Washington knows how to shut a financial door, but it needs to pay closer attention to the alternative cross-border payment architecture being built on the other side.

Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Western governments restricted Russian banks’ access to international finance, including disconnecting designated institutions from SWIFT.

The intention was to impose costs and constrain Moscow’s ability to finance its war.

But those restrictions also strengthened an incentive American policymakers cannot afford to dismiss: building ways to trade that depend less on Western permission.

America’s objective should be to preserve its financial leverage.

That requires understanding how its competitors adapt when established channels close.

That is the uncomfortable consequence of turning financial access into a geopolitical weapon. Countries denied access have a powerful reason to develop alternatives.

Russia’s payment agents show how quickly that adaptation can occur.

When established banking channels became harder to use, importers sought alternative commercial intermediaries. What began as an urgent search for workarounds helped create demand for organized payment networks.

Intermediaries are turning disrupted banking relationships into a market for alternative settlement services.

Consider A7. In August 2025, the U.S. Treasury sanctioned A7 and its affiliated companies, citing their role in sanctions evasion. Treasury pointed to A7’s support for the sanctioned cryptocurrency exchange Garantex and its links to the ruble-backed A7A5 token.

Treasury’s designation makes A7 a sanctions-enforcement concern.

It also raises a strategic question: how effectively can Washington constrain payment networks that operate across multiple jurisdictions?

A7 describes an intermediary model using agency agreements and promissory notes; its FAQ also references SWIFT payment confirmations.

A Russian company pays rubles domestically, while a partner abroad pays the foreign supplier in local currency.

In this model, the buyer’s funds do not move directly across the border to the supplier. Instead, domestic payments on each side are coordinated through agency agreements and promissory notes.

The promissory note isn’t some novel loophole: it is an established legal instrument recording an unconditional obligation to pay a specified amount. Whether a particular transaction is lawful depends on the parties, jurisdictions and sanctions involved.

A7 advertises payments to China in as little as four hours.

Its emphasis on speed illustrates the commercial demand these networks seek to capture when established banking channels become unreliable.

Dismissing the entire development as “sanctions workarounds” misses the strategic point.

Restrictions can impose immediate costs while encouraging investment in infrastructure that reduces dependence on the channels Washington controls.

Sanctioning a provider does not erase that incentive.

Beyond Russia, governments are developing new ways to move money across borders, driven by demand for faster payments, lower costs and greater control over financial infrastructure.

Consider mBridge, a platform for settlements in central bank digital currencies involving China, Hong Kong, Thailand, the UAE and Saudi Arabia.

According to the Atlantic Council, the platform had processed over 4,000 transactions totaling $55.49 billion. That is substantial activity, though it does not establish a universal replacement for existing payment channels.

Similarly, Project Nexus, developed through the Bank for International Settlements, aims to connect the national instant payment systems of India, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand, with a launch targeted by 2027.

Nexus and mBridge develop payment infrastructure; A7 arranges payments through intermediaries. Demand for better cross-border settlement extends well beyond sanctioned economies. Washington must understand that demand to retain its influence.

Does this mean SWIFT is dead?

No. SWIFT remains a leading global financial messaging network, with formidable network effects. Nor should we confuse SWIFT with the dollar: SWIFT provides messaging; it is not a currency. An alternative messaging route does not mean countries have abandoned dollar-denominated trade.

But financial dominance does not guarantee permanent control over the channels others use. America’s competitors do not need to replace every function of the existing system at once. They can build alternatives transaction by transaction.

Washington should respond with the same seriousness.

Sanctions must have clear objectives and regular assessments of how targets are adapting. American policymakers must also make legitimate dollar-based payments faster, less expensive and more attractive.

That response requires regulatory clarity at home.

The GENIUS Act established a framework for payment stablecoins, and recent SEC and CFTC guidance has clarified the treatment of other crypto assets.

America must translate clearer rules into competitive payment services businesses have practical reasons to choose.

For lawful businesses, the question is whether a payment arrives reliably, affordably and on time. Enforcement and competitiveness belong in the same strategy.

Financial leadership requires investment in the reasons others choose to participate.

The ability to exclude cannot substitute for that work.

Restrictions can impose real costs while simultaneously accelerating the search for alternatives.

Washington can close a banking channel, but it cannot outlaw the evolution of global trade.

This week is the 3rd anniversary of the terror attacks on Israeli non-combatants, aka innocent civilians. It opened at 0630 in the morning with Hamas/PIJ rocket and mortar fire to suppress the terrorists’ initial objectives, ie their planned breach points thru the Israeli border with Gaza, and the several small, Israeli villages (kibbutzim) within aprox. 3 kilometers of the Gaza perimeter. Simultaneously, Hamas paragliders flew over the border and below the radar to land inside the villages, and Hamas sappers blew breaches through the border barriers to allow several hundred terrorists to penetrate (mounted in trucks, on motorcycles and on foot). To say the result was an atrocity and a war crime is an understatement.

Why would they do such a thing? How was it even possible? The answers are important to anyone who values Humanity.

First, when adversaries lack the combat power to gain decisive results against trained, capable and ready military units, they unsurprisingly seek other ways to gain decision. Hence, the most despicable of them frequently employ terrorism to target those who can’t fight back, so to speak. But that’s really not the full reason. The full reason is that their intentional slaughter/torture/kidnapping of noncombatants realizes grossly disproportionate psychological effect upon their target audience…which is YOU, us, the Western public. Enough of that and we become “terrorized,” cowed, and (they intend) willing to submit. Wonder why we see increasing use of terrorism in the 21st Century? Because it’s the Information Age, and cellphones and media outlets instantaneously carry the terrorists’ barbarity into the homes of every peace-loving family with a computer, iPhone or cable TV. We are hundreds of millions of humans, and we become horrified. The result…a single, tactical strike in the 21st Century can now achieve STRATEGIC effect.

Second, Real Peace can never be anything less than durable & lasting, and (in the Real World) that requires that it be defended, and THAT begins with defensible borders against those who intend harm. Because even the most well-designed defense has its limits, enemies work diligently to find those limits. Hence, the Hamas decision to target the Gaza border and the tiny villages around it. Why there? Because at the strategic level Israel had come to view Hezbollah to its north as the most lethal threat (not necessarily Hamas to the south) and at the tactical level, because in Gaza the terrorists of Hamas could locate effectively within 3kms of several villages of Israeli civilians…well within range of Hamas mortar/rocket barrages. And as the IDF was arrayed at the time, 3kms and less provided almost no time to deploy an effective counterattack.

So, what makes borders defensible? It’s not what you might think. We discussed that and more on this week’s show. My guest is an old comrade, Colonel Joe Kopser, US Army (ret), who was on the ground with me near the Gaza border roughly a year before the 7Oct attacks. He is now a successful entrepreneur, author and founder of Leading 2 Win, his nation-wide effort to help build more unity of understanding between American civilians and our military community and also within our military itself. He is an inspiring guy! Click on the link to hear our chat: https://frontlinesoffreedom.com/show-980/

Michele Tafoya (R) vs. Peggy Flanagan (D)

I. The Race

Michele Tafoya (Republican) is new to politics after a career as a sports broadcaster and is running on an anti-corruption platform in a state that has that problem in every direction.

Peggy Flanagan (Democrat) is the sitting lieutenant governor of Minnesota, having won alongside Tim Walz in 2018 and 2022, with her second win by a reduced margin of +7.7%. She has worked to conceal Minnesota’s substantial fraud and corruption, participated in anti-ICE chaos, and is not uniformly supported by Democrat factions within the state.

II. State Profile

Minnesota is the GOP’s white whale. It is the state with the longest standing Democrat-voting streak in presidential elections, with 13 consecutive wins stretching back to 1976. Donald Trump almost joined Richard Nixon and his predecessors in the hall of GOP nominees to carry the state in 2016, primarily because of third-party defectors from Hillary Clinton, but missed it by 1.5%. Since then, the state legislature has enacted the standard litany of blue state laws loosening up election rules, laws, and procedures to ensure the Twin Cities can get over the top of what has been an increasingly reddening state for most of two decades.

In 2024, Trump won the 85 counties outside of Hennepin and Ramsey Counties (the two dominant blue counties of the Twin Cities metro) by 12.7%. Unfortunately, he got clobbered in the two that prop Democrats up statewide:

Hennepin and Ramsey produce roughly 30% of all ballots cast in Minnesota’s elections. Without serious gains there, GOP statewide candidates are on the outside looking in. How strongly those two counties tie Flanagan to fraud and corruption, and the degree to which they respond to midterm dynamics, will make or break Tafoya’s campaign.

