Individual Economists

UK MPs Call For Digital Identity To "Tackle Illegal Immigration"

Zero Hedge -

UK MPs Call For Digital Identity To "Tackle Illegal Immigration"

Authored by Kit Knightly via Off-Guardian.org,

It turns out that the solution to illegal immigration is instituting a nationwide system of digital identity, issued to every baby at birth and containing all your social, education, financial, medical, and employment information.

At least, according to the 40 or so Labour MPs who co-signed an open letter calling for such a system.

Of course, that digital ID could solve the immigration “problem” should come as no surprise. After all, it can solve every “problem”.

It can make sure our elections aren’t rigged. It can protect our children on the internet. It can prevent the spread of disease. It can lower crime. It can tackle truancy and benefit fraud. It can government eliminate inefficiency.

Oh, it’s good for the economy too!

Yay!

Digital Identity is the Swiss Army knife of political policy. 

It has an attachment for everything, even funny-shaped ones you never use.

That’s why virtually every government in virtually every nation on Earth is keen to get one set up, to make life easier and safer for all of us.

And for no other reason.

This is nothing new. 

They’ve been saying it for years, but this louder and prouder, and worthy of note for that.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/14/2025 - 03:30

US, EU Condemn Russian Mass Casualty Strikes On Ukraine's Sumy

Zero Hedge -

US, EU Condemn Russian Mass Casualty Strikes On Ukraine's Sumy

On Sunday Russian ballistic missiles pummeled the Ukrainian city of Sumy, resulting in a mass casualty event which was quickly condemned by the United States and European Union.

Trump's special envoy to Ukraine, retired lieutenant general Keith Kellogg, reacted by saying it "crosses any line of decency". He suggested the strikes targeted civilians. "As a former military leader, I understand targeting and this is wrong," Kellogg posted on X. He said there are "scores of civilian dead and wounded."

State Emergency Services of Ukraine

Ukrainian emergency authorities said the Sumy attack killed at least 34 people and wounded more than a hundred. Local officials said that among the dead were at least two children

"On this bright Palm Sunday, our community has suffered a terrible tragedy," Sumy's acting Mayor Artem Kobzar said. Orthodox Christians across both Ukraine and Russia are celebrating Palm Sunday.

Ukrainian officials suggested the casualty toll is so high because the strikes were near a Palm Sunday church celebration, which marks the first day of Holy Week for the Orthodox.

Zelensky called on the West to ramp up support in the wake of the deadly strikes:

“It is crucial that the world does not stay silent or indifferent. Russian strikes deserve nothing but condemnation,” Zelenskyy said. “There must be pressure on Russia to end the war and guarantee security for people.”

Likely the death toll could rise amid ongoing efforts to rescue people under the rubble amid a devastated city section. Zelensky called called Russia "filthy scum" after the attack.

"Talks have never stopped ballistic missiles and aerial bombs. What’s needed is an attitude toward Russia that a terrorist deserves," Zelensky followed with.

The Ukrainian leader has of late argued that ongoing attacks like these show Moscow doesn't want peace, but is stringing Washington along as President Trump seeks the start of serious peace talks.

Via Reuters

Kiev has been frustrated that the White House has been more muted in reaction to such attacks, in comparison to the prior Biden administration.

But Trump may also see in this tragedy greater impetus for quickly achieving ceasefire. He's been emphasizing that people are needlessly dying on both sides in a war which "never would have started" if he had been president, instead of Biden.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/14/2025 - 02:45

Can Israel & Turkiye Manage Their Escalating Rivalry In Syria?

Zero Hedge -

Can Israel & Turkiye Manage Their Escalating Rivalry In Syria?

Authored by Andrew Korybko via substack,

The “deconfliction mechanism” that they’re reportedly discussing would likely be insufficient for resolving their security dilemma and might thus only delay what could be an inevitable clash.

Israel and Turkiye held talks in Azerbaijan last week on the creation of a so-called “deconfliction mechanism” for preventing an accidental conflict between them in Syria. No details were disclosed but it might resemble the one that Israel and Russia agreed upon in September 2015 and which is still in use. Unlike its precedent, however, this new one that’s reportedly in the works has much higher stakes given the escalating Israeli-Turkish rivalry in Syria since the fall of the Assad Government last December.

Israel never regarded post-Soviet Russia as a threat, and in fact, relations between them are closer than ever under Putin due to his lifelong passionate philo-Semitism. Their “deconfliction mechanism” therefore wasn’t all that difficult to negotiate and maintain since Russia had no ideological or strategic reason to interfere with Israel’s regular bombing of the IRGC and Hezbollah in Syria. Israeli-Russian relations sharply contrast with Israeli-Turkish ones, however, in the ways that’ll now be explained.

Israel and Turkiye’s mutual threat perceptions worsened after October 7th. Turkiye believes that Israel’s military operation in Gaza is a genocide that could one day be replicated against Muslims everywhere and can only be averted by restoring a regional balance of power. Israel suspects that Turkiye might try to achieve the aforesaid by ordering its Syrian clients to host ideologically aligned Hamas militants who’d be defended from Israeli airstrikes by Turkish air defense systems (even if they’re only Syrian-manned).

Turkiye abuts Syria so it can bolster its new authorities’ military capabilities and those of their shared Hamas allies much easier and quicker than Iran was able to bolster the Assad Government’s and their shared “Resistance Axis” allies’. This represents a much greater national security threat than the one that Israel earlier mitigated via its “deconfliction” mechanism with Russia, not least because Turkish systems might be used to defend Hamas, while Russian ones were never used to defend the “Resistance Axis”.

The potential downing of an Israeli jet by Turkish air defense systems (even if they’re only Syrian-manned) during an anti-Hamas bombing mission in the Arab Republic could spark a regional crisis that they want to avoid for now. Neither can be sure whether the US would take their side against the other, both over that hypothetical incident and whatever they choose to do afterwards, and the worst-case scenario of a direct Israeli-Turkish clash – let alone a conventional war – is fraught with uncertainties.

At the same time, such a scenario could become more likely if the newly exacerbated Israeli-Turkish security dilemma in Syria isn’t responsibly managed, but the root cause is arguably more connected to regional leadership aspirations than it is to Hamas. Israel and Turkiye are vying to fill the void left by the unexpected expulsion of Iran’s on-the-ground influence in Syria, which both envisage achieving via a hybrid approach, but their methods differ.

Israel wants to retain its freedom to bomb whoever it wants there together with strengthening the Druze and Kurds in order to facilitate the creation of a decentralized Syria that could be more easily divided-and-ruled for thwarting latent threats. Turkiye wants military bases and Hamas militants in a centralized Syria, which are tangible returns on its 14-year-long investment into regime change there, and to symbolically lead the Ummah by positioning its forces to strike Israel from Syria (even if it never does).

Each is convinced that their national security interests can only be ensured by filling the void left by Iran in Syria through their respective abovementioned methods, which they consider to be a zero-sum competition, but one that doesn’t have to lead to an accidental war if it’s responsibly managed. To that end, they might agree to a compromise whereby Turkiye entrenches itself in the north while Israel maintains freedom of action in the south, but such an arrangement would likely prove unsustainable.

Israel would feel uncomfortable with Hamas possibly operating training camps in Turkish-defended northern Syria while Turkiye would feel uncomfortable with Israel holding the Damocles’ sword of airstrikes above the head of Syria’s new authorities in Damascus. Turkish air defense systems could also secretly be deployed in proximity to the Golan Heights for defending Hamas militants that might launch missiles against Israel from there. A regional crisis might therefore only be delayed instead of averted.

As such, whatever imperfect “deconfliction mechanism” might be agreed to between Israel and Turkiye would be insufficient for responsibly managing their escalating rivalry, thus perpetuating regional instability as they continue vying for leadership in Syria. These dynamics raise the risk of a direct Israeli-Turkish clash that could quickly spiral into a conventional war unless creative diplomacy succeeds in reshaping them. It’s here where Syria, Russia, and the US could possibly play positive roles.

To explain, Syria wants to replace some of its military equipment that Israel destroyed right after Assad’s fall, which Russia could help it do in exchange for privileged economic (reconstruction, resource, etc.) contracts and so long as this is within Israeli-approved limits. Israel doesn’t regard post-Soviet Russia as a threat and has a decade-long history of successfully interacting with it in the context of their “deconfliction mechanism” so Israel would accordingly prefer for Russia to rearm Syria than for Turkiye.

This accounts for why Israel is reportedly lobbying the US to keep Russia’s bases in Syria as a way for Moscow to help West Jerusalem balance Turkish influence there through these means. Damascus would have to agree, however, but it would do well to go along with the abovementioned arrangement since this is the only realistic pathway for partially rearming, liberating itself from Turkish tutelage, and eliminating the pretext for more Israeli bombings. It’s unclear how interested it is in this though.

The new authorities came to power due to the leading role that their Turkish patron played in the 14-year-long rolling regime operation in Syria so they’re indebted to Ankara and trust it a lot too. These factors reduce the likelihood that they’d agree to rely on Russia instead of Turkiye for (at least partially) rearming, not to mention within Israeli-approved limits that would amount to tacitly subordinating themselves to its interests, though the US could offer phased sanctions removal as an incentive.

The problem though is that Turkiye wants tangible returns on its lengthy investment in overthrowing Assad, so it probably won’t accept not being able to at least set up a few bases in Syria and secure the right to use its airspace for military purposes, both of which Israel doesn’t want Damascus to provide. Just like the US could offer incentives to Syria for agreeing to this, so too could it offer some to Turkiye after Trump volunteered to mediate between it and Israel, though it’s unclear what he might propose.

All in all, the insight that was shared in this analysis suggests that more than a “deconfliction” mechanism is required for responsibly managing the escalating Israeli-Turkish rivalry in Syria, with the most effective solution being the proposal that was just forth with regard to Russia. Damascus might not agree, however, while Turkiye could unilaterally establish more bases in Syria even if it does. Trump might therefore try to broker a deal, but if he fails, then an Israeli-Turkish clash might be inevitable.

Tyler Durden Mon, 04/14/2025 - 02:00

How The Ukraine Minerals Deal Supports US Strategy And Ukrainian Security

Zero Hedge -

How The Ukraine Minerals Deal Supports US Strategy And Ukrainian Security

Authored by Milo Austin and WIlson Beaver via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),

China currently has a significant advantage over the United States in terms of critical minerals.

These minerals are “critical” for the production of green energy technology, the semiconductors used in consumer electronics, and military hardware—including missiles, aircraft, and ammunition.

An aerial view shows a dragline excavator operating in an open-pit titanium mine in the Zhytomyr region, Ukraine, on Feb. 28, 2025. Roman Pilipey/AFP via Getty Images

The PRC controls over 90 percent of the world’s production of gallium, over 80 percent of the production of magnesium, tungsten, and bismuth, and over 70 percent of the production of graphite. China also controls between 40 and 50 percent of the world’s supply of refined rare earth elements. Domestic production of critical minerals is comparatively weak, and the construction of new mines was repeatedly blocked by the Department of the Interior and the Environmental Protection Agency under President Joe Biden.

If we are to successfully counter Chinese influence in the Indo-Pacific, it is imperative that we secure new sources of critical minerals and grow our ability to refine them.

In light of these challenges, President Donald Trump has indicated his intent to promote the production of critical minerals both at home and abroad.

The Ukraine minerals deal, which will set up a “reconstruction investment fund” with the revenues from Ukrainian government-owned natural resources, is a significant step in the right direction.

The deal accomplishes several important goals.

First, it provides capital for the reconstruction of Ukraine’s devastated infrastructure and is designed to attract additional private sector investment, giving Ukraine a path toward financial recovery from the war.

Second, it compensates the U.S. for billions of dollars’ worth of military and financial assistance provided to Ukraine since the beginning of the invasion.

Third, it will create Western buy-in for the region’s stability that could deter future Russian aggression in lieu of a formal security guarantee.

Finally, and most importantly, it will give the U.S. a new source of the critical minerals and rare earth elements needed to expand semiconductor production and rebuild and modernize the military.

Ukraine is of particular importance because it is one of the most resource-rich countries in Europe. The Ukrainian government estimates that the country contains 5 percent of the world’s critical minerals, with large deposits of graphite, titanium, lithium, beryllium, uranium, and rare earth elements. Moreover, because of a lack of capital and sophisticated mining technology, only 15 percent of deposits were being exploited when the invasion began in 2022.

According to the director of a Ukrainian graphite factory, 70 percent of Ukraine’s critical minerals have not been mined. Up to $350 billion worth of these minerals are found in areas under Russian occupation, but the remainder are still accessible to foreign and domestic mining interests.

The deal is good for both Ukraine and for the United States, and ought to move forward.

Reprinted by permission from The Daily Signal, a publication of The Heritage Foundation.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times or ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 23:10

What $1 Million Can Buy In Prime Real Estate Around The World

Zero Hedge -

What $1 Million Can Buy In Prime Real Estate Around The World

Across global luxury property markets, $1 million doesn’t go as far as it used to.

In Dubai, for instance, a $1 million dollar property in 2020 is worth $2.7 million today. Meanwhile, in Miami, it would be worth $1.9 million. However, in some markets, cracks are beginning to show amid higher rates and frothy valuations spurred by the pandemic.

This graphic, via Visual Capitalist's Dorthy Neufeld, shows what $1 million can buy in prime real estate across 20 markets worldwide, based on data from Knight Frank.

Luxury Properties Are Getting Pricier

Below, we show the square footage that $1 million covers across luxury real estate markets, defined as the top 5% of residential listings as of 2024:

As we can see, $1 million covers just 205 square feet in Monaco, with an average new build costing a staggering $39 million in 2024.

Monaco’s appeal for the ultra-rich largely stems from its tax-haven status as it has no income tax, inheritance tax, or capital gains tax. Additionally, the scarcity of land met with high demand contributes to high property values.

Despite economic challenges, Hong Kong ranks as the second-most expensive luxury market. While many properties of Chinese real estate tycoons have sold at a sharp discount since the collapse of China Evergrande, it still commands top dollar for the most exclusive residences. Overall, buying power has moderately decreased compared to 2014 levels.

On the other hand, buying power has risen notably in London due to a falling pound against the dollar and a property market correction. Over the last decade, it has increased by 43%, the biggest jump across cities analyzed.

In many ways, this bucks the trend of a majority of prime real estate markets globally. In particular, Dubai has seen buying power drop 59% since 2014, followed by Miami (-54%) Lisbon (-51%), and Shanghai (-47%) amid robust demand and rising affluence.

To learn more about this topic from a real estate perspective, check out this graphic on the world’s least affordable housing markets.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 22:35

Escobar: Why China Won't Call The "Tariff-Wielding Barbarian"

Zero Hedge -

Escobar: Why China Won't Call The "Tariff-Wielding Barbarian"

Authored by Pepe Escobar,

The Toddler Temper Tantrum-style Trump Tariff Tizzy (TTT), now accelerated to 145% – and counting – is yet another thunderous trademark pigeon smashing the chessboard gambit.

It won’t work. Trump claimed that China would call him to “make a deal”. That’s reality show territory. Reality is more like the statement by the Customs Tariff Commission of the State Council: “Given that U.S. exports to China already have no market acceptability under the current tariff ratesif the U.S. further imposes additional tariffs on Chinese goods, China will simply ignore them.

Translation: keep vociferating/tariffing. We don’t care. And we will stop buying from you. Anything.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry: A “tariff-wielding barbarian can never expect a call from China.”

Basic numbers. China’s GDP for 2025 is projected at 5%. U.S. imports account for at best 4% of Chinese GDP. China’s share of total exports to the U.S. dropped to 13.4 per cent in 2024.

Goldman Sachs – not exactly a CCP “mouthpiece” – has just projected that TTT will cost China only 0.5% of GDP in 2025, while costing no less than 2% of U.S. GDP. Talk about blowback.

Still, from now on, what matters most for Beijing is to keep diversifying the supply chain.

Asia-wide, the extra wheels are in motion. President Xi Jinping will soon start an ASEAN mini-tour (Vietnam, Cambodia, Malaysia). The Shanghai Cooperation Organization – increasingly focused on geoeconomics – is about to meet. The EU, for all the mendacity of its “elites”, is absolutely itching to strike trade deals with China.

Zhao Minghao, deputy director at the Centre for American Studies at Fudan University, in Shanghai, refers to the current incandescence as “a game of strategic resolve.”

Previously, the eminent Wang Yiwei, international relations star professor at Renmin University in Beijing and an expert on the New Silk Roads, noted that the current tariff rate already made China’s exports to the U.S. “almost impossible”.

This analysis noted how China started to deal with TTT with a “courtesy before force” approach, then turned to “we don’t care”, while cultivating “the art of timing” in its asymmetric attack on U.S. stocks.

A fascinating window on the real wheels of Chinese trade is offered by a timely visit to the vast Yiwu International Trade City, the largest concentration of small traders on the planet.

Less than 10% of Yiwu’s phenomenal amount of business involves the U.S. Among the 75,000 business operators in Yiwu Small Commodity City, only a little over 3,000 do business with the U.S.

Two Sinophobes meet one mirage

TTT is largely the product of two crude Team Trump arrogant/ignorant Sinophobes, economic advisor Peter Navarro and Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent, who know less than zero about all things China.

In fact it was Bessent who right at the start gave the game away:

“This was driven by the president’s strategy… You might even say that he goaded China into a bad position. They responded. They have shown themselves to the world to be the bad actors, and we are willing to cooperate with our allies and with our trading partners who did not retaliate.”

A crude trap. With the sole focus on China. That had nothing to do with the initial tawdry plot line: tariffs, Mafia-style, on most of the planet, penguins included. If you don’t retaliate, fine. If you do, we hit harder.

of the so-called “Miran mirage” – after Trump’s alleged economic brain Stephen Miran. What is actually happening, fast, bypassing the stupid notion that tariffs will be paid for by current depreciation elsewhere (see Miran’s white paper here), is the uncontrolled demolition of the U.S. as a world trade center.

Asked why he paused the tariffs, Trump answered: “I thought people were jumping a bit out of line. They were getting a little bit yipee. They were getting afraid.”

Nonsense. Trump cannot possibly admit on the record that the U.S. oligarchy, Jamie Dimon and co., freaked out big time; and that, plus the debacle in the bond market, forced him to backtrack.

Nobody in neoliberal heaven and earth can mess with the Goddess of the Market.

As for the long-term strategy of several nations of the Global Majority caught in TTT’s crossfire hurricane, not to mention big players like China and the EU, they will all avidly reduce their dependence on U.S. markets.

Once again, the elaborate “deal” offered by Trump and his illiterate advisors boiled down to a Mafioso “offer you can’t refuse”: blow up, or significantly diminish, your trade with China – the largest trading partner of nearly all of these nations – and trade with Exceptionalistan, plus 10% tariffs. To hell with your economic sovereignty and strategic flexibility. Once again: it’s our way or the – tariff – highway.

Reality instead will dictate that the U.S. will increasingly import Chinese products from third countries – while China will continue to get paid for it. China will export even more to ASEAN and other Global Majority actors.

As it stands, Trump’s “plan” – if there is any – remains to “stabilize” his allies while concentrating all the firepower on China, in theory to drive China’s complex supply chains to chaos and force companies to move production lines to, for example, Vietnam or India.

Shakedown leading to breakdown

China containment will be on overdrive. Expect a tsunami of technological restrictions, investment red lines and, of course, extra sanctions. Sinophobe Bessent does not rule out delisting Chinese stocks from U.S. exchanges: “I think everything’s on the table (…) That will be President Trump’s decision.”

Beijing, for its part, can easily go nuclear, deciding for a sell-off of its U.S. Treasuries en masse, with catastrophic cascading consequences. As of January, Beijing held $760 billion in U.S. debt. With a delightful diplomatic touch, Yang Panpan and Xu Qiuyan, researchers at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, note that what happens next with U.S. Treasury bonds remains “highly uncertain”.

Bridgewater billionaire investor Ray Dalio, for his part, while incisive, was also heavy on diplomacy: “We are seeing a classic breakdown of the major monetary, political and geopolitical orders.”

There’s no more “cooperative world order” led by the U.S. (in fact that was anything but cooperative”); Dalio at least recognizes the unilateralism manifest in “the U.S.-led trade-war, geopolitical war, technology war, and, in some cases, military wars.”

Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Lin Jian de facto synthesized Beijing’s position. No more Mr. Nice Guy, which was the default Chinese position until recently: if the U.S. insists on fighting a tariff war and a trade war, China will fight to the end.

So here we are. And once again, it’s the Empire of Chaos against BRICS.

The Empire of Chaos embarks on a hot geoeconomics war against its peer competitor China; contemplates a hot military war against sovereign Iran; and at the same time tries to appease nuclear/hypersonic power Russia into a sort of hazy deal to somewhat freeze the Forever War by proxy in Ukraine.

The new Primakov triangle, RIC (Russia-Iran-China) is perfectly aware of these moves. Putin had metaphorically characterized the Russian position in the U.S.-China trade war when he mentioned that the Chinese have a good proverb: when tigers fight in the valley, the smart monkey sits and watches how it ends.

Now is more the case of three wise monkeys perfectly aware of what a pigeon posing as eagle is really up to.

*  *  *

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 22:00

The 'Nixon Shock' Might Help Us Make Sense Of The Trump One

Zero Hedge -

The 'Nixon Shock' Might Help Us Make Sense Of The Trump One

Submitted by Huw van Steenis via the Financial Times,

The author is vice-chair at Oliver Wyman and former global head of banks and diversified financials research at Morgan Stanley

What will the longer-term financial consequences of Trump’s tariffs be? We may be in a 90-day pause but the question remains urgent. A look back at Richard Nixon’s experience in 1971 could help investors understand what might happen next.

President Richard Nixon addresses Congress to explain his new economic policy in 1971 © AP

Certainly recent events share some hallmarks with the “Nixon shock”, which occurred when the then president took the dollar off the gold standard, implemented a 10 per cent import tariff and introduced temporary price controls. This de-anchoring of the regime resulted in a period of global economic instability and uncertainty. It not only caused a loss in business confidence but led to stagflation. Nixon’s price and wage controls spectacularly backfired, triggering product shortages and helping to fuel a wage-price spiral. The whole episode was a pivotal contributor to the huge inflation of the ’70s.

As with Trump’s tariffs, Nixon’s were introduced to cudgel countries into changing the terms of trade to help reduce the US trade deficit. His biggest concerns were Japan and Germany. “My philosophy, Mr President, is that all foreigners are out to screw us and it’s our job to screw them first,” Treasury secretary John Connally had said to him.

In today’s hyperfinancialised world, we have already seen that bond markets can force the hands of politicians far more quickly. It took four months in 1971 before Nixon’s tariffs were removed via the Smithsonian agreement. But the shock had already done enough to catalyse extraordinary changes in finance, leading to the creation of new instruments to bet on the direction of interest rates and hedge currency risk, including FX futures and options. 

The pain of stagflation in the banking system prompted a huge change in financial behaviour and financial regulation. Investors shifted asset allocation to gold and real assets to preserve value. Meanwhile corporates and depositors increasingly moved their activities from banks to bond markets. Bank lending as a share of total borrowing in the economy has been falling ever since. In short, modern finance was forged in the early 1970s. 

There are parallels as well for countries outside the US currently worrying about tariffs. Back in 1971 there was also shoddy treatment for the US’s closest allies. Nixon hit Canada with tariffs despite its currency already floating. Like Prime Minister Mark Carney today, Canadians didn’t back down and eventually the tariffs were removed. It could have been even worse: Connally had also wanted the US to withdraw from a long-standing pact with Canada on cars and auto parts. But Paul Volcker fixed that, according to his memoirs, by cheekily encouraging a State Department official to tear off the last page of every press release which mentioned it. 

Ultimately, the need to stabilise international relations with allies helped tip the balance away from the tariffs. Henry Kissinger, then the national security adviser, “grew concerned about the unsettling impact of a prolonged confrontation on allied relationships”. 

Nixon also put huge pressure on the Fed for expansionary monetary policy to offset the shock. William Safire, Nixon’s speechwriter, recounts how the administration kept up a steady stream of anonymous leaks to pressure Fed chair Arthur Burns, including floating one proposal to expand the size of the Federal Reserve, so that Nixon could pack the committee with supportive new members.

At the end of it all, Nixon’s four-month tax may have helped facilitate dollar revaluation, but it fell short of the desired goals and had no discernible impact on imports. The move’s economic shockwaves, however, rippled through the decades. Even the creation of the euro stems from it. Might a digital euro or deeper European capital markets be next? It’s not yet clear but history suggests the fallout from this latest shock will be felt for years to come.

*  *  *

You can support ZeroHedge with the purchase of a waxed canvas hat

Click hat... add to cart... check out... receive awesome hat... Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 20:50

"Widespread Freezes": Trump's Tariff Blitz Sends US Import Bookings Crashing, Global Supply Chains Crack

Zero Hedge -

"Widespread Freezes": Trump's Tariff Blitz Sends US Import Bookings Crashing, Global Supply Chains Crack

Global trade may be in danger of a disruption following President Trump's "Liberation Day" tariff blitz on Beijing. 

The latest high-frequency data on container freight bookings reveals that Chinese shippers rushed shipments to the U.S. over the last year to front-run the trade war—but have now abruptly paused shipments amid sky-high levies. 

Freight data firm Vizion published a new report Friday titled "Tariff Shockwave: U.S. Import Bookings Collapse After Q1 Surge. "

Here are snippets from the alarming report that warns about "widespread booking freezes" and unfolding global trade turmoil:

U.S. Import Bookings YoY % Change: 5-Year View

The chart below illustrates year-over-year changes in U.S. import bookings, highlighting key shifts over the past five years. After a surge during the pandemic that peaked in 2021, booking volumes declined sharply through 2022. A steady recovery began in 2023 and gained momentum through 2024, leading to a strong start in early 2025.

But that momentum didn't last. March 2025 bookings fell 20% from January peaks, even though volumes were still 30% higher year-over-year compared to 2024. The most likely explanation? Shippers moved quickly to front-load shipments ahead of anticipated tariff increases.

A Sudden April Crash in Bookings

As tariff-related uncertainty intensified, booking volumes collapsed in real time. Comparing the week of March 24–31, 2025 to the following week, April 1–8, 2025, we saw sharp declines:

  • Global TEUs Booked: ↓ 49%

  • Overall U.S. Imports: ↓ 64%

  • Overall U.S. Exports: ↓ 30%

  • U.S. Imports from China: ↓ 64%

  • U.S. Exports to China: ↓ 36%

This dramatic drop aligned with two key developments: the April 4th U.S. tariff announcement, followed by China's retaliatory measures announced on April 5. The result? A widespread booking freeze, as shippers paused mid-shipment cycle to reassess costs, timelines, and broader trade strategy.

Week-over-Week Drop in U.S. Imports by Product Type

Zooming in on product-level trends between March 31-April 6, 2025, and the prior week (March 24-30) reveals sharp booking declines across several categories:

  • Apparel & Accessories: ↓ 59%

  • Wool, Fabrics, and Textiles: ↓ 57%

  • Art, Antiques, Umbrellas, Feathers: ↓ 50%+

These are largely discretionary or seasonal categories, often the first to react to rising costs, demand shifts, or trade policy changes. Many of these goods also fall under one of many tariff adjustments, making them more sensitive to uncertainty and pricing volatility in the short term.

‍Week-over-Week Drop in U.S. Imports from China by Product Type

Imports from China showed similar pain, particularly in foundational manufacturing inputs:

  • Plastics: ↓ 45.4%

  • Copper: ↓ 31.1%

  • Wood Products: ↓ 24.0%

These categories are deeply tied to industrial and manufacturing supply chains and now face significant tariff pressure. On April 10, the White House clarified that tariffs on Chinese goods now total 145%, combining the previously announced 125% rate with an additional 20% import tax tied to other enforcements. This sharp increase in effective duty rates has already created significant hesitation in forward bookings from China, especially in high-volume, high-cost raw material categories.

The analysts at Vizion summed tariffs have sparked vast amounts of uncertainty:  

The message is clear: Shippers moved early to get ahead of tariffs, and then hit the brakes as conditions changed. This behavior, visible in booking data weeks before it shows up at the port, shows just how critical forward-looking logistics intelligence has become.

With tariffs from other trade partners currently on a 90-day pause, shippers are navigating a highly uncertain and fast-changing trade environment. The rest of 2025 is likely to bring continued volatility marked by demand swings, accelerated ordering patterns, and a re-evaluation of sourcing strategies the global response to these trade actions continues to unfold.

Emerging signs of trade disruption on major maritime shipping lanes between China and the U.S. come as Chinese suppliers are being swamped with canceled or reduced orders from U.S. companies...

We previously noted that the latest high-frequency indicators from Goldman—dated April 3 and covering Chinese consumption, mobility, production, investment, and broader macro activity—show that Trump’s tariff blitz has not yet impacted the real economy, particularly in terms of traffic congestion.

However, as we also pointed out, with suppliers pulling back on orders and container shipments declining, these high-frequency indicators could be on the verge of deteriorating...

