All the focus at present is on the on-going war between Israel and Iran but this just reminds us again of the importance of geopolitics and its ability to impact on markets and the global economy.
Dear Professor Ash, I agree with your analysis that predatory leaders can and will overturn the practitioners of the idea of the perfect market reflecting reality. As we have seen in history, elites have gone to war when they fear for the future and decide to role the dice by going to war. See the German High Command in 1914, the Japanese High Command in 1941, and the Bush administration in 2003. Bibi hopes that he can lead Trump by the nose to affect the change of the Iranian regime by aerial bombardment. This is the geostrategic equivalent to the road to perdition. Although the IDF has been brilliantly successful during its preemptive campaign, does anyone with an understanding of history believe that a real country of 90 million really pissed off Iranians the size of Alaska will surrender its sovereignty to only an aerospace bombardment? By the way, the Iranians have a significant cache of enriched uranium. Might not the IRI assemble an arsenal of primitive uranium bombs to conduct a slow motion strategic campaign of revenge?
Love the analyses. Makes you wonder how often these major decisions are less about long-term strategy and more about timing — Germany in ’14, Japan in ’41, the U.S. in 2003. Seems like once certain windows open, the pressure to act overrides the risk of fallout. Bibi’s reading the same moment. October 7 flipped the narrative, Biden’s hands are tied, and Israel’s tech edge is real — drones, F-35s, Iron dome, AI targeting. But Iran isn’t just a military target. It’s a nation of 90 million, and honestly, most of them are exhausted. Not just by sanctions, but by the IRGC. The regime has hollowed out the country — and yet, the world still treats the regime as if it is Iran. That said, I don’t think Israel’s acting out of dominance. It looks more like survival — surrounded by proxies and threats that don’t bluff when they talk about wiping it off the map. You don’t wait until your enemies are better armed and better positioned. You act before you’re cornered. And yeah — the uranium issue isn’t academic anymore. Even without a full weapon, the potential for slow-burn asymmetric retaliation is real. Dirty bombs. Proxy wars. Cyber. It won’t be clean. I’m no expert — just someone watching the patterns. And to be honest, it’s hard not to see something bigger unraveling here. The old global system feels worn out. The institutions that were supposed to keep things in check — the UN, G7, IMF, even NATO — seem more symbolic than functional lately. Would be interested to hear your take, Timothy, on whether this is just another period of transition — or if we’re watching the globalist framework itself come apart. Because it’s starting to look like the old rules don’t apply anymore, and some of us have the sense that this isn’t just politics — it’s a shift in the entire world order. Let’s see where it goes.
Dear Professor Ash, I agree with your analysis that predatory leaders can and will overturn the practitioners of the idea of the perfect market reflecting reality. As we have seen in history, elites have gone to war when they fear for the future and decide to role the dice by going to war. See the German High Command in 1914, the Japanese High Command in 1941, and the Bush administration in 2003. Bibi hopes that he can lead Trump by the nose to affect the change of the Iranian regime by aerial bombardment. This is the geostrategic equivalent to the road to perdition. Although the IDF has been brilliantly successful during its preemptive campaign, does anyone with an understanding of history believe that a real country of 90 million really pissed off Iranians the size of Alaska will surrender its sovereignty to only an aerospace bombardment? By the way, the Iranians have a significant cache of enriched uranium. Might not the IRI assemble an arsenal of primitive uranium bombs to conduct a slow motion strategic campaign of revenge?
Clear, 100% persuasive analysis of why and how we've got to where we are and what is the next probability
Love the analyses. Makes you wonder how often these major decisions are less about long-term strategy and more about timing — Germany in ’14, Japan in ’41, the U.S. in 2003. Seems like once certain windows open, the pressure to act overrides the risk of fallout. Bibi’s reading the same moment. October 7 flipped the narrative, Biden’s hands are tied, and Israel’s tech edge is real — drones, F-35s, Iron dome, AI targeting. But Iran isn’t just a military target. It’s a nation of 90 million, and honestly, most of them are exhausted. Not just by sanctions, but by the IRGC. The regime has hollowed out the country — and yet, the world still treats the regime as if it is Iran. That said, I don’t think Israel’s acting out of dominance. It looks more like survival — surrounded by proxies and threats that don’t bluff when they talk about wiping it off the map. You don’t wait until your enemies are better armed and better positioned. You act before you’re cornered. And yeah — the uranium issue isn’t academic anymore. Even without a full weapon, the potential for slow-burn asymmetric retaliation is real. Dirty bombs. Proxy wars. Cyber. It won’t be clean. I’m no expert — just someone watching the patterns. And to be honest, it’s hard not to see something bigger unraveling here. The old global system feels worn out. The institutions that were supposed to keep things in check — the UN, G7, IMF, even NATO — seem more symbolic than functional lately. Would be interested to hear your take, Timothy, on whether this is just another period of transition — or if we’re watching the globalist framework itself come apart. Because it’s starting to look like the old rules don’t apply anymore, and some of us have the sense that this isn’t just politics — it’s a shift in the entire world order. Let’s see where it goes.
A most insightful and helpful analysis, as always. One of the best there is.