Simulirana situacija, ki se je dogajala v soboto, ko sta se dve ameriški fregati mora obrniti na zadnje opozorilo Irana

Robert Pape je profesor politologije na univerzi Chicago, specializiran za vojaško strategijo in varnostne zadeve. Je avtor knjige “Our Own Worst Enemies: America and the Age of Violent Populism”.

Pojasnjuje:

• 4-stopenjsko past eskalacije in zakaj so se vse njegove napovedi uresničile
• kako bi lahko Iran in Rusija, če bi nadzorovala 30 % svetovne nafte, sesula svetovno gospodarstvo
• zakaj ubijanje iranskih voditeljev državo dejansko krepi, ne slabi
• zakaj lahko ZDA bombardirajo iranske jedrske objekte, vendar kljub temu ne morejo preprečiti Iranu, da pride do jedrskega orožja
• kakšen je edini dogovor, ki bi lahko preprečil Iranu pridobitev jedrskega orožja, in zakaj se ta dogovor verjetno ne bo zgodil.

Trump’s Deal With Indonesia: Mahan at the Strait of Malacca

Hu Jintao warned China about this moment more than twenty years ago. In 2003, the then Chinese president coined the phrase “Malacca dilemma” to describe a simple, brutal fact: the country’s economic rise depended on foreign oil sailing through a narrow strait that other powers could, in a crisis, choose to close. Most of China’s imported crude and gas still squeezes through that same bottleneck between Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore. The US  has just moved to wire that vulnerability, and it is no accident this is happening on Donald Trump’s watch.

Washington’s new Major Defense Cooperation Partnership with Indonesia is being sold in the usual diplomatic euphemisms: capacity building, maritime security, joint training. Strip away the boilerplate and you see something far sharper. The agreement’s focus on maritime domain awareness, subsurface and autonomous systems, and special forces training is about giving Indonesia and by extension the U.S. and its allies, a far richer picture of everything that moves between the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea, and greater ability to shape it in a crisis. As with Trump’s broader Indo‑Pacific posture, this is one more move to reassert the US as the pre‑eminent maritime power of the age, and to ensure China feels that reality every time a tanker clears the Strait.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

No, s tem, ko so Američani napadli Iran, so ne samo izgubili Irak, pač pa celoten Bližnji vzhod. In s tem vso nafto in plin, o katerih so sanjali, da ju bodo kontrolirali in služili z njima.

Samo še dvakrat gremo spat do takrat…

Pope Leo XIV’s close ally Cardinal Robert McElroy received a standing ovation at the end of his homily, where he called on Catholics to take up civic action to help end the “immoral” war against Iran.

“When we leave this church tonight, we must move beyond prayer. As citizens and believers in this democracy that we cherish so deeply, we must advocate for peace with our representatives and leaders.

“It is not enough to say we have prayed. We must also act. For it is very possible that the negotiations will fail because of recalcitrance on both sides, and the president will move to re-enter this immoral war.

“At that critical juncture, as disciples of Jesus Christ called to be peacemakers in the world, we must answer vocally and in unison:

“No. Not in our name. Not at this moment. Not with our country.”

Bine Kordež

Spremljanje zadnjih nastopov voditeljev političnih strank je pokazalo, da so si, ko gre za davke, programi sicer raznorodnih strank postali vse bolj podobni. Desni pol je že doslej izpostavljal predvsem podporo podjetniškemu sektorju z zniževanjem davčnih obremenitev – in to smer zdaj poudarjajo tudi v Gibanju Svoboda s programom Ambiciozna Slovenija. Poudarek vseh je torej predvsem na davčni razbremenitvi dela in propulzivnega podjetniškega sektorja.

Najbrž ni dileme, da zniževanje davčnih bremen pomeni tudi izpad prihodkov države. In tudi glede tega so si programi precej podobni. V glavnem se s tem ne ukvarjajo. Vemo, da se izpad javnofinančnih prihodkov potem odrazi ali v znižanju državnih izdatkov, nadomestitvi z drugimi davki ali v povečanem proračunskem primanjkljaju, torej zadolževanju države. Nobena od teh rešitev seveda ni všečna, zato se jim vsi raje izognejo.

S tem se bodo pač ukvarjali po prevzemu izvršne funkcije, ko se bodo soočili z realnostjo. Neizpolnjene obljube bodo opravičevali z razmerami, s stanjem, ki je slabše, kot so ga pričakovali. Tak izgovor bo lažji za trenutno nevladne stranke, ki imajo zaradi tega tudi več idej in predlogov zniževanja, medtem ko so vladajoči iz izkušenj bolj previdni pri obljubah in ostajajo bolj na načelni ravni.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

In JD Vance’s own words, he stated that Iran has not accepted the US/Israel terms for establishing peace.

But I’d like to know what kind of negotiation this is, in which terms are simply imposed. Did anyone inform the American delegation that this isn’t a surrender treaty?

They seem to be living in a different reality. This is not how you negotiate peace, and this delegation certainly includes many people who know that very well.

Here are 10 points explaining why Iran is not in a position to give in:

1. It controls the Strait of Hormuz, and any attempt to take it would be extremely bloody and result in heavy casualties;
2. It can close the other strait using the Houthis;
3. It has maintained a stable daily rate of missile and drone launches for several weeks, demonstrating it has a large arsenal;
4. Its ground forces still have intact equipment and high morale, especially after the failure at Isfahan;
5. No one knows where the enriched uranium is, nor is there any effective way to seize it;
6. It is Iran that is effectively sanctioning America, with fuel prices and inflation already knocking at the door;
7. It is Iran generating pressure on Trump from Gulf countries;
8. It is Iran generating pressure on Trump from its Asian and European allies;
9. Iran is well aware of the shortage of interceptors and is actively exploiting it;
10. Its air defense capabilities are gradually improving through the deployment of new equipment, showing that Iran has a long-term strategy.

On the other hand, the daily bombings are steadily eroding Iranian infrastructure. The decisive factor in this war is precisely whether this resilience will prove sustainable in the long run.

Večina političnih analiz Petra Magyarja predstavlja kot človeka, ki bi lahko končal Orbanovo dobo. Paradoks madžarske politike pa je, da Magyar ne izziva Orbanove ideologije. Analiza programa stranke TISZA in njegovih javnih nastopov kaže, da so razlike med njima presenetljivo majhne. Ločujeta ju predvsem generacijska razlika in odnos do korupcije, medtem ko so njuna temeljna stališča glede nacionalizma, konservativizma, nacionalne suverenosti, migracij, energetske politike ter odnosa do Ukrajine in Rusije v veliki meri skladna. Magyar tako ne predstavlja ideološkega preloma z Orbanovim modelom, temveč prej njegovo politično prenovo brez korupcijskih bremen.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Trumpova eskalacijsko-deseskalacija retorika je zelo povezana z njegovim prishološkim profilom. Ni pa v celoti iracionalna. V precekšnjem delu jo je mogoče razumeti kot strategijo tržnih manipulacij, da lahko z njim povezani špekulanti na podlagi notranjih informacij služijo stotine milijonov z borznimi transakcijami. Trump je vojno izkoristil za bogatenje njegovega kroga ljudi.

So, a couple of the boys have been texting me: “Why the hell would Trump drop the Hormuz blockade bomb on a Sunday? It’ll send oil screaming past $120, maybe $130 if the algos really panic. Makes zero sense if you actually want cheaper barrels.”

But it makes perfect sense. Beautiful, even.

See, Tokyo and Hong Kong are already humming by the time the East Coast is still nursing its coffee. Those futures pits—Dow, S&P, the whole equity complex, plus Brent and WTI on the screens—never really sleep. You’ve got fourteen, fifteen hours of runway before the New York bell. Plenty of time for the right hands to lean in: long the indices in Hong Kong, short the crude in Tokyo, riding the fear wave as the blockade tweet lights up every terminal from Singapore to Sydney.

Then, right on cue, before the U.S. opens, comes the pivot. Something about “there’s regime change in Tehran,” “we can do business,” “Talks were Good,” the usual art-of-the-deal baloney. Markets whip around like they’ve been Tasered. Oil gives back the spike, stocks rip higher. The boys in Asia unwind clean, pocket the spread.

A few hundred million, maybe more, conjured out of thin air on the back of one perfectly timed Sunday morning post. Not bad for a morning’s work. The Street’s been running these kinds of games for decades: information, timing, leverage. Just never quite so… presidential!!

Strinjam se s spodnjo argumentacijo in do kakšnega rezultata bi blokada vodila.

Regarding Trump’s threat/decision to impose a naval blockade on Iran, color me a skeptic.

1. Taking more oil off the market, particularly the only oil that is now getting out from the Persian Gulf, will drive oil prices further up, and the paper price of oil will get closer to the actual price, which should be around $150 per barrel. A dramatic increase in inflation in the US will ensue. Avoiding this is precisely why Trump was stuck in a position where he had no escalatory options out of this conflict before the ceasefire. He still doesn’t.
2. Stopping tankers carrying Iranian oil wouldn’t just be an escalation vis-à-vis Iran, but also against the countries that are buying Iranian oil, which includes China, India, and other Asian countries. I doubt Trump is ready for that escalation, particularly given the upcoming summit in Beijing.
3. This is also true for punishing countries that have negotiated a toll with Iran for the Straits. That includes Pakistan, which hosted the negotiations.
4. The naval blockade escalation will make the closing of the Red Sea more likely by the Houthis. That would take another 12% of global oil flow off the market. We would now be looking at oil around $200 per barrel.

Nadaljujte z branjem→