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 20:15

David Stockman On Why The Houthis Aren't America's Problem

Zero Hedge -

David Stockman On Why The Houthis Aren't America's Problem

Authored by David Stockman via InternationalMan.cm,

The ascension to NATO of the Balkan Five (Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, Montenegro and Albania) and the Baltic Three (Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia) amounts to some kind of bad joke. Their combined active military forces total just 66,000 servicemen, which is exactly equal to the combined 66,000 man police forces of New York City, Chicago, Los Angeles and Philadelphia.

Likewise, their combined defense budgets are $8 billion annually or about the level of Pentagon spending every seven hours, including weekends, holidays, snow days and the Fourth of July parades, military bands and all. And when it comes to economic heft, their collective GDP is a diminutive $350 billion or just 1.3% of that of the USA.

So we rightly asked, why bother? Their military manpower, token defense budgets and rounding error GDPs do not have even remote relevance to standing up America’s triad strategic nuclear deterrent, which doesn’t require any foreign bases or allies in any case. Nor do they contribute a whit to an invincible conventional military Fortress America defense of the airspace and shorelines of the US homeland way over here on the far side of the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean moats.

And yet and yet. The wee countries of Eastern European NATO actually have some modest throw-weight compared to what’s involved in the raging Yemen bombing leak controversy at the top of today’s the news. Of course, the controversy is all about the leak of what practically amounts to a scheduled bombing run against a tiny spec of an “enemy” on the Red Sea coast. But the far more important question is why in the hell was the Donald bombing the bedraggled Houthi installations in the first place?

Or as Ann Coulter expressed it more colorfully,

…because right now, his foreign policy team is looking like John Bolton without the ridiculous Wilford Brimley mustacheSince Trump keeps hiring these people, it’s a good time to remind him that, in 2016, he won more primary votes than any Republican in U.S. history (as well as the election) by saying things like this about a war that had a million more justifications than his recent bombing of the Houthis:

“Obviously, the war in Iraq was a big, fat mistake. … We spent $2 trillion, thousands of lives … George Bush made a mistake. We can make mistakes. But that one was a beauty. We should have never been in Iraq. We have destabilized the Middle East.”

So why does Trump keep surrounding himself with tinhorn cowboys who think it’s America’s responsibility to drone, bomb, invade and occupy other countries whenever and for whatever reason they want?

As it happens, the Houthi tribes– who profess a variant of Shiite Islam—have dominated much of northern and western Yemen for centuries. They generally ruled North Yemen during the long expanse after it was established in 1918 until the two Yemen’s were reunified in 1990.

So when a Washington installed government in Sana’a was overthrown and the uneasily unified nation of Yemen disintegrated into warring religious factions, the Houthi took power in northern Yemen, while Sunni tribes aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood and al-Qaeda held sway in the south. And these latter folks are far worse on the terrorist scale than the Houthi ever dreamed of being.

Needless to say, this Houthi remnant of the failed state of Yemen ain’t no threat to nobody who’s minding their own business. They have no blue water Navy, no Air Force, no regular Army and just some odds and sots of coastal patrol boats and short range drones and missiles. So their ability to inflict even a scratch on the American homeland way over here lies somewhere between slim and none.

As indicated, the Houthis rule not the entire sovereign country of Yemen, but roughly 25% of  the former Yemen territory (about 137,500 square kilometers out of 550,000), including the capital at Sana’a and key northern population centers. Given that the GDP of the entirety of the Yemen territory was a scant $20 billion in 2024 and that slightly more of the economic activity—now often barter-based after years of USA and Saudi bombing—is under Houthis control, our trusty AI, Grok 3, estimates that in their wisdom the Donald’s purported America Firsters were bombing the shit out of some desert salients which generate a mere $6-8 billion of GDP annually.

That’s right. We are talking about a rogue regime of rifle-waving ruffians who control the equivalent of 1oo minutes of US GDP!

And, no, ensuring the freedom of navigation in the Red Sea doesn’t have a damn thing to do with it. Thus, in 2023, about 8.7 million barrels per day (b/d) of crude oil and refined products flowed through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait (southern Red Sea entrance), but almost all of that went to Europe. And the tiny 500,000 barrels per day of Persian Gulf oil that went to the US (1% of US energy consumption) could be readily replaced by domestic production anyway under the Donald’s drill, baby drill policy.

When it comes to the oil trade through the Red Sea/Suez route, therefore, we are basically talking about profits to the Petro-State producers and costs to European consumers—not anything remotely related to the national security of the American homeland.

Likewise, the containership trade is even more irrelevant. The overwhelming share of US destined goods from China, South Korea, Taiwan or elsewhere in the Far East (upwards of $600 billion per year) arrive here via the Pacific Coast and Panama Canal routes to eastern USA, not the Red Sea/Suez route. By contrast, upwards of 75% of the $1 trillion of containership cargo transiting the latter route, goes to Europe.

Moreover, in the event that the modest amount of US bound container cargo is diverted to the Cape of Africa route the incremental cost to the US east coast is barely material: At current market levels, the price per TEU is about $264 for the Red Sea-Suez route and $292 for the Cape route, again according to Grok 3.

In short, there is no economic case for attempting to bomb the Red Sea into freedom of navigation. And surely there is no basis for claiming that the Houthi, who are a rag-tag tribe of desert insurgents, are a threat to the liberty and security of the American homeland in any way, shape or form.

After all, even their Iran-supplied missiles have a maximum range of well less than 1,200 kilometers. Yet the last time we checked, the distance from Yemen to Washington DC was 11,000 kilometers!

So to repeat the mantra that could not be more pertinent to the Donald’s inchoate attempt to bring the Empire home: America must not go abroad seeking monsters to destroy, as our sixth president, John Qunicy Adams, stated so cogently nearly 204 years ago on Independence Day.

The Red Sea is not the Gulf of Mexico, Long Island Sound or the Gulf of Catalina. That means that the Houthi’s only real offense, which is attempting to blockade ships heading to Israel in retaliation for the latter’s genocidal assault on Gaza, is Jerusalem’s business to treat with, not Washington’s.

Moreover, the US Navy has not been hired by the UN or any other global body to safeguard every sea lane on the planet from the Suez Canal to the Straits of Hormuz and the Straits of Malacca. Nor should it take the assignment if offered because the homeland security of America does not depend upon Washington functioning as the gendarme of the world.

The fact is, if Washington had not foolishly placed warships in harms’ way in the Red Sea, monitoring the doings of the Houthi would be of such trivial relevance to the homeland security of America as to be assignable to a small staff of White House interns jabbering on Slack. There would be no need for secrecy at all, and even the CNN “war correspondents” wouldn’t much care.

In the section below, we will therefore address what Washington’s idiotic war on the Houthi is really about, but suffice it here to remind that US homeland security has nothing to do with the Red Sea or the navigation routes depicted in the graphic above.

To the contrary, it’s narrowly and precisely about two things and two things only.

  • prevention of nuclear attack or blackmail.
  • repelling a conventional military invasion and occupation of US territory.

Neither are even remotely possible at present by any power on planet earth. And when it comes to the Houthis and their Iranian backers, any potential threat doesn’t even register on the richter scale of national security.

Moreover, assurance of that impossibility does not require aircraft carriers or military bases strung around the planet. Nor American servicemen positioned in harm’s way for no good reason of homeland security, as are the US warships plying the Red Sea today.

As to nuclear blackmail, there is no nation on earth that has anything close to the First Strike force that would be needed to totally overwhelm America’s triad nuclear deterrent force, and thereby avoid a retaliatory annihilation of its own country and people. After all, the US has 3,800 active nuclear warheads and they are spread under the sea, in hardened silos and among a bomber fleet of 66 B-2 and B-52s—all beyond the detection or reach of any other nuclear power.

For instance, the Ohio class nuclear submarines each have 20 missile tubes, with each missile carrying an average of four warheads. That’s 80 independently targetable warheads per boat and at any given time 12 of the 14 Ohio class nuclear subs are actively deployed, and spread around the planet’s ocean bottoms within a firing range of 4,000 miles. So that’s 960 deep-sea nuclear warheads to find and neutralize before any would be blackmailer even gets started.

And then there are the roughly 1,200 nukes aboard the 66 strategic bombers, which also are not sitting on a single airfield Pearl Harbor style waiting to be obliterated, but are constantly rotating in the air and on the move. Likewise, the 400 minutemen missiles are spread out in extremely hardened silos deep underground.

Needless to say, there is no way, shape or form that America’s nuclear deterrent can be neutralized by a blackmailer. And the best thing is that the nuclear triad costs only $75 billion per year to maintain, including allowances for periodic upgrades, and needs no foreign bases or launch pads, at all.

At the end of the day, the only other potential military threat to the homeland security of America is invasion by a massive conventional armada of land, air and sea-based forces many, many times larger than the military behemoth that is now funded by Washington’s $950 billion defense budget. The logistical infrastructure that would be needed to control the vast Atlantic and Pacific Ocean moats surrounding North America and to sustain an invasion and occupation force on the North American continent is so mind-mindbogglingly vast as to be scarcely imaginable.

At the least, it would take a $50 trillion GDP to support such a thing—or obviously far more than the mere $2 trillion GDP of Russia or even the $18 trillion GDP of the Red Ponzi in China. So, most surely, the microscopic sliver of GDP under Houthi control ($7 billion) is an utter joke in the scheme of things.

Moreover, it’s not as if in an age when the sky is flush with high tech surveillance assets that such a massive conventional force armada could be secretly built, tested and mustered for surprise attack without being noticed in Washington. There can be no repeat of the Akagi, Kaga, Sōryū, Hiryū, Shōkaku, and Zuikaku  strike force steaming across the Pacific toward Pearl Harbor sight unseen.

As a practical matter, Russia has only one aircraft carrier and China has just three— two of which are refurbished rust buckets purchased from the remnants of the old Soviet Union, and which carriers do not even have modern catapults for launching their strike aircraft.

Likewise, neocon knuckleheads have been jabbering about China’s growing Navy, which numbers 400 hulls compared to 305 ships in the US Navy’s fleet. But what they don’t say is that most of these Chinese units are coastal patrol boats, which likely couldn’t even make it to the coast of California, anyway.

In terms of Naval power projection capability, the proper measure of lethality is not the number of hulls, but the total displacement tonnage. In this connection, the US Navy has 4.6 million tons of displacement, averaging 15,000 tons per ship. By contrast, China’s Navy has but 2.0 million tons of displacement, averaging only 5,000 tons per boat. That is to say, the Chinese Navy is totally visible, assessable and trackable, and is not remotely of the size and lethality that would make an invasion of America remotely plausible.

In other words, all of today’s Uniparty prattle about maintaining freedom of navigation in the Red Sea, Persian Gulf, Straits of Taiwan and Malacca and many more makes sense only through the false lens of a Washington-based Global Hegemon.

Indeed, for those in the Trump entourage who think Washington is obliged to keep the peace everywhere on the planet and safeguard all the sea lanes and all the air space from quarreling local parties, as per the prior professions of Little Marco Rubio and national security advisor Walz, let them advise the Donald to call a special session of Congress to declare yet another war on Yemen, as did the hapless Woodrow Wilson in April 1917 to no avail except the resulting rise of Hitler, Stalin, World War II, the holocaust and the Cold War.

But the truth is, Washington has been launching not very secret bombing raids on the Houthi for months because it has waded yet again into the long-running spat between Israel and its Arab and Islamic neighbors. Yet as unfortunate as that may be for the inhabitants of Gaza, the West Bank and Israel itself, it does not threaten either the peace or even the commerce of the globe. If it did, then the most immediately impacted parties would be the heaviest shippers and neighbors on the Red Sea.

For instance, Saudi Arabia lives on the Red Sea, with major ports at Jeddah, Yanbu, Jubail and the massive futuristic investment at Neom. Likewise, China sends more containership cargo through the Red Sea by far than any other nation. And, of course, Egypt collects the tolls from the Suez Canel through which the Red Sea traffic transits.

So, has Saudi Arabia, China or Egypt joined Washington’s one-nation “coalition” to bomb the daylights out of the Houthi?

No, they haven’t!

But what is especially rich is all the handwringing from the Washington neocons about the 9% of global seaborne oil traffic that traverses the Red Sea/Suez route. The fact is, however, the US is now a net energy exporter. So higher oil prices would actually be a slight benefit economically.

But actually, despite the latest kerfuffle over the Houthi interdiction of Red Sea traffic, there has been no visible impact on global oil prices since October 7, 2023, even if you make use of a magnifying glass. So what in the hell, exactly, are they talking about?

Daily Price Of Brent Crude Since October 2021

Yes, until Israel comes to terms with its neighbors, seaborne traffic from China and the Far East may be diverted into the longer route from Asia around the Cape of Hope. But so what?

The distance from Shanghai to Rotterdam through the Red Sea is just under 6,000 miles versus 9,400 miles around the Cape. That adds another third to the trip, but all the bleating from Washington about the extra costs is really too much—just 12% on traffic to the USA as we indicated above.

The fact is, the minor Houthi disruption of commercial traffic on the Red Sea is just one more reminder of why the US doesn’t need any of its 700 global bases, nor 100,000 military personal in Europe and roughly 100,000 in Korea, Japan and elsewhere in Asia, as well. And most especially it does not need aircraft carriers in the Red Sea, the Mediterranean Sea and the Persian Gulf—nor 50,000 American troops in Syria, Iraq. Kuwait, Bahrain etc.

These latter forces depicted below (sans Afghanistan), in fact, are all sitting ducks in harms’ way, waiting to get caught in the crossfire of local Shiite/Sunni conflicts or Israel’s perpetual conflict with its Arab and Muslim neighbors in the region. Yet all these forces would do exactly nothing to deter nuclear blackmailers or global armadas heading for the New Jersey shores, if such existed, which they do not.

And, no, there is not a sinister monster state in Iran behind all of the commotion, either. Iran poses zero threat to America’s homeland security. Period. It has no missiles capable of reaching the US and has no nukes at all, and would never get any had Trump not cancelled the 2015 nuclear agreement that Tehran was fully complying with.

The fact is, even though all of these bases and US naval forces in the middle east region are of no benefit whatsoever to America’s homeland security, they are also actually a profound disservice to the security of Israel, as well. That is to say, just as in the case of loud-mouth adventurists in the Baltics and Poland, who poke the Russian Bear because the NATO Article 5 mutual defense commitment putatively has their back, Israel’s rightwing politicians operate on the same perverse incentives.

Owing to the US military shield, which is once again on display in the pointless bombings of the Houthi, Israel’s right-wing religious fanatics led by Bibbi Netanyahu continue to sabotage a two-state diplomatic solution and, instead, make war on their encircled enemies to the bitter end. And they are enabled to do so without leveling with the Israeli electorate about the true implications of going it alone as a Warfare State.

Thus, in the case of the Hamas matter currently at hand, if Israel wanted to safely and permanently incarcerate the Gaza strip and its 2.1 million population in an open-air prison, then it needed not only the Iron Dome to protect its population against Hamas’ primitive rockets, but also a full-time garrison along the border to putdown any breach of the Wall, and thereby preempt anything remotely like the catastrophe of October 7th.

To put a fine point to it, the Gaza strip is 25 miles long or 131,000 feet. If you put one IDF soldier every 6 feet, that’s a 22,000-man requirement. And on a 24/7 four shift basis that’s 88,000 troops in total at an average cost of $40,000 per soldier plus $20,000 for the overhead and generals. Overall, we are talking $5 billion of incremental military expense to make the Gaza prison break-proof, which amounts to about 1% of Israel’s $550 billion GDP.

All along, that’s been part of the unacknowledged incremental cost of the Garrison State alternative to a two-state settlement. It would have meant appreciably higher taxes on Israel’s citizen, but the bloody and barbaric breach by Hamas fighters on October 7th would have never happened, either.

In truth, however, Israel never even considered tightening its own economic belt to pay for the war policy that its militaristic and religious extremist government insisted upon. Netanyahu ceaselessly campaigned for decades implicitly on behalf of a Garrison State national security policy, but one funded on the cheap via a quasi-pacifist defense spending level.

That’s right. Israel’s military expenditures had plunged from more than 20% of GDP at the time of the last existential crisis during the Yom Kippur War of 1973 to just 5% of GDP on the eve of the October 7 attacks. In effect, Netanyahu falsely told Israeli voters that they didn’t have to take the risks and make the territorial concessions implicit in a two-state and diplomatically-based solution to the Palestine problem. But at the same time, they could also avoid having to be taxed to the gills to pay for the alternative—a costly, heavily militarized Garrison State.

The wink and nod underlying this false solution, of course, was a pitiless willingness to keep Hamas in check by “mowing the grass” every few years in Gaza, as a desperate Israeli government has done once again to the horror of much of the civilized world.

So even more than the failure of Israel’s vaunted intelligence operations in the run-up to the October 7th massacres, the real deep policy failure is the flaccid blue line in the chart below, slouching toward 5.0% of GDP defense spending after the Netanyahu coalition came to dominate policy in the 1990s.

You simply can’t have a Garrison State policy—no negotiations with the Palestinians, no two-state solution, no continuation of the Oslo or other international negotiations process and the quarantine of 2.1 million largely destitute Palestinians in a congested dysfunctional strip of land cheek-by-jowl with the Mediterranean Sea—on a 5% of GDP war budget.

In short, Israel’s $25 billion defense budget is a pittance compared to its booming, technologically advanced and robust $550 billion national economy. The latter, in turn, is 20X larger than what had been the $28 billion that passes for an economy in the shambles of Gaza—a whisp of GDP mainly funded by foreign philanthropists and so-called malign actors in the region. And even that will soon virtually cease to exist.

Even if you count a few hundred million per year of aid from Iran and others that flows through Qatar to Hamas, there is simply no contest. Israel is an economic Goliath relative to the thin resources of the Hamas terrorist apparatus and does not need a US military shield in the region to ensure its survival. It just needs a government that will tell voters the truth about the real cost of the Netanyahu policy of perpetual war.

Needless to say, Bibi Netanyahu and his coalition of rightwing religious parties would have likely never stayed in power with their “rejectionist front” policy against an internationally brokered and superintended two-state arrangement had they leveled with the public about the immense increase in military spending and taxes these policies required.

But even that is not the half of it. The truth is, Netanyahu is a megalomaniacal madman who has had the reckless audacity to pursue an utterly dangerous Machiavellian strategy of promoting and funding Hamas in order to kill dead as a doornail any prospect whatever of a two-state arrangement.

The public record makes absolutely clear that this is what Netanyahu has done, even as he failed to tell the Israel’s public that this policy, in turn, necessitated a full-bodied Garrison State with painful tax increases to keep his Frankenstein monster contained inside the Gaza prison walls.

Israel Tax Revenue As % Of GDP, 1995 to 2021

For want of doubt, the facts are these. Between 2012 and 2018 Netanyahu gave Qatar approval to transfer a cumulative sum of nearly one billion dollars to Gaza in the form of suitcases full of cash. And at least half of that is estimated to have reached Hamas, including its military wing.

According to the Jerusalem Post,

……in a private meeting with members of his Likud party on March 11, 2019, Netanyahu explained the reckless step as follows: The money transfer is part of the strategy to divide the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. Anyone who opposes the establishment of a Palestinian state needs to support the transfer of the money from Qatar to Hamas. In that way, we will foil the establishment of a Palestinian state (as reported in former cabinet member Haim Ramon’s Hebrew-language book “Neged Haruach”, p. 417).

In an interview with the Ynet news website on May 5, 2019, Netanyahu associate Gershon Hacohen, a major general in reserves, said, “We need to tell the truth. Netanyahu’s strategy is to prevent the option of two states, so he is turning Hamas into his closest partner. Openly Hamas is an enemy. Covertly, it’s an ally.”

