Dr Strangecurve

By Michael Every of Rabobank

As Christian Lawrence notes in ‘

Meanwhile, the Great Game continues to come into sharper focus in global War Rooms for those not staring too hard at lines on their Bloomberg screens.

The SCMP headline today is, ‘As the US retreats, can Xi Jinping’s new initiative shape the future world order?’ They add, “Analysts say the Global Governance Initiative reflects China’s ambitions to shape a multipolar world, but it needs more substance to avoid becoming an ‘empty shell’.”

That’s as ‘Greenland’s defenses are being bolstered against Russia and China, but Trump may be the real target’ (CNN) – I’m sure the Pentagon is terrified if so; the US warned Canada of potential negative consequences if it dumps F-35 fighter jets; Israel presented Syria with a proposal for a new security agreement, which it hasn’t yet replied to; and Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu have refused to sign the defense treaties with Australia it had drawn up for them.

In short, the boundaries of emergent geopolitical blocs continue to be thrashed out in real time alongside those of the matching geoeconomics.

There, the SCMP claims a Trump China trip many hinge on Boeing and soybean deals and that “significant progress” has been made. Recall the Farce One Trade Deal which was an irrelevant thing in markets nearly six years ago? It’s unlikely to play out again, even as Trump extended TikTok’s deadline as US investors seem set to take 80% control of it while the actual algorithm stays with China.

Rather, the US is beginning the review of trade deal with Canada and Mexico – expect far stronger measures to ringfence US production in some key sectors and guidance on transshipment from outside the bloc. PM Carney reportedly told Anglo American to move its HQ to Canada for the Teck deal approval, which is Anglo American in the broadest sense. The UK has paused its push for a 0% US tariff on steel, which it makes very little of, as PM Starmer prefers to lock in a “permanent” 25% rate, but the Trump state visit is going to see US tech giants pledge billions for UK AI infrastructure. Moreover, the US government will start a multibillion mining initiative for critical minerals via the IDFC and hedge fund Orion.

The EU and Indonesia are set to agree a trade deal next week, which the Financial Times claims is to “seek to reduce reliance on the US.” Except both economies want to be net exporters, so won’t import much from the other, especially against public protests and political populism, and both signed trade deals with the US which don’t allow them to export anything to it they import in volume from China. As such, an EU-Indonesia trade deal is still a step towards a US-centric trading bloc. Just don’t expect many headlines saying so from Brussels or Jakarta.

The EU will reportedly adopt new sanctions against Israel today, which could involve removing trade privileges. As the EU runs hefty trade and services surpluses with Israel, that could mean it takes the larger economic blow should things escalate, while Israel is a key source of defence tech, such as Iron Dome, that a Europe trying to rearm rapidly may have to buy from the US, which will continue to work with Israel, or duplicate domestically at higher cost, and much more slowly.

In Australia, China could disable or detonate Aussie EVs.” He notes, “Take off the safety features of household batteries so that they overcharge. Take off those same safety features for electric vehicles. Just turn them off from the manufacturer so that those vehicles explode,” and argues the nature of war isn’t changing, but technology is. Of course that’s just paranoia or is only for Aussie EVs… right?

In markets, the recently fired US BLS chief has just called her dismissal a “dangerous step”, claiming she wanted to modernize federal statistics but the agency “got caught in DOGE’s crosshairs.” Well, now there are lots of crosshairs to get caught in, or so it seems. How many of them are the BLS taking into account? Indeed, while timely and accurate economic data are regarded as essential, in a contested geopolitical and geoeconomic environment, will it be in the best interests of governments to share them?

For those quoting Dr Strangelove’s “Of course, the whole point of a doomsday machine is lost if you keep it a secret! Why didn’t you tell the world, eh?”, or shrieking “because markets!”, have you noticed what’s happened with some key data series in China in recent years, or in Russia since the war started? Logically, would you share targetable signs of economic weakness or strength via online data platforms that the other side can read and model as its leisure? Do you show other market players your books?

If not, what makes you sure you will see the real numbers going forwards as the West embraces more bloc-based realpolitik neo-mercantilism? More darkly, what makes you think you do now – “because markets”?

Over to you, Dr Strangecurve.