters every conversation from a position of brutal clarity: he invaded, he occupies, and he is willing to wait. Time, for him, is a weapon. For Ukraine, time is blood, cities, and exhaustion. When peace plans shift with every phone call, the side that benefits is the one least bothered by delay. That side is Russia.

Trump, in this scenario, becomes the amplifier. Not necessarily a mastermind, but a megaphone. His instinct to deal, to announce, to declare victory before details exist, turns diplomacy into performance. Each new plan is framed as decisive, bold, historic. Yet the substance is thin, malleable, and easily reshaped by the last voice on the line. Putin understands this dynamic perfectly. He does not need to shout. He only needs to call last.

European leaders, meanwhile, scramble to stabilize the narrative. Macron and Merz are reduced to diplomatic firefighters, rushing to contain the damage of the latest revision before the next one arrives. Their involvement is serious, often principled, but reactive. They are correcting course, not setting it. And in a war where momentum matters, reacting is another form of losing ground.

What makes this cycle so dangerous is not just that it favours Putin, but that it normalizes the favour. Each shift is justified as balance, compromise, realism. Ukraine is told that peace requires flexibility, that borders are lines on a map that security guarantees can be vague, that justice can wait. Russia is never told the same. Its red lines are treated as immovable facts of nature, like gravity or winter.

Over time, the conversation itself changes. The question is no longer how Ukraine wins, or even how it survives intact, but how much it can afford to lose for the sake of “stability.” Stability, in this telling, is silence from Moscow and relief in Western capitals. It is a peace that looks calm on television while storing future wars beneath the surface.

This endless loop of calls also corrodes trust. Zelenskyy is forced into a permanent defensive crouch, responding to plans he did not design and concessions he did not offer. Ukrainian agency shrinks with every revision. The country becomes a topic rather than a participant, a problem to be managed between larger men with louder phones.

And Putin? He learns that persistence pays. That he does not need to win outright. He only needs to stay in the game long enough for others to negotiate themselves into fatigue. Every changed plan confirms his core belief: the West will eventually bargain with aggression if the bargaining sounds reasonable enough.

Peace is not built this way. It is not assembled through endless improvisation or last-minute calls that undo yesterday’s promises. Real peace requires clarity, consistency and a refusal to let force dictate terms. Without that, all these conversations amount to theater, and the script is already familiar.

The phone keeps ringing. The plans keep changing. And somewhere beneath the noise, a simple truth is being quietly accepted, as long as this never-ending negotiation continues, Putin does not need to stop the war. The process itself is already working for him.


Built gods and borrowed thunders by Mia Rodríguez

Contemporary artificial intelligence is often accused of harboring a god complex, as if silicon has suddenly decided to play deity. The charge is dramatic, flattering, and misleading. AI does not wake up one morning believing it is omniscient. It inherits that posture from us. The god complex attached to modern AI is not self-made; it is human-made, carefully assembled through ambition, language, incentives, and mythmaking.

We speak about AI in absolutist terms. We call models “all-knowing,” systems “superhuman,” and future machines “inevitable.” We frame progress as destiny rather than choice. This rhetoric matters. When we describe a tool as a god, we begin to treat it like one: unquestionable, inscrutable, and above responsibility. The first brick in AI’s supposed god complex is laid by the humans who narrate its rise.

The second brick is delegation without humility. We increasingly hand AI tasks that once required judgment, context, and moral friction. Hiring decisions, medical triage, sentencing recommendations, creative authorship. Each delegation is often justified as efficiency, but underneath sits a quieter belief: the machine will be more objective than we are. That belief is not faith in AI; it is a loss of faith in ourselves. We crown machines as higher arbiters because we are tired of human messiness, disagreement, and error.

Then there is scale. AI systems operate at speeds and volumes no human can match, which creates the illusion of omnipresence. When something answers instantly, everywhere, all at once, it feels godlike. Yet speed is not wisdom, and coverage is not understanding. We confuse quantity with depth because our culture rewards output over reflection. AI mirrors that bias back to us, magnified.

Crucially, AI does not assert its own divinity. It does not demand worship, loyalty, or belief. It responds to prompts. The god complex emerges in the space between system capability and human expectation. We expect certainty from probabilistic systems, coherence from pattern engines, and morality from optimization functions. When those expectations are met occasionally, we call it intelligence. When they fail, we act surprised, as if a fallen angel has betrayed us.

Corporate incentives deepen the myth. Selling AI as revolutionary, transcendent, and world-altering is good business. “Powerful” sounds better than “limited.” “Autonomous” sells better than “dependent.” Marketing language inflates capability into destiny, and destiny into authority. Over time, this language leaks into public consciousness, policy debates, and personal trust. The god complex is not an accident; it is a product strategy.

There is also a psychological comfort in externalizing authority. A godlike AI absolves us. If an algorithm decides, then no one is fully to blame. Responsibility dissolves into code, data, and metrics. This is perhaps the most dangerous aspect of the myth. Gods forgive; systems optimize. When we confuse the two, harm becomes procedural rather than moral, and therefore easier to tolerate.

Ironically, the louder we proclaim AI’s godhood, the smaller we make ourselves. We narrate a future where humans are obsolete, creativity is automated, and judgment is outsourced. This story flatters technology but insults humanity. It ignores the fact that AI has no goals without us, no values without us, no direction without our choosing. A god that cannot want is no god at all.

So is AI developing a god complex? No. We are projecting one onto it. We are the theologians, the prophets, and the worshippers, all at once. AI is the altar we built and then knelt before, forgetting we were the carpenters.

