Energy is the life-blood of every country and the key factor in determining its stability and control over its own future. But the key question is “who controls it; the host country or Russia and China?” We are about to see explosive growth in the global power sector, and today you’d have to say that most of that business will go to Russia and China. The construction of plants to meet the needs of half the world’s population will represent the largest infrastructure project in human history. And it’s not just the business. With ownership and control over the generation of electricity goes huge political power; for example, power to influence the price of oil in Saudi Arabia, or of cobalt in Congo, or to control traffic through the Suez Canal. Thus far the United States has not been competitive. Still, it remains plausible that the United States could rally companies here at home and engage partners from among other traditional nuclear power producers. Such a consortium could lead the competition against Russia and China and ultimately rebuild our own industry. Energy Secretary Rick Perry and the Department of Energy are doing all that they can to enable the recovery of our nuclear power industry. We must do that. If we fail, we will lose the leading role that includes the right to set the standards and make the rules that have foreclosed the enrichment of nuclear fuel and the launch of clandestine nuclear weapons programs. Our country participated in the negotiation of an agreement with Iran that was designed to constrain the development of its nuclear weapons program. Whatever one may think of that agreement it has clearly stimulated a determination among the Gulf Arab States to achieve an equivalent nuclear power capability.

Energy is an essential driver of every economy. It enables formation of businesses, jobs and the possibility of prosperity. Ironically, because we are so richly blessed with energy we tend to take it for granted. But what if your electricity were provided by an authoritarian government such as Russia or China? Before long that could well become the case for much of the world. More than 1.2 billion people in the world have never had access to electricity. They live in harsh, brutal settings often governed by corrupt unaccountable leaders who are susceptible to seductive offers from Russia and China to build, own and operate power plants under apparently reasonable terms. Before the ink is dry, those terms veer quickly toward extortion and indebtedness but with no means of expelling the invader. In this century as the world population grows from 7 billion to 10 billion, the unmet demand for electricity could grow to at least 5 billion people (half the population of the world). That scale of unmet demand for electricity has led Russia and China to develop enormous capacity to build nuclear power plants and they have cooperated toward becoming the leading bidders to supply power throughout the world ? and to garner the political power that goes with it. Thus far, Russia has contracted to build four plants in Egypt, two more in Jordan, another two in Turkey, and they hope between two and 17 in Saudi Arabia. China has built 44 plants at home and plans to add at least that many more as it builds out its expansion through South Asia, the Middle East, Africa, Europe and beyond. As for the United States, since 1953 we have built the largest fleet of nuclear power plants in the world but haven’t completed a new one for more than 30 years,

The Trump administration is taking seriously the entire spectrum of economic challenges related to China that impact our nation. For decades, prior administrations have either ignored the issues or accepted Chinese lies, fabrications and excuses without any push back. Mr. Trump has said that the enormous trade imbalance with China and the grossly unfair tariffs imposed on American exports must end. The trade imbalance was on the order of $300 billion annually. A sad fact that not even progressive Democrats think is a good idea. The Chinese, who are anything but stupid, have learned that they can get away with economic murder and build their wealth on the backs of American taxpayers. For decades, the Chinese have been stealing the United States blind. Some 70 percent of all Apple computers sold in Asia were illicit Chinese copies. No prior administration has done anything about this outrageous conduct. More recently the Chinese theft of intellectual property has risen to new and more sophisticated levels, aimed not simply at “products” but at the U.S. technology base and in an effort to make China the world technology leader. The last piece of the Chinese theft equation is yet another form of intellectual and industrial espionage against the United States, and on a truly massive scale: Currently, there are some 100,000 Chinese students in the United States on student visas, and many others working here on other visa categories who are required ? as a basic condition of their permission to leave China ? to bring U.S. technology back. Because of the vast size of these practices, the U.S. intelligence community has a hard time coming to grips with the nature and scale of this espionage enterprise.

Amazon, however, has no problem carrying materials promoting every sort of sexual behavior no matter how unhealthy, even such odious practices as pedophilia. Joe Nicolosi was a courageous and insightful therapist. He was a founder and president of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH). Over the years, Joe had personally helped hundreds of men understand the nature of their sexuality. Many went on to marry and have children, something they never thought possible. But the brave new world fashioned by LGBTQ activists and their fellow cultural Marxists must crush any hope of escape. They’ve managed to outlaw therapy” in 18 states, denying client self-determination and parents’ ability to get licensed counseling for troubled children. In California, where a proposed law would have banned any materials advocating counseling toward natural sexual identity (including the Bible), the K-12 curriculum promotes every form of sexual activity under the sun while preventing parents from opting out their children. The advocates of this pagan, state-blessed religion, are ruthlessly building a social Berlin Wall to keep everyone locked into their bizarre version of what’s acceptable. It’s a new age, all right. One in which darkness poses as light, and light is suppressed by darkness, all in the name of tolerance. When Amazon founder Jeffrey Bezos took over The Post, he placed this slogan on the front-page banner: “Democracy Dies in Darkness.” Now that Amazon is descending into censorship, we have to wonder whether Mr. Bezos, who began his empire as a bookseller, sees the irony.

Myranny can arrive fast in the form of tanks and jackboots. Or it can come gradually, snuffing out liberty and replacing it with fear. The latter is what we’re facing today, as cultural Marxists advance their doctrines and silence any dissension. Each day brings new examples, but here are a few that show why a sleeping church and any friend of liberty had better wake up before it’s too late. Social media giants Facebook, Twitter, Vimeo, Google’s YouTube and even Pinterest have all been caught censoring Christians and conservatives. Most of it is being done at the behest of LGBTQ activists. If that particular issue is of no concern, consider the famous quote by once-Nazi supporter and then-foe Martin Niemoller. Various versions of the pastor’s statement have circulated, but here is the gist: “First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out ― because I was not a communist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out ― because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out ? because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me ? and there was no one left to speak for me.” This past week, we learned that Amazon.com has banned books by psychologist Joseph Nicolosi, Ph.D., at the request of an LGBTQ activist who did not like Mr. Nicolosi’s theory of the origins of male homosexuality and his advocacy of reparative therapy to reduce such inclinations. It’s part of a pattern. Last December, Amazon removed an app from Living Hope Ministries, which helps people who want to leave homosexuality.

Mr. Trump should have his staff prepare a document authorizing particular actions to help the Iranian people overthrow the Tehran regime. The document should authorize helping the Iranians establish communications, providing them with intelligence about the regime’s efforts to stop the protests and smuggling into Iran the other tools of revolution, including weapons. Communications are the sine qua non of any rebellion. It may be possible for us to provide ? at least sporadically ? Internet coverage for many of Iran’s cities. If we can, we must. Intelligence gathering in Iran is difficult but not impossible. Our spy satellites enable the National Security Agency to listen to and otherwise intercept much, if not most, of the regime’s telephonic and other electronic communications. What they can learn should be provided to the revolutionary leaders. Smuggling equipment, including weapons, into Iran will not be easy but Iran’s long borders with Turkmenistan and Afghanistan can provide avenues of entry. We must do these things without falling into the neocon trap of invasion and “nation-building.” There is much to be done and little time to do it. The Iranian revolutionaries may soon be crushed if we don’t help them. During the Vietnam War, the “domino theory” held that if South Vietnam fell to Communist North Vietnam, neighboring nations would also fall under Communist dominance. In the Middle East, the Iranian revolutionaries’ fight for freedom could result in another version of that theory coming true. The fall of the ayatollahs’ regime would remove the world’s principal sponsor of terrorism and could spark the fires of freedom elsewhere in the Middle East.

12 days of protests and riots engulfed Iran. This is the greatest upheaval in Iran in the 40 years since the 1979 Iranian Revolution. It continues while the regime is doing its worst to suppress what may be a nascent revolution. Since Nov. 15, news reports indicate that at least 200 people have been killed by the regime’s enforcers. Other reports say that Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps troops have massacred hundreds of unarmed protesters. The protests and riots have reportedly erupted in 29 of the country’s 31 provinces and ? in a major development ? about 50 military bases have been attacked. Seven hundred banks have been burned as well as other businesses. (Because the IRGC, the military arm of the ayatollahs’ kakistocracy, controls most of the Iranian economy these riots have to be judged to be directly against the regime.) In Iraq, which has become essentially an Iranian satrapy, the prime minister was forced to resign amid similar protests and riots against his Iran-dominated regime. In 2009, President Obama was given the same sort of opportunity. But he turned a blind eye to the “Green Revolution” engulfing Iran and the ayatollahs were able to suppress the nascent revolution. The new round of demonstrations and riots present the United States with an historic opportunity to change the face of the Middle East. They are a strong signal that President Trump’s sanctions against the regime are working, gradually strangling the Iranian economy. But sanctions are not enough. They have not stopped Tehran from sponsoring terrorism, or from developing ballistic missiles. We need to do more, covertly, through our intelligence agencies.

As China goes, so goes North Korea. It’s an obvious takeaway from the recent contentious behavior of the Asian giant that is imitated by its junior partner. The People’s Republic of China is engaged in a game of feigns and jabs over trade and human rights with the United States. The task falls on Mr. Trump to meet the extraordinary challenge of threading the needle between the need for respectful negotiations essential to finalizing a pending trade pact and the expectation that he deliver blunt criticism of the mainland’s intrusion into Hong Kong’s longstanding autonomy. Likewise, the president’s bargaining skills are taxed to the max by North Korea’s on-again, off-again interest in trading its nuclear armaments for commitments of economic development that could end the poverty wrought by its self-imposed isolation. Watching from his provincial redoubt of Pyongyang, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has witnessed the negotiating style employed by his ancestral cousins. In similar fashion, the youthful leader models Mao Zedong in dress and hairstyle while alternately extending an open hand and a clenched fist toward Mr. Trump in their multi-year mediation over denuclearization. In a show of good faith, Mr. Kim blew up a nuclear test site in May 2018, but then shut down a U.S.-North Korean summit in Hanoi earlier this year over Mr. Trump’s refusal to lift a raft of U.S. sanctions. The U.S. president has recently attempted to kick-start languishing talks, ordering the postponement of planned U.S.-South Korean military exercises as a good-will gesture. Sensing weakness from Washington, the North has upped the price for an end to the stalemate. Hurling bold demands at the White House demonstrates that Mr. Kim’s tutorials in Beijing have yielded a certain mastery of the diplomatic arts.

Indeed, even the threat from the North of this escalation will generate a momentum in the United States to revert back to a policy of “maximum pressure” and “fire and fury.” Pyongyang just announced that a Plenary meeting of the Central Committee of the Workers’ Party will meet later in December, before Mr. Kim’s 2020 New Year’s address. It’s fair to assume Mr. Kim will have a major pronouncement at this meeting, with expected unanimous support. It would be unfortunate, however, if Mr. Kim uses this meeting and his New Year’s address to claim that North Korea is the victim and the United States is the perpetrator, thus necessitating that the North work harder to build its so-called nuclear deterrent. Given how far North Korea has come working with Mr. Trump, to revert to such a hostile and provocative stance will, no doubt, destroy any remaining good will and force the United States and its allies to revert to a policy of maximum pressure and fire and fury. Movement in this direction will be extremely dangerous for the Korean Peninsula, the region and the world. This is a time that China, an ally of the North, has to use its significant influence on the North to convince Mr, Kim that movement in this direction would be a tragic mistake. President Xi Jinping now has a personal relationship with Mr. Kim and hopefully can convince Mr. Kim to refrain from this type of escalation and encourage him to pursue the commitments that were made at the June 2018 Singapore Summit, in addition to reminding Mr. Kim that the United States will provide the security assurances and economic development assistance North Korea needs and expects, in return for complete and verifiable denuclearization.

The second summit in Hanoi unfortunately was not successful, with both sides making unacceptable proposals. The DMZ meeting that followed in June 2019 was positive, with a commitment to have positive (working level) meetings going forward. The first and last senior working level meeting was in Stockholm in October 2019. That one-day meeting, between Special Representative Steve Biegen and chief nuclear negotiator Kim Myong Gil, went for more than eight hours, with positive comments from Mr. Biegen and criticism from Mr. Kim. Efforts to have a second working level meeting have been unsuccessful. Over the last few months, North Korea has publicly issued a series of ultimatums to the United States to change its calculus by December of this year for dealing with the North. Recent media commentaries from Gen. Kim Yong-chol, the former lead negotiator for North Korea and head of the United Front Department and Kim Kye-gwan, the former First Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs and lead negotiator for the Six Party Talks, have been very critical of the United States, parroting this ultimatum. The recent public comments from the new First Vice Foreign Minister Ri Thae-Song have been, even by the North’s standards, critical and offensive. To threaten the United States with an “unwelcomed Christmas gift” if we don’t change our approach and discard our so-called hostile policy toward the North is unsettling and unfortunate. For North Korea to allude to a return to 2017, with nuclear tests and intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) launches, is reckless and provocative. Certainly, Mr. Kim must know that President Trump will respond forcefully to this type of escalation.