Log In
Search
UnHerd’s Freddie Sayers speaks with Professor of Political Economy at Cambridge University, Helen Thompson, to dismantle the mainstream narrative surrounding the conflict in the Middle East. Moving beyond the idea that the U.S. is stumbling into war, Thompson reveals a possible strategic plan by the Trump administration to weaponise energy markets against China, while exploring how the closure of the Strait of Hormuz serves American interests in the global AI race, and how a reverse Suez moment is fundamentally redrawing the map of global power.
Freddie is the best interviewer in the world
This was a really outstanding interview, imo. I have no idea if Helen Thompson’s ideas are correct, but they are at least credible. And the obvious theme running through Trump’s second term is challenging regimes that, in some way, threaten America, and to strengthen America’s position in the emerging multipolar world.
If Trump is thinking in terms of his legacy, it appears facilitating the election of another Republican president in 2028 is not how he envisages that legacy. For whatever reason, if Trump has a grand strategy for this Iran intervention, he’s unwilling to clearly explain it, perhaps because he can’t outright say he’s trying to undermine China. So the American people are left with a weak job market, weak economy, an incipient war, and a president who seems more interested in geopolitics than the core concerns of voters. That may well cost the Republicans both the midterms and the general election.
Anyway, kudos to Helen and Freddie for a most interesting discussion.
Are you American or do you live in the US. Because the situation I see in the US, being both American and living here, is that (a) gas prices have only gone up minimally. i.e. yes the price per gallon has gone upo a little but less than by the difference in price between gas prices in bethesda and say Germantown, barely 15 miles away! As for the job market it is still a lot better than under the Biden administration. As for affordability, wait until the tax refunds flow in come late April/early May.
The economics underlying this discussion are sophomoric.
Oil is fungible. Imposing constraints on global supply amounts to imposing upward pressure on global prices. So, even if a country like the United States may appear “self-sufficient,” it will have to face up to higher prices, too.
Petrol prices have already appreciably increased in the United States notwithstanding the fact that the United States is a net exporter of oil. Go figure.
The Professor ist right. The simple question is always cui bono and cui malo?
Despite knowing how stupid US decision makers can be, that they would not have considered the obvious Iranian action in this asymmetric conflict is just implausible.
Cui bono? The US.
Cui malo? The only adversary they care about: China
Europe’s increased energy dependency is just a bonus.
I like differing opinions and this one is well thought out. But I don’t personally agree that Trump is playing “4D chess” or something, and is strategically ten moves ahead of everyone else. I think the administration is frantically attempting to manage some bad miscalculations, and they might yet find a way to barely squeak out of a total potential debacle. But if the “4D” plan was to cripple China, it also cripples allies in the region like Japan and S. Korea… and how do you cripple *just* the adversary?
Only time will tell… but I just don’t sense that this is going all to plan and we just haven’t reached “checkmate” where some masterful plan is revealed to everyone by the “grandmaster” Trump.
You have to be suffering from considerable cognitive dissonance to buy the argument Thompson makes.
Both fail to play in Trump and family’s side hustles. The notion Trump cares much about the longer term a nonsense. He’s angered alot of Gulf State benefactors, and even if Bin Salman has an outlet on the Red Sea (if one forgets the Houthi’s for a moment) none of this slows the broader drive to reduce reliance on Oil and Gas from this part of the World. That’s not in their interest. Idea that Trump was prepared to upset his source of private planes, crypto investments and some real estate deals for the US’s longer term gain is nonsense. It’s not how the Grifter works.
And guess who has the greater Oil reserves – USA or Canada? Yep the latter. Thompson fails to mention that. Who’s helped turn Canada and Europe to greater collaboration?
China has considerable short term strategic reserve, and built it up in seeming readiness for this sort of scenario and Iran will let their Tankers through. Medium term it won’t be China that the Iranian’s Straits strategy squeeze. Of the Tankers let through thus far majority are Chinese flagged. China also invested heavily in renewables.
Where one has sympathy with the contentions is the suggestion that ‘geography’ will drive diversification of energy needs. Hormuz as a pinch point will not change and clearly now the notion of fundamental Regime change in Tehran debunked (unfortunately).
It’s a mistake always to view world events through the lens of your own moral vanity, you know. It hinders your ability to understand.
The Democrat plan?eave Mahdi fanatics alone, armed to teeth, in position to blackmail major trading actors for decades.