Indeed, earlier that spring Netanyahu himself was widely quoted as saying during the aforementioned meeting of Likud MKs that,

“Whoever opposes a Palestinian state must support delivery of funds to Gaza (cash in suitcases from Qatar) because maintaining separation between the PA in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza will prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state.”

So Israel’s governing faction of religious extremists, militarists, messianic settlers and Eretz Yisrael ideologues have chosen, instead, to live in a Garrison State and to be periodically compelled to “mow the grass” in the Gaza outdoor prison. Yet if its rightwing governments want to operate a modern-day Sparta, they need to tap their own taxpayers first.

In the meanwhile, the Donald and his minions need to truly sober up. Uncle Sam’s checking account is massively overdrawn. Now is not the time to fund wars which do nothing for America’s homeland security (Ukraine) or to perpetuate yet another war on behalf of an “ally” that is unwilling to pay for the Garrison State its own blood-soaked, perpetual war policies require.

*  *  *

The amount of money the US government spends on foreign aid, wars, the so-called intelligence community, and other aspects of foreign policy is enormous and ever-growing. It’s an established trend in motion that is accelerating, and now approaching a breaking point. It could cause the most significant disaster since the 1930s. Most people won’t be prepared for what’s coming. That’s precisely why bestselling author Doug Casey and his team just released an urgent video with all the details. Click here to watch it now.

Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ZeroHedge.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 19:40

Kremlin Says A Putin-Trump Meeting "Will Take Place"

Zero Hedge -

Kremlin Says A Putin-Trump Meeting "Will Take Place"

Following the March phone call between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, which lasted over two hours, the Kremlin has this weekend hinted strongly that the two leaders could soon meet in person.

Such an in-person meeting "will take place," Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has confirmed, but then vaguely said it would be "at the appropriate time."

"The presidents expressed their political will that [the meeting] should take place, including publicly. But it will take place at the appropriate time, we need to prepare for it," he added.

The Sunday statement by Peskov also followed Friday’s meeting between Putin and Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff in St. Petersburg. While diplomatic normalization was the focus of the latest Istanbul talks, the Witkoff meeting covered "aspects of the settlement of the Ukraine conflict."

The White House called it "another step in the negotiating process". Earlier this month Russian presidential aide Kirill Dmitriev met with senior Trump officials in Washington.

Still, Moscow has repeatedly stressed the need to "eliminate the root causes of the crisis" and to uphold "Russia’s legitimate interests in the area of security" and "the complete cessation of foreign military aid and the provision of intelligence information to Kiev."

But President Trump has lately expressed frustration on the question of achieving peaceful settlement on Ukraine, and the clock is ticking as critics say the Kremlin is intentionally buying and wasting time, making slow but steady gains on the battlefield all along.

"Russia has to get moving. Too many people [are] DYING, thousands a week," Trump wrote days ago on Truth Social.

Trump further reiterated that the war would have never started in the first place if he were president. He called it "a war that never should have happened, and wouldn't have happened if I were president."

The Kremlin has made clear that it will never budge on certain conditions - especially Russian ownership of Crimea and the four eastern territories, and of course a commitment to Ukraine demilitarizing and no more NATO expansion.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 19:05

Washington, Riyadh Agree To 'Pathway' For Saudi Civilian Nuclear Program

Zero Hedge -

Washington, Riyadh Agree To 'Pathway' For Saudi Civilian Nuclear Program

Via The Cradle

The United States and Saudi Arabia are moving toward a preliminary agreement to cooperate on developing a civil nuclear program in the kingdom, US Energy Secretary Chris Wright announced this weekend during his visit to Riyadh.

Wright, on his first official visit to Saudi Arabia, met with Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman and stated that both nations are on a "pathway" toward collaboration in nuclear energy.

Saudi energy minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman met with US Secretary of Energy Chris Wright, SPA

The agreement is expected to involve a memorandum of understanding later this year. Any US involvement in Saudi Arabia's nuclear program would require a so-called "123 Agreement," referring to Section 123 of the US Atomic Energy Act of 1954. This section outlines nine non-proliferation requirements designed to prevent the use of civil nuclear technology for weapons development or the transfer of sensitive materials.

"For a US partnership and involvement in nuclear here, there will definitely be a 123 agreement ... there's lots of ways to structure a deal that will accomplish both the Saudi objectives and the American objectives," Wright said.

Progress on a deal has previously been hindered by Saudi Arabia's reluctance to accept restrictions that would prohibit uranium enrichment or fuel reprocessing – both of which can be used to produce nuclear weapons.

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MbS) has previously warned that Saudi Arabia would pursue nuclear weapons if Iran acquired them, a position that has raised concerns among arms control advocates and US lawmakers.

Wright emphasized that multiple approaches could meet the objectives of both nations, though Saudi Arabia has not yet accepted the 123 agreement terms.

While the Joe Biden White House had sought a broader deal involving nuclear cooperation, security guarantees for the kingdom, and normalization with Israel, Wright's remarks focused narrowly on energy partnership. Saudi Arabia aims to expand renewable and nuclear energy as part of its Vision 2030 reforms.

In a related matter, US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steven Witkoff has presented Iran with a draft agreement that does not require Tehran to dismantle its nuclear program and did not mention an explicit military threat during indirect talks in Oman that began Saturday, Amwaj Media reported Sunday, citing an Iranian source.

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported Saturday that Iran had asked the US for sanctions relief in exchange for restrictions on its nuclear program.

"In exchange [for sanctions relief], Iran would be ready to return to the same levels of nuclear enrichment agreed under the 2015 pact that Trump withdrew the US from during his first term as president, according to Iranian officials and Europeans who spoke to them," the WSJ wrote, referencing the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) agreement signed during former president Barack Obama's term.

Talks between Iran and the US over the Islamic Republic's nuclear program follow threats made by President Trump last month. He said he would bomb Iran if it refused to come to an agreement with the US to dismantle its nuclear program.

Washington and Tel Aviv accuse Iran of seeking a nuclear weapon. Iranian leaders have made clear their nuclear program is for civilian use, saying that the use of a nuclear bomb is un-Islamic.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 18:30

Sunday Night Futures

Calculated Risk -

Weekend:
Schedule for Week of April 13, 2025

Monday:
• No major economic releases scheduled.

From CNBC: Pre-Market Data and Bloomberg futures S&P 500 are up 48 and DOW futures are up 250 (fair value).

Oil prices were down over the last week with WTI futures at $61.50 per barrel and Brent at $64.76 per barrel. A year ago, WTI was at $86, and Brent was at $93 - so WTI oil prices are down about 28% year-over-year.

Here is a graph from Gasbuddy.com for nationwide gasoline prices. Nationally prices are at $3.15 per gallon. A year ago, prices were at $3.60 per gallon, so gasoline prices are down $0.45 year-over-year.

Man 'Erroneously Deported' Is Alive In El Salvador Prison: Official

Zero Hedge -

Man 'Erroneously Deported' Is Alive In El Salvador Prison: Official

Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the man the US government has acknowledged erroneously deporting, is alive in a prison in El Salvador, according to a new State Department court filing.

Kilmar Abrego Garcia in a file photo. Abrego Garcia Family/Handout via Reuters

"It is my understanding based on official reporting from our Embassy in San Salvador that Abrego Garcia is currently being held in the Terrorism Confinement Center in El Salvador," said State Dept. official Michael Kozak in a sworn declaration to a federal judge in Washington. "He is alive and secure in that facility. He is detained pursuant to the sovereign, domestic authority of El Salvador."

The filing is the first since a federal judge overseeing the Abrego Garcia case ordered the Trump administration to provide daily updates on how they're effectuating his return to the United States.

Abrego Garcia, an El Salvadorian national, was illegally residing in the United States when he was arrested and deported to El Salvador in March due to what US authorities claim was a "prominent role" in the MS-13 gang.

While an immigration judge had previously ruled that there was strong evidence the man was a member of MS-13, a different judge issued a withholding of removal - preventing his deportation to his home country over concerns that he would not be safe there.

The US government subsequently admitted that the deportation was due to an administrative error.

On April 10, the US Supreme Court ruled that the government must "facilitate" the release of Garcia from El Salvadorian custody, and make sure his case "is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador."

Meanwhile, President Donald Trump said on April 11 that he will honor the Supreme Court order.

As the Epoch Times notes further, when asked about the court ruling, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One: “If the Supreme Court said bring somebody back, I would do that.”

I respect the Supreme Court,” the president added.

The federal government removed illegal immigrant Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia from the United States to El Salvador on March 15. He is now detained at the Center for Terrorism Confinement, a maximum security prison in Tecoluca, El Salvador, the Supreme Court noted in its April 10 opinion. The opinion was unsigned. No justices dissented.

The Trump administration agreed a month ago to pay El Salvador $6 million to detain about 300 alleged members of the Venezuelan Tren de Aragua gang and two alleged members of the MS-13 gang in its prisons for one year. The United States has designated both criminal gangs as foreign terrorist organizations.

The government has acknowledged that Abrego Garcia was subject to a withholding order and that his deportation took place because of an “administrative error.” The government has also acknowledged that his removal to El Salvador was “illegal,” the court said.

After an immigration judge signs a deportation order, he then has discretion to issue an order withholding removal, which prevents the government from moving forward with the deportation. The removal of the person is said to be withheld, leaving the individual in a kind of legal limbo.

At the same time, the government said that Abrego Garcia is a member of the MS-13 gang. Returning him to the United States would place the public in danger, the government says, according to the Supreme Court.

Abrego Garcia denies being a member of MS-13 and has said that he “has lived safely in the United States with his family for a decade and has never been charged with a crime,” the court said.

On April 4, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis in Maryland ordered the government to “facilitate and effectuate the return of [Abrego Garcia] to the United States by no later than 11:59 p.m. on Monday, April 7,” according to the high court.

On April 7, U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer urged the Supreme Court to vacate the judge’s order, arguing it would interfere with the president’s authority to manage the nation’s foreign relations.

Xinis “ordered unprecedented relief: dictating to the United States that it must not only negotiate with a foreign country to return an enemy alien on foreign soil, but also succeed by 11:59 p.m. tonight,” Sauer wrote.

Later the same day, Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily stayed the order to give the justices time to consider the case.

Three days later in the April 10 opinion, the Supreme Court said that although the district court’s deadline has passed, the rest of its order is still in effect, and returned the case to that court for clarification.

“The order properly requires the Government to ‘facilitate’ Abrego Garcia’s release from custody in El Salvador and to ensure that his case is handled as it would have been had he not been improperly sent to El Salvador,” the opinion said.

Meanwhile, on April 11, Xinis ordered the Trump administration to provide daily updates on Abrego Garcia’s situation starting on April 12.

At the April 11 hearing, when Xinis asked Department of Justice attorney Drew Ensign where Abrego Garcia was, Ensign said he didn’t possess that information. The lawyer also declined to offer additional information on what the government intends to do to bring Abrego Garcia back to the United States.

The judge told Ensign it was “extremely troubling” that there was no evidence available as to Abrego Garcia’s whereabouts.

T.J. Mascaro and Sam Dorman contributed to this report.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 17:55

New York Bill Proposes Legalizing Bitcoin, Crypto For State Payments

Zero Hedge -

New York Bill Proposes Legalizing Bitcoin, Crypto For State Payments

Authored by Zoltan Vardai via CoinTelegraph.com,

A New York lawmaker has introduced legislation that would allow state agencies to accept cryptocurrency payments, signaling growing political momentum for digital asset integration in public services.

Assembly Bill A7788, introduced by Assemblyman Clyde Vanel, seeks to amend state financial law to allow New York state agencies to accept cryptocurrencies as a form of payment.

It would permit state agencies to accept payments in Bitcoin, Ether, Litecoin and Bitcoin Cash, according to the bill’s text.

Source: Nysenate.gov

According to the bill, state offices could authorize crypto payments for “fines, civil penalties, rent, rates, taxes, fees, charges, revenue, financial obligations or other amounts,” as well as penalties, special assessments and interest.

Cryptocurrency legislation is becoming a focal point in New York, with Bill A7788 marking the state’s second crypto-focused legislation in a little over a month.

In March, New York introduced Bill A06515, aiming to establish criminal penalties to prevent cryptocurrency fraud and protect investors from rug pulls.

Crypto-focused legislation has gathered momentum since President Donald Trump took office on Jan. 20, with Trump signaling during his campaign that his administration intends to make crypto policy a national priority, as well as making the US a global hub for blockchain innovation.

New York may mandate state “service fee” on crypto payments

If passed, the bill would mark a significant shift in how New York handles digital assets. It would allow state entities to integrate cryptocurrency into the payment infrastructure used for collecting public funds.

The proposal also includes a clause allowing the state to impose a service fee on those choosing to pay with crypto. According to the text, the state may require “a service fee not exceeding costs incurred by the state in connection with the cryptocurrency payment transaction.” This could include transaction costs or fees owed to crypto issuers.

Assembly Bill A7788 has been referred to the Assembly Committee for review and may advance to the state Senate as the next step.

New York’s legislation comes shortly after the state of Illinois passed a crypto bill to fight fraud and rug pulls after the recent wave of insider schemes related to memecoins, Cointelegraph reported on April 11.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 17:20

Top CDC Vaccine Safety Officer's Records Missing, HHS Says

Zero Hedge -

Top CDC Vaccine Safety Officer's Records Missing, HHS Says

Authored by Zachary Stieber via The Epoch Times,.

Records from a top official at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention are missing, the CDC’s parent agency has informed a U.S. senator.

Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) officials told Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) in March that “they are having difficulty locating records,” Johnson said on April 9.

More recently, HHS officials said that Dr. Tom Shimabukuro’s records “remain lost and, potentially, removed from HHS’s email system altogether,” Johnson added.

Shimabukuro, the CDC, and HHS did not respond to requests for comment by publication time.

Shimabukuro is director of the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office, which researches the safety of vaccines, according to the CDC’s website. He frequently spoke at vaccine meetings, at times offering false information, The Epoch Times previously reported.

He was also involved in vaccine research, including monitoring vaccine safety in pregnant women.

Johnson, the chairman of the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, disclosed the situation with Shimabukuro’s records in a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel, and Juliet Hodgkins, the acting inspector general of HHS.

“Dr. Shimabukuro’s potential mishandling of his official records is highly concerning. His actions, if true, would have directly obstructed my multi-year oversight efforts of the COVID-19 vaccines and would be in clear violation of my November 19, 2024 demand to HHS, CDC, and the Food and Drug Administration to ‘preserve all records referring or relating to the development, safety, and efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccines,’” Johnson wrote.

“Furthermore, given Dr. Shimabukuro’s role at CDC, which includes monitoring adverse events relating to the COVID-19 vaccines, his communications are directly responsive to my January 28, 2025, subpoena to HHS for records relating to the development and safety of the COVID-19 vaccines. Any attempt to obstruct or interfere with my investigatory efforts would be grounds for contempt of Congress.”

The senator also said that if Shimabukuro mishandled records, he may have violated laws such as the Federal Records Act.

Johnson asked Bondi, Patel, and Hodgkins to investigate whether Shimabukuro and other officials within HHS deleted or destroyed agency records, including any attempts to avoid congressional oversight or Freedom of Information Act requests.

Spokespersons for the Department of Justice and HHS Office of Inspector General (OIG) confirmed in emails to The Epoch Times that the agencies received the letter, and declined to comment further. The FBI declined to comment.

Another HHS official, National Institutes of Health scientist Dr. David Morens, was previously revealed—through emails obtained via the Freedom of Information Act—to have talked about how he learned to make messages disappear after requests under the act were lodged.

“So I think we are all safe,” he wrote in one of the emails in 2021.

Johnson also requested an HHS inspector general investigation of Morens. The HHS hasn’t confirmed whether any probes were initiated, according to Johnson.

To date, the HHS OIG refuses to confirm that it has initiated any of these investigations. The HHS OIG’s lack of transparency with Congress is unacceptable,” Johnson wrote. “If the allegations regarding Dr. Shimabukuro’s mishandling of agency records are true, then it will certainly raise questions about the effectiveness of the HHS OIG’s oversight and cast doubt on whether the HHS OIG actually did what I asked it to do nineteen months ago.”

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 16:10

Cutting Through Financial Noise

The Big Picture -



 

 

In the latest edition of more or me, I chat with my friend Eric Golden:

I speak My guest today is Barry Ritholtz. As the founder & CIO of Ritholtz Wealth Management Barry manages assets of over $5B. He is also a famous author and commentator, fondly known as the ‘Prickly Prophet of Wall Street’ for his contrarian views. In this conversation, Barry shares the origin story and the ideas behind his latest book, “How Not to Invest.” We also talk about how he’s remained a force in the industry while calling out powerful people, advice for curating the right information diet, and some of his biggest misses.  Please enjoy this conversation with Barry Ritholtz.

This was a little different than the usual pod…

 

 

Source:
Cutting Through Financial Noise
Hosted by Eric Golden
Colossus, 04.11.2025

 

 

 

 

 

The post Cutting Through Financial Noise appeared first on The Big Picture.

You Can't LNG Your Way Out Of A Trade Deficit

Zero Hedge -

You Can't LNG Your Way Out Of A Trade Deficit

Authored by Tsvetana Paraskova via OilPrice.cm,

  • Some traditional U.S. energy buyers, such as Japan, South Korea, and the EU, have signaled that they may be willing to buy more American oil, LNG, or coal.

  • Higher energy imports from the trade partners could dent some of the U.S. trade deficits, but they will by no means fix or erase these.

  • Commitments and contracts to buy more U.S. energy will not necessarily spare any buyer from tariffs.

U.S. President Donald Trump insists that American buyers boost purchases of U.S. energy goods to reduce their large trade surpluses with America.

Some traditional U.S. energy buyers, such as Japan, South Korea, and the EU, have signaled that they may be willing to buy more American oil, LNG, or coal to appease the President who has fixated on fixing the massive trade deficits America runs with most countries.

Higher energy imports from the trade partners could dent some of the U.S. trade deficits, but they will by no means fix or erase these.

For most countries, energy is the only viable increase in imports from the United States. Japan, South Korea, and the EU, for example, have expressed readiness to boost their LNG or oil imports from America.

They did so immediately after President Trump’s inauguration. Nonetheless, tariffs followed. They are now paused, but the threat of more rounds of tariffs across the board is still very much present—just look at the whiplash trading and carnage on Wall Street.

Even if buyers commit to significantly boosting their imports of U.S. oil and gas, the deficits will remain. On the other hand, U.S. exporters cannot provide the energy commodities needed to significantly reduce America’s trade deficits.

A case in point is President Trump’s idea that the European Union should pledge to buy $350 billion worth of energy from the United States if it wants tariff relief.

The European Union is ready to commit to buying more liquefied natural gas from the United States if that would appease President Trump and make him reconsider tariffs, the EU’s energy commissioner Dan Jørgensen said this week.

However, $350 billion worth of LNG is roughly equal to some 40 million tons of the super-chilled fuel. That’s more than half of the EU’s total LNG imports last year of some 75 million tons, much of which came from America anyway, per the bloc’s statistics agency, Eurostat.

Commitments and contracts to buy more U.S. energy will not necessarily spare any buyer from tariffs. Taiwan, traditionally strongly supported by the U.S. in its quest to shake off Chinese influence and continue to be a democracy, saw this firsthand.

Taiwan was slapped with a 32% tariff, which has been halted for 90 days, although it had just made some big commitments to invest in the U.S., including in U.S. energy projects. Last month, Taiwan’s state-held oil and gas company CPC Corporation signed a letter of intent to invest in the $44-billion Alaska LNG export project and buy LNG from it as part of a move to bolster its gas supply and energy security.

Unfortunately for Taiwan, in any negotiations with deficit-fixated President Trump, the value of its exports to the U.S. – predominantly semiconductors – vastly outstrips the value of the goods it imports from America.

Taiwan wasn’t spared from one of the highest now-suspended tariffs despite being the only early committed investor in the huge Alaska LNG project, while Japan and South Korea are hesitating.

This doesn’t give much assurance to other energy buyers that their commitments would satisfy President Trump.

And even if Japan, for example, were to dramatically raise its oil exports from the U.S. to account for 10% of all its crude imports, up from 1.6% last year at WTI at $60 per barrel, the volumes would be worth about $4.8 billion, Reuters columnist Clyde Russell estimates. But Japan’s trade surplus with the U.S. was more than 14 times higher than this—at $68 billion in 2024, he notes.

Moreover, Japan already imports U.S. LNG, representing nearly 10% of all its LNG purchases. It isn't easy to increase this amount due to Japan’s long-term supply deals with other LNG exporters and the simple logistics and availability of U.S. LNG exports.

U.S. trade partners will now look to negotiate their way out of hefty tariffs during the 90-day pause. They can only hope for reasonable talks and deals, and that the U.S. and the world will avoid recession in the escalating U.S.-China trade war that could crush global energy demand and the U.S. ability to sustain its oil production at current levels.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 10:30

Space Force Commander Fired After Undermining JD Vance Visit To Greenland

Zero Hedge -

Space Force Commander Fired After Undermining JD Vance Visit To Greenland

During the height of the Cold War the United States built multiple military outposts and bases in Greenland as part of the Distance Early Warning (DEW) Line to defend against a sneak attack by Soviet forces.  The presence of these forces (including a secret underground ice base) was not only to act as early detection, but also as area denial.

For decades the US has been pouring money and resources into Greenland, even though it was officially an "autonomous" territory of Denmark.  For example, Greenland received yearly subsidies from USAID (until it was shut down) of up to $12 million.  Greenland officials talked avidly of strengthening economic ties with the US in 2021 after stopping a Chinese attempt to secure mining rights in the region (the CCP uses resource agreements in weaker countries to gain leverage over their governments).    

In the uncertain period after WWII, the American presence was considered practical and was welcomed.  It would be unheard of for base commanders in the region to openly question or undermine Presidential efforts to secure Greenland.  It would also be especially bizarre for a US commander to express loyalty to Denmark or Greenland over America.  However, in 2025 we're living in the age of military DEI and the now defunct Biden era has left some nasty activist surprises behind.

Vice President JD Vance has been busy in the country pursuing Donald Trump's interest in bringing back a greater US presence in Greenland or perhaps negotiating for control of the territory outright.  This included a tour of the last remaining US base in the region, Pituffik Space Base.

The commander of the base, Colonel Susan Meyers, responded to the visit with an email message to personnel expressing opposition to Vance's statements during his tour in which he argued that Denmark had left Greenland in an economic doldrums.  She also reportedly insinuated concerns that Vance's visit might have an adverse effect on personnel and their relationships with Greenlanders and Danes that work at the base.

“I spent the weekend thinking about Friday's visit -- the actions taken, the words spoken, and how it must have affected each of you. I do not presume to understand current politics, but what I do know is the concerns of the U.S. administration discussed by Vice-President Vance on Friday are not reflective of Pituffik Space Base...I commit that, for as long as I am lucky enough to lead this base, all of our flags will fly proudly -- together..."

Meyers, who has been commander of Pituffik Space Base since July of 2024, has subsequently been fired from her post. Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell retweeted Military.com’s story on the email and added a screenshot of the announcement of Meyers’ removal.

“Actions to undermine the chain of command or to subvert President Trump’s agenda will not be tolerated at the Department of Defense,” Parnell wrote on X.

Military leaders are expected to remain non-partisan in their engagements with personnel and foreign interests, but the statements by Meyers reflect the commonly invasive nature of progressive activism.  The need to push equity and inclusion rhetoric spread like a virus within the armed forces during the Biden Administration due to DEI programs.  It is incumbent upon military personnel to place US interests above all others, not clutch pearls in the name of "equity".  Any disagreements on policy are supposed to be handled internally to prevent fomenting divisions.

Numerous DEI hires within the military have led to embarrassing breaches of protocol, from drag queen TikToks to promote recruitment for the Navy, to Critical Race Theory classes and marketing for up and coming officers, and feminist based promotions for unqualified women into specialized combat units like the Army Rangers.  This kind of recruitment is poison to an organization that relies on merit as a foundation for its survival.    

Pituffik Space Base is home to the 821st Space Base Group and is responsible for space base support. The base hosts the 12th Space Warning Squadron (12 SWS), which operates a Ballistic Missile Early Warning System (BMEWS) designed to detect and track ICBMs launched against North America. The base is also host to Detachment 1 of the 23rd Space Operations Squadron, part of the Space Delta 6's global satellite control network. The airfield's runway handles more than 3,000 US and international flights per year. The base is also home to the northernmost deep water port in the world.

Greenland officials have expressed interest in working more closely with the US but also say they want to keep their autonomy (have their cake and eat it too). Greenland's economic development is essentially non-existent and with a tiny population of 56,000 people that's unlikely to change.  Denmark has indeed left the nation to flounder.  A larger American presence could jump-start resource projects including energy and mineral exploration. 

It's difficult to determine what Trump's true strategy will be for a larger US presence in Greenland, but he has stated that "nothing is off the table".  One thing is certain - Military leaders announcing political proclamations out of turn will not make it any easier for Trump to secure a deal.   

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 08:45

PCE Inflation expected to be Soft in March

Calculated Risk -

The Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) price index for March will be released on April 30th. The data released so far suggests the PCE inflation will be soft in March.

From Goldman Sachs economists:
The producer price index (PPI), the PPI excluding food and energy, and the PPI excluding food, energy, and trade were all below consensus expectations in March. The components relevant for core PCE were soft. Based on the details in the PPI and CPI reports, we estimate that the core PCE price index rose 0.08% in March (vs. our expectation of 0.13% before today's PPI report), corresponding to a year-over-year rate of +2.52%.
And from BofA:
[W]e are tracking core PCE to rise by 0.1% m/m (0.08% unrounded) in March. This would be a notable deceleration from the first two months of the year. However, February is likely to be revised up significantly to 0.5% m/m due to a very large upward revision to portfolio management. As a result, we expect y/y core PCE to fall to 2.6% from an upwardly revised 2.9%.
This is further improvement progress on inflation.  If policy had remained unchanged, we'd probably be celebrating a "soft landing".  However, the tariffs will likely impact prices in May (the data will be released in June).

More 'Trump-Proofing' The War: Europe Pledges $23BN In New Military Support For Ukraine

Zero Hedge -

More 'Trump-Proofing' The War: Europe Pledges $23BN In New Military Support For Ukraine

Authored by Kyle Anzalone via AntiWar.com,

The Ukraine Defense Contact Group (UDCG) pledged to send 21 billion euros ($23.7 billion) in future military aid for Kiev. Under the Joe Biden administration, Washington led the UDCG and was the largest contributor to the Western proxy war in Ukraine.

Following a meeting of the UDCG on Friday, the bloc announced the new military aid for Kiev. The majority of the aid was pledged by Berlin and London. Germany agreed to send Ukraine €11 billion over the next four years. The UK plans to send £4.5 billion this year.

Getty Images

The UDCG was formed and led by the US to facilitate Western support for the proxy war in Ukraine. After Trump returned to the White House, the US stepped back as the group’s leader. London and Berlin are now co-heads of the organization. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth attended Friday’s summit remotely.

Discussing Berlin’s pledge, Defense Minister Boris Pistorius argued, “Given Russia’s ongoing aggression against Ukraine, we must concede (that) peace in Ukraine appears to be out of reach in the immediate future.” He added, “We will ensure that Ukraine continues to benefit from our joint military support.”

President Trump is making a major push to bring the war to an end with a diplomatic settlement. US and Russian officials met in Turkey on Thursday, with both sides describing the talks as positive. On Friday, Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, traveled to St. Petersburg to meet with President Valdimir Putin.

UK Defence Secretary John Healey accused Putin of misleading the US about Russia’s interest in ending the war. “Putin said he wanted peace, but his forces continue to fire on Ukraine,” he said.

Ukrainian Defense Minister Rustem Umerov, who attended Friday’s summit, explained that Europe was now “taking the lead in security assistance for which we are thankful to the UK and Europe.” He noted that Washington has continued to send Kiev military aid.

Pistorius said Berlin’s pledge to send billions in weapons to Kiev over the next four years is because “Russia needs to understand that Ukraine is able to go on fighting, and we will support it.”

According to the Ukrainian Defense Ministry, the German pledge includes 4 IRIS-T air-defence systems with 300 guided missiles, 300 reconnaissance drones, 120 MANPADS, 25 Marder infantry fighting vehicles, 15 Leopard 1A5 main battle tanks, 14 artillery systems, 100 ground surveillance radars, 30 PATRIOT guided missiles, and 100,000 rounds of artillery ammunition.

Berlin’s pledge notably does not include Patriot launch systems, just interceptors. Ukrainian President Zelesnky has recently made several appeals to allies for more air defense systems. Pistorius said Germany was unable to send a Patriot system to Ukraine as Berlin is waiting for deliveries of the platform for its defenses.

“Air defence is a problem all over the world – we are doing as much as we can as fast as we can,” said PistoriusMost of Britain’s military aid will come as radar systems and air defenses. “In our calculations, 70% to 80% of battlefield casualties are now caused and inflicted by drones,” Healey explained.

Tyler Durden Sun, 04/13/2025 - 08:10

Pages