Demographic Statistics

76.3% White, 6.9% Black, 6.1% Hispanic

III. Market Assessment

Polymarket bettors have Flanagan shares positioned at 89%. This is surprising, since polling (the main driver of trades on the platform) is suggesting a closer-than-normal race. Tafoya shares offer huge returns if she pulls the upset.

IV. History

This is the first Senate race I’ve profiled this year with no incumbent. Tina Smith’s retirement left the seat open, so neither Tafoya nor Flanagan will get the incumbency boost. In Minnesota, it is powerful; here are Amy Klobuchar’s margins for the other seat:

2006 +20.1%
2012 +34.7%
2018 +24.1%
2024 +15.7%

Notably, Klobuchar’s 2018 margin ran 22.6% right of the 2016 presidential result. Walz, running for governor, won by 11.4%; however, the polarizing Keith Ellison only won the Attorney General’s office by 3.9%. Flanagan resembles Ellison far more than she resembles Klobuchar, who is a shoe-in to replace Walz as governor. Minnesota’s U.S. House races were a mixed bag in 2018, with Democrats flipping two suburban seats but losing two rural seats in a full realignment of the suburbs and the state’s Iron Range and southern rural areas. In short, 2018’s elections, from the first Trump midterm, do not suggest automatic Democrat success – although Tina Smith won her special election for the seat Flanagan and Tafoya are after by +10.6%.

The 2022 midterm results, despite comfortable Walz and Flanagan reelections, saw Ellison barely scrape by (+0.8%). If Minnesota voters (Democrat insistence aside) continue to prioritize going after corruption, the U.S. Senate race could be this year’s big sleeper.

V. Analysis of 2026 Primary Results

Tafoya won with a bare majority in a crowded field that included 2024 Senate nominee, Royce White. Unlike the GOP gubernatorial primary, I am not aware of any drama here that will prevent Tafoya from having Republicans behind her campaign.

Democrats, on the other hand, are the ones with the primary problem.

While Flanagan won by plenty (+19.4% margin) over Rep. Angie Craig (MN-2), Craig would have waltzed to a 2026 midterm victory as a low-controversy suburban female Democrat running in a “get Trump” environment. Flanagan, a renowned activist selected to be Walz’s running mate thanks to diversity check boxes, gives the “mushy middle” room to reconsider their past Democrat loyalties. Check out this creepy outfit in a recent campaign video:

VI. Polls

RCP Average: Flanagan +1.6%

In a year marred by terrible polling and in a Democrat state without a Republican U.S. Senator for almost two decades, I would expect to see Flanagan up like Roy Cooper in North Carolina polls. Instead, she’s polling like Ashley Hinson in Iowa, who I will believe will be stronger than her polling indicates. The two-party shares reflect a lot of undecided voters, but given the divisive Democrat primary, some of the missing voters could be Democrats waiting to come home. Either way, Tafoya is within the margin of error in every single poll since the beginning of September.

VII. Media Ratings

Minnesota is emerging on radars as a Senate battleground, but I think these reviewing bodies are overstating Flanagan’s strength.

VIII. Party Registration

Minnesota does not register voters by party. Until very recently, in something only offset by the Democrat primary surge, Iowa had been shifting Republican since the 2024 election. Not much has changed there (a proxy for Minnesota), so the ideological and political environment in Minnesota is likely not much different than it was in 2024.

IX. Election Considerations

This is Flanagan’s great equalizer. Minnesota runs absolutely filthy elections, and I’ve documented that here within these virtual pages for years.

That article reviews recent changes to Minnesota’s election laws, including:

• Allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to pre-register to vote
• Automatic Voter Registration
• Driver’s Licenses for All
• Expanded Early Voting

Opportunities for Election Manipulation

Familiarize yourself with the grading criteria for my election ratings. Here is how Minnesota rates with regard to the most common election demerits and its own unique traits:

• Voter ID – Minnesota requires no proof of identification to cast a ballot.
• Same Day Registration – Minnesota permits same day voter registration.
• Ballot Harvesting – Ballot harvesting is allowed, but according to law, a “designated agent” (ballot harvester) can only return ballots on behalf of three people. I have no idea how this can be monitored, let alone enforced, so it goes without saying that ballot harvesting is clearly taking place in population dense areas as evidenced by the mountainous spike in Democrat ballots in the Twin Cities in the past two elections. Undercover video of ballots being sold in the Somalian parts of Minneapolis serves as hard proof of criminal activity tainting elections in the state.
• Unique Corruption – The fleabag Minnesota legislature, which comprised a Democrat trifecta (House, Senate, Governor) in the past session, passed a ton of new election reforms, none of them good – more early voting, licenses for illegals, Automatic Voter Registration, and allowing 16- and 17-year-olds to pre-register to vote. These were all passed because every Demofrat in the state knows Minnesota would go the way of Iowa and Wisconsin if permitted to trend organically.

With the race no longer hidden from national attention, you can expect Democrats to have the Somali ballot trafficking machine on full blast, and all hands on deck in the Twin Cities to try and steer the race to Flanagan.

X. Summary and Election Estimate

These are the major factors for the U.S. Senate race in Minnesota:

Minnesota is still Minnesota. To overcome the Twin Cities, Tafoya will need to have her messaging down pat and exploit the divide between Democrat factions. Ellison’s 2022 challenger for Attorney General, Jim Schultz, got almost 32 percent in Hennepin County and nearly 30 percent in Ramsey County. In Hennepin, we are talking almost 10 points better than Trump’s losing margin from 2024. Tafoya will need to be aiming for a third of the vote in those two counties to be within striking distance.

If the people are truly upset about Flanagan’s role in the rampant fraud and corruption in Minnesota, all bets are off:

The survey above lists “inflation/cost of living” as the chief concern of Minnesota voters, but the second-most prominent issue pertains to the fraud. ZeroHedge, which posted the survey, had this to say about the issue in their recent article outlining the possible Senate upset:

Federal prosecutors estimate that at least $9 billion billed to 14 state-run Medicaid programs since 2018 may be fraudulent, a figure Walz disputes, on top of separate schemes in which sham nonprofits billed the state for child care, school lunches and other services. According to a House Oversight report, the state’s Democratic leaders knew about the fraud and failed to act.

Most of those charged are of Somali descent, and the House report found state officials ignored the fraud to avoid accusations of racism. Gov. Tim Walz’s net approval has since collapsed from +19 in June 2025 to -14 in August 2026. The damage has spread to Attorney General Keith Ellison, Sen. Amy Klobuchar and the Democratic legislature. Pollsters have yet to publish separate numbers for Flanagan, though a politician who has stood one step behind Walz since 2019 has little room to distance herself from the scandal. Tafoya has built her campaign on that exact point.

Minnesota, having previously elected Jesse Ventura as governor, is fond of political outsiders, which may give Tafoya an anti-establishment edge (now that former grassroots darling Flanagan had has her time in the sun and used it to create problems). Tafoya hasn’t been shy about the fraud issues:

NEW 📺 AD: We teach our kids that bad behavior has consequences, but somehow politicians think the same rules don’t apply to them. Peggy Flanagan ignored warning signs while fraudsters stole our tax dollars. She has spent eight years as lieutenant governor in the Walz …

Michele Tafoya (@Michele_Tafoya), Sep 18, 2026

Here is how the key factors in this race stack up:

Forecast for Minnesota U.S. Senate

Just like Republicans aren’t going to get caught from behind in Texas, Ohio, Alaska, or Iowa without throwing every dollar they can at them, the Democrats are in the same boat in Minnesota. If they have any shot at taking over the Senate, even with a loss of Maine, they can’t drop Minnesota’s Senate race. Had Craig been nominated and the rampant corruption not been such a pressing issue during this cycle, I would probably have this seat rated at 85-15% odds for Democrats instead of 60-40%.

Tafoya is definitely in the game. She will probably produce a results map with as many red counties as Trump does, but how many votes make up how much margin intensity is the key – and it will only matter if she can make a sizable dent in the Twin Cities Democrat machine. Flanagan, thanks to the key factors of the race and codified electoral corruption, maintains a fundamental edge that gives her the advantage for an underwhelming (for Democrat standards) victory.

Do not sleep on this race. Somali gangs have been busy doing all they can to flip public sentiment toward Tafoya.

Seth Keshel, MBA is a Senior Fellow at the Gold Institute for International Strategy and a retired Army Captain. He publishes Captain K’s Corner on Substack.

Susan Collins (R-inc.) vs. Troy Jackson (D)

I. The Race

Susan Collins (Republican) is seeking her sixth term in the U.S. Senate, and is the only Republican in all of Congress from any of the six New England states. She last won reelection in 2020 by 8.6% in a COVID-marred election.

Troy Jackson (Democrat), a former state Senator, began 2026 running for the Democrat gubernatorial nomination. He lost the race, but received the Senate nomination after the Democrats torpedoed the scandal-ridden Graham Platner, whom I have written about often this year.

II. State Profile

Maine was once an impenetrable Republican fortress when it came to presidential preference. The state backed all but three GOP presidential nominees between 1860 and 1988 before flipping into perma-blue status in 1992. It is one of two states (the other being Nebraska) that splits its electoral votes; Donald Trump carried ME-2 (northern Maine) all three times he ran for president, but struggled to compete in ME-1 (southern Maine). Troy Jackson’s brand is “working man from northern Maine,” and it is clear he is looking to peel away as much GOP identity as possible there to ride the partisanship in the southern and coastal portions of the state that Collins has managed to flout.

The state is lily-white, but remains loyal to Democrats because the southern portion of the state votes harder for Democrats than the northern portion votes for Republicans like Trump:

2016 ME-1 Clinton +14.8%; ME-2 Trump +10.3%
2020 ME-1 Biden +23.1%; ME-2 Trump +7.4%
2024 ME-1 Harris +21.6%; ME-2 Trump +9.1%

From my 2024 Leaner Deep Dive of Maine:

Democrat strength is clustered in the far southern end of the state, with Cumberland (23.7%) and York Counties (15.8%) combining for nearly 40% of the statewide ballot count in the 2020 presidential race. The northern part of the state, which falls into ME-2, is much more favorable for Republicans with a working-class agenda but splits its votes (Democrat congressman) and cannot regularly overtake the massive Democrat margin of Cumberland County (metro Portland), which dwarfs the next largest margin for either party by nearly 10%.

Demographic Statistics

94.4% White, 1.5% Hispanic, 1.2% Black

III. Market Assessment

Poll-believing apes are throwing money around for Democrats, but Collins is trading a lot higher than she was earlier this summer as people start to research her past races.

IV. History

The forecast for this race hinges on Collins’ specific history in winning this seat on five different occasions. There is no national comparison, no bellwether, and no proxy state to measure – she is the only member of Congress from the Republican Party representing any New England state, and that is for good reason.

For those of you who hate polling as much as I do, 2020 Maine Senate is a textbook museum display piece:

Not one damn poll had Collins leading. She wound up winning by nearly 9 points, roughly 18 points ahead of Donald Trump on the same ticket. She torpedoed a highly-regarded Democrat up-and-comer; in 2014, she laid the lumber to Shenna Bellows, the crooked Democrat Secretary of State who tried, but failed, to keep Trump off the state’s ballot in 2024. The beating was merciless, with a +37% margin and win of every county for Collins, who was defending in an apocalyptic year for Democrats.

In 2020, with a presidential electorate and modern polarization serving as a test, Collins lost ME-1 by 5 points, but won ME-2 by 24 points, 18 and 17 points ahead of Trump, respectively. Her model has proven simple – limit the damage in ME-1, and blow out ME-2. Jackson is trying to count on polarization in ME-1 and shaving margin in ME-2, but he has a major problem from the not-so-distant past looming over his shoulder.

V. Analysis of 2026 Primary Results

This is where the water gets really choppy. Collins ran unopposed, with enough Republican Mainers having the sense to accept her squishy nature, which I recommended last August.

The Democrats essentially experienced Götterdämmerung after having allowed Graham Platner to make it all the way through the official primary as the nominee. Once it became clear the image-conscious moderate weaklings in southern Maine wouldn’t vote for a literal Nazi who recounts his deployment bowel movements and fantasizes about political violence, they moved onto sexual assault stories and ran him off faster than you can say Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain.

Platner, despite his controversial nature, topped sitting Governor Janet Mills and took 156,084 primary votes. He tried to hang on once the media drumbeat started and the Democrats began to shoo him away, but the threats for more and more dirt to be released persisted. Platner left the race in July. It is a near certainly that a large percentage of his base supporters won’t vote for Jackson, who has eased into his role as nominee and cozied up to the elites he has spent his entire career raging against.

The Platner exile is one of the most impactful events of the 2026 midterm cycle, and one very few are talking about anymore. The Democrats’ presumptive path to a Senate majority arguably runs through Maine. If Collins holds it, the math gets extremely fuzzy for the left.

VI. Polls

RCP Average: Jackson +0.1%

Collins has led/tied in 6 of the last 8 polls released, including a +3 from NYT/Siena last week and a +2 from co/efficient this week. Tossing the two Jackson outliers, Collins has a small but clear polling lead. This is important given how significantly she outperformed her 2020 numbers. Bottom line, this is not where Democrats want to see Jackson heading down the home stretch, when Republican candidates usually tighten the polling up.

VII. Media Ratings

Toss-ups all around. Not enough guts to pick against Collins, but not enough conviction to research her consistent electoral over-performances.

VIII. Party Registration

These figures haven’t been updated by the Secretary of State since spring, but they certainly don’t help Jackson’s case. ME-2 continues to align with Republicans, while southern Maine remains mostly put with Democrats (York County shifting right is a huge deal for Collins, however). Her performance against party registration data is a key component of this assessment.

IX. Election Considerations

Advantage: Jackson.

Maine runs, by far, the worst elections in all of New England.

You name it, Maine has it. Too much mail-in voting, a blind eye to ballot harvesting, Automatic Voter Registration, and the dreadful Ranked Choice Voting, which is constantly gamed and exploited to produce the most troublesome outcomes. If this race winds up in a dead heat, a slow drip of mail-in ballots combined with Ranked Choice Voting tilts the scales heavily in favor of Jackson. Collins need to get her majority in the First Choice round.

X. Summary and Election Estimate

These are the major factors for the U.S. Senate race in Maine:

Collins has a history of vastly outperforming polling and presidential baselines that simply cannot be ignored. Perhaps full polarization will finally set in and her luck will run out this year, but betting against her requires tuning out her past performances. I wrote this in my “But the Polls” piece from June:

Maine ran 2.8% left by registration from 2014 to 2020, but Collins still ran 15.9% right of the voter registration index. Now, voter registration is 3.8% right of the 2020 election. If we throw out the ridiculous 2014 Collins +37.0% margin (Democrat president’s midterm), then Collins has run an average of 22.4% right of voter registration in two separate runs.

She only needs to run 3.6% right of the present voter registration index to beat Graham Platner, or whoever the hell the Democrat machine attempts to parachute in at the last minute in an attempt to mitigate Platner’s liabilities as a candidate. The polls, and by extension the gamblers, do not account for what history tells us, and history tells me that it is extremely unlikely for the incumbent senator from Maine to underperform by 19 points against voter registration from her historical benchmarks and lose to an increasingly radical candidate who will offend the intellectual elites in the exurbs of Boston.

Jackson is far behind Collins in terms of campaign finance. He wasn’t allowed to transfer any gubernatorial funds to his Senate campaign, so Collins had a head start he’s been unable to match. Republican outside spending trumps that of the Democrats by nearly double.

The only doubt for me, as an analyst, manifests when I consider this is the first midterm race in 24 years Collins has faced with a GOP president in office. The 2002 midterm cycle, thanks to the 9/11 dynamic, is one of just three cycles favoring the president’s party in the U.S. House since 1934, and it propped up Collins by a margin of +16.9%.

Jackson may dent Collins’ margins from 2024 in ME-2, and polarization may hurt her in ME-1; however, the Platner effect will undoubtedly favor Collins and deprive Jackson of a major chunk of raw votes he needs in order to topple an incumbent who does one thing very well – survive. If Collins finishes within 20 points in Cumberland County (ME-1), and wins Penobscot County (ME-2), she’s got the race locked up.

Here is how the key factors in this race stack up:

Forecast for Maine U.S. Senate

I expect Collins to win this race, probably inside of her 2020 margin and perhaps by as little as 3-4 points. Like a great artillery officer, she seems to have the range on exactly what she needs to achieve in an otherwise hostile district (ME-1) while leveraging existing support networks in areas of strength within the Trumpy ME-2 district. A Collins win in Maine this year devastates Democrat chances for a Senate majority, even if they hold Georgia and flip North Carolina. They would then be required to prevent any upsets (such as in Michigan, New Hampshire, and Minnesota) and flip two of Ohio, Alaska, Iowa, or Texas to get the math to 50/50.

Seth Keshel, MBA is a Senior Fellow at the Gold Institute for International Strategy and a retired Army Captain. He publishes Captain K’s Corner on Substack.

While Americans argue about which religious minorities belong in our national life, a Hindu of Indian origin captain and Jewish Israeli passengers offered a more consequential answer: They helped keep everyone on board Flydubai Flight FZ1073 alive.

On Sept. 30, Flight FZ1073 from Dubai to Tel Aviv became the scene of an apparent attempt to crash a passenger aircraft. Capt. Smit Machchhar was stabbed by his co-pilot, an Omani national, whose name has not been publicly released. Despite his injuries, he opened the cockpit door, allowing passengers and crew to intervene. Additional pilots subsequently landed the aircraft in Tabuk, Saudi Arabia.

Israeli passenger Yaniv Hayun was among those who rushed forward. He recalled telling the injured captain: “You’re not going to die today.”

An Indian pilot opened the door. Israeli passengers went through it. Their cooperation helped turn a possible catastrophe into a story of survival.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the Omani co-pilot had undergone Islamist radical indoctrination, while cautioning that final conclusions had not been reached. The United Arab Emirates is investigating possible terrorist links. The motive remains under investigation.

The rescue already offers a lesson America should absorb.

Last year, I completed a successful speaking tour dedicated to building bridges between the Hindu and Jewish diaspora communities on behalf of HinduACTion. The tour helped educate people about shared threats from radical leftists, radical right-wing white supremacists and Islamists. We spoke in Washington, D.C., Maryland, New York, Ohio, Texas, Palo Alto, and Beverly Hills about confronting shared threats.

To my knowledge, I was the first person to undertake a speaking tour across the United States specifically organized around a Hindu-Jewish alliance against those three threats. My message was straightforward: Communities facing overlapping forms of hatred should build relationships before a crisis forces them to depend on one another.

The cooperation aboard Flight FZ1073 reinforces the importance of that work. Solidarity has consequences far beyond a conference room.

Hindus, Jews, and Christians have compelling reasons to stand together against movements that make religious identity grounds for persecution. Their traditions differ. Their shared interest in protecting life, religious freedom, and peaceful assimilation is substantial.

An alliance requires recognizing a common danger and refusing to leave one another exposed. Sadly, I have seen certain groups who have yet to stand up and confront the dangers within their own diaspora communities.

And yet, parts of the American Right and Left seem determined to turn potential allies into enemies.

Groypers, or radical right-wingers, who treat Jews and Hindus as outsiders, weaken the country they claim to defend. Activists on the Left do the same when they excuse antisemitism as resistance or treat Hindu identity as evidence of political guilt.

Criticizing Israeli policy or Indian politics is legitimate. Holding entire religious communities and nationalities responsible substitutes collective suspicion for judgment.

Christians concerned about religious freedom should defend Jewish and Hindu neighbors. Progressives invoking solidarity should oppose persecution even when the victims challenge their political assumptions.

Islamist expansionism threatens people who refuse its authority, including Muslims themselves. Confronting it requires identifying its doctrines and networks accurately and strengthening cooperation among those resisting it.

The Abraham Accords made the Dubai-Tel Aviv connection possible through UAE-Israel normalization. Saudi Arabia is not a signatory, but the flight’s emergency landing there offered a glimpse of the wider regional cooperation we should want more often: Israelis and their Arab neighbors working together to preserve life.

Washington should demand a thorough investigation and examine cockpit security. At home, Americans should reject efforts to isolate Jewish and Hindu communities whose freedom is bound up with our own.

The people aboard Flight FZ1073 needed courage, competence, and someone willing to act.

America needs those qualities, too.

A Hindu Indian captain opened the door. Jewish Israeli passengers answered. Every American should recognize the strength in that partnership before another emergency forces the lesson upon us.