The corrective is not fear, nor blind enthusiasm, but demystification. Strip away the divine metaphors. Call AI what it is: a powerful, brittle, human-shaped mirror. Treat it as a tool that amplifies intention rather than replaces agency. The moment we stop calling our creations gods is the moment we reclaim responsibility for what they do in our name.

Ultimately, the question of a god complex reveals less about machines and more about modern power. We live in an era uncomfortable with limits, impatient with uncertainty, and addicted to prediction. AI fits this hunger perfectly, promising foresight without wisdom and control without care. If we want less mythology and more maturity, we must insist on human authorship at every layer: in design choices, data curation, deployment contexts and consequences. That insistence is not anti-technology; it is pro-responsibility. Gods demand obedience. Tools demand stewardship. The future hinges on which role we assign and whether we are brave enough to keep the heavier one for ourselves. Nothing else will save us from mistaking power for wisdom again.


Berserk Alert! #082 #cartoon by Tony Zuvela

 

Tony Zuvela and his view of the world around us in a constant berserk alert!
For more Berserk Alert! HERE!
For more Ovi Cartoons, HERE!


When Words Ruled and Results Vanished: The Hollow Year of 2025 by Javed Akbar

A politician is a person who approaches every issue with an open mouth.
-Friedrich Nietzsche

Leaders entered 2025 with thunder in their voices and renewal on their banners—at home, abroad, and in the fragile spaces in between. They promised closure, courage, and change. As the year now closes, what defines it is not achievement but absence. The unfulfilled. The abandoned. They were quietly shelved. The true story of 2025 is not what happened, but what never did.

We are trained to catalogue calamities—wars, floods, scandals, triumphs—as though history were merely a ledger of eruptions. But societies are more often undone by voids: the spaces where leadership should have stood and did not. This year, that void yawned wide.

Consider the United States. Donald Trump promised Americans they would “get tired of winning.” Instead, they have grown tired of watching promises evaporate. He pledged to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours. The war grinds on. The only discernible “solution” appears to be one that coerces Ukraine into surrendering to Vladimir Putin’s demands. The world continues to wonder what binds Trump to Putin—kompromat*, admiration, or the gravitational pull of authoritarian power. The rumours read like pulp fiction; the geopolitical consequences are deadly serious.

Trump also boasted that he would end Israel’s devastating war. Not only did peace fail to materialise—he now claims he deserves a Nobel Prize for brokering what never occurred. On the ground, settlement expansion proceeds unchecked. Roughly 42 per cent of Palestinian land is now effectively under Israeli control, with settlers claiming new territory through force. Palestinian blood quietly flows; devastation

Grinds on, even as Trump’s much vaunted ceasefire exists only in rhetoric - announced, applauded, and abandoned while lives are lost beyond the cameras. The region edges closer to irreversible fragmentation while the language of peace dissolves into dust.

Trump insisted Iran’s nuclear capacity had been neutralised. Subsequent assessments showed the strike fell short of its stated aim. He celebrated having secured lasting peace between Thailand and Cambodia; this very week, shells began falling again. Promises, proclamations, declarations—noise without delivery.

This pattern, however, is not uniquely American. Across the democratic world, 2025 exposed a widening gap between electoral vows and governing resolve.

In Canada, the contradictions have been stark. Oil executives who once booed the prime minister now applaud him. Climate experts and business leaders alike are baffled by Mark Carney’s abrupt fossil-fuel pivot. Pushback against U.S. tariffs remains a work in progress. A transformative housing buildout is promised—but deferred into the long term, where political accountability goes to rest. Each item is explained as pragmatic, incremental, or complex. Collectively, they form a portrait of hesitation masquerading as strategy.

Back in Washington, Trump and his allies thundered about the “communist threat” posed by Zohran Mamdani’s mayoral run in New York. Then came the reversal. Mamdani was welcomed into the Oval Office, congratulated on his victory, praised for having “run an incredible race,” and assured he would “do a very good job.” When asked about previously calling Trump a fascist, Trump jokingly interjected, “That’s OK—you can just say yes… it’s easier.”

The moment was light, even affable. It was also revealing. What evaporated was not hostility but conviction. What vanished was not rhetoric but meaning. In the theatre of politics, yesterday’s existential threats become today’s photo opportunities. Principles are not defeated; they are simply set aside when inconvenient.

To be fair, this late pivot suggested something else too: that 2025 may yet close on a gentler note than it began. Civility flickered. Dialogue reappeared. But even this modest hope underscores the deeper indictment. We are now relieved not by progress, but by tone. We celebrate gestures because outcomes remain elusive.

And so, as we look back on 2025, we must widen our lens beyond the crises that did occur. The harsher judgment lies in what did not: wars not ended, reforms not enacted, climate promises not honoured, justice not upheld. History is not shaped only by explosions and elections, but by the choices leaders evade—and the futures they quietly forfeit.

Nietzsche warned us about open mouths. What 2025 exposed was something more corrosive: closed wills. When speech outruns substance, democracy does not collapse—it hollows out. And hollow systems, eventually, cannot bear the weight of the people they claim to serve. 

* Kompromat is a Russian term that literally means “compromising material”. It refers to information collected on a person – often politicians, public officials – that can be used to manipulate, control, or discredit them. Typically used to gain leverage over someone, force them to act in a certain way, or damage their reputation if they resist.


Javed Akbar is a freelance writer with published works in the Toronto Star and across diverse digital platforms.


A toast by Thanos Kalamidas

I have tried quite consciously, to avoid the Happy New Year editorial these last few years. It feels like a ritual that has outlived its ho...