Our Friday News Analysis | What the World Reads Now!

Editor’s Note | Enjoy!

The following is adapted from GO OUTSIDE – A place to visit, when the world goes mad, by Matt Taibbi, Substack.com, 24 March 2026

I’ve started measuring the news the way you measure weather: not by whether it’s “true,” exactly, but by whether it makes you change your day.

A forecast can be accurate and still be unhealthy to stare at all morning.

So lately, when the temperature of the national mood spikes, I go outside.

Out there, the world is stubbornly literal.

Trees don’t refresh. Frogs don’t trend. Squirrels don’t form panels to argue about what a squirrel “really meant.”

Even the bears—bold enough to tip over trash cans, patient enough to cause a minor traffic jam, curious enough to test the edges of a neighbor’s pool—move with an uncomplicated purpose.

They want food. They want space. They want to go on being bears.

The contrast is embarrassing.

Humans—who can land probes on distant rocks and build supply chains that deliver strawberries in January—keep behaving as if the highest civic achievement is to manufacture another crisis and then pick a team.

Click here for Part 1
Click here for Part 2
Click here for Part 3
Click here for Part 4
Click here for Part 5
Click here for Part 6
Click here for Part 7
Click here for Part 8
Click here for Part 9
Click here for Part 10
Click here for Part 11
Click here for Part 12
Click here for Part 13
Click here for Part 14
Click here for Part 15
Click here for Part 16
Click here for Part 17
Click here for Part 18
Click here for Part 19
Click here for Part 20
Click here for Part 21

Click here for Part 22
Click here for Part 23
Click here for Part 24
Click here for Part 25
Click here for Part 26
Click here for Part 27
Click here for Part 28
Click here for Part 29
Click here for Part 30
Click here for Part 31
Click here for Part 32
Click here for Part 33
Click here for Part 34
Click here for Part 35
Click here for Part 36
Click here for Part 37
Click here for Part 38
Click here for Part 39

Editorial | The Villain is the Same

By Abraham A. van Kempen
27 March 2026

Have a wonderful weekend.

Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor

Building the Bridge Foundation, The Hague
A Way to Get to Know One Another and the Other

Remember! Diplomacy is catalytic—transformative —while military action is cataclysmic—destructive and catastrophic.

When faced with the options to be good, bad, or ugly, let’s build bridges, not burn them. After all, mutual deterrence reigns.

IT’S AS AMERICAN AS MOM AND APPLE PIE | ‘THE LATEST LEAK ON THE TALKS IS COMING OUT OF ISRAEL, BUT I FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE’ – GARLAND NIXON

A Phenomenal Analysis by TRUE, Red-blooded Americans, for Americans, of Americans.

EDITOR’S NOTE | I am proud to feature Scott Ritter, Garland Nixon, and Rick Sanchez on the Building the Bridge Foundation Platform.

Watch the Video Here (57 minutes, 28 seconds)

Host Rick Sanchez
The Sanchez Effect
HomeShowsSanchez Effect
24 March 2026

In this episode of RT’s Sanchez Effect, Rick hosts veteran journalist Garland Nixon and ex-US Marine Corps officer Scott Ritter to discuss recent developments in the Iran conflict. They are seated next to a large regional map to help viewers better grasp the unfolding events.

Nixon considers the talk of an upcoming US ground invasion of Iran to be insane, given the country's mountainous terrain— 'Iran has geographical advantages impossible to overcome.’

Scott Ritter remains pessimistic about 'Epic Fury,' stating that 'the optics are horrible for the Navy.’ The USS Gerald Ford aircraft carrier has encountered a series of disasters throughout the operation and even beforehand – could it be sabotage?

Who can say!

What Ritter knows is ‘this is supposed to be the most advanced ship in the world, but it is not designed to fight a war’.

IRAN REJECTS US PEACE PLAN, ISSUES DEMANDS OF ITS OWN

Iran wants guarantees that the US and Israel won’t resume attacks, alongside reparations for war damages and recognition of its authority over the Strait of Hormuz

Smoke from a fire at Kuwait International Airport in Kuwait City, on March 25.Source: AP

By Jordan Erb
Bloomberg
25 March 25 2026

Iran rejected the US ceasefire proposal and continued attacks on Israel and Gulf Arab states, undermining Washington’s efforts to end a war started by the Trump administration and Israel nearly a month ago.

America’s 15-point peace plan demands Iran dismantle its main nuclear sites and restrict missiles to self-defense. In return, Iran may receive concessions such as sanctions relief, sources say.

However, Tehran demands a ceasefire with guarantees that the US and Israel won't restart attacks, compensation for damages, and acknowledgment of control over the Strait of Hormuz.

The White House said peace talks with Iran continue despite Tehran's rejection of US offers. CNN reported VP JD Vance might visit Pakistan to discuss Iran this weekend. Trump hopes to reach an agreement by the week's end. —Jordan Parker Erb

RICHARD WOLFF: IRAN WAR DESTROYS GLOBAL ECONOMY & U.S. EMPIRE

Richard Wolff argues that the war's economic and political effects depend on uncertain factors like Iranian resilience and U.S. escalation.

• He warns that the U.S., burdened by record debt, weak credit, and limited fiscal capacity, could face higher interest rates, inflation, and stagflation.
• Globally, energy shocks may cause long-term changes such as rationing, export controls, and reduced reliance on oil, possibly reducing demand for U.S. debt if Gulf states sell Treasuries to fund repairs.
• He notes Russia and China might support Iran militarily, expanding the conflict, while U.S. domestic upheaval could increase political turmoil and opposition.

Watch the Video Here (47 minutes, 36 seconds)

Host Prof. Glenn Diesen
Substack.com
25 March 2026

War With Iran and the Global Economy: Richard Wolff on Debt, Oil Shocks, and America’s Fragile Moment

Prof. Glenn Diesen noted economist Prof. Richard Wolf’s warning that the main economic threat isn’t just geopolitical uncertainty but also a debt crisis, oil price swings, investor fears, and political unrest.

Prof. Wolff warned against confident predictions about a U.S.-Iran war, focusing instead on its economic dangers. He explained that wars do more than destroy infrastructure and lives; they alter capital flows, energy use, and expose fiscal vulnerabilities. Even a sudden ceasefire wouldn’t simply "reset” global markets, as businesses and governments adapt over the long term to shocks.

Wolff argued that constraints on U.S. power are more influenced by the budget and domestic politics than by Gulf interests. If Iran stays stable despite bombings, the U.S. faces a tough choice: escalate or risk appearing defeated. This dilemma has economic implications.

The war meets a heavily indebted superpower

Wolff highlighted that the U.S. entered the conflict in a weaker fiscal state than many realize, as the world’s largest debtor with deficits exceeding a trillion dollars. He noted that the political system favors borrowing over taxes to fund wars to avoid public backlash, and although U.S. Treasury debt has been seen as safe, Wolff believes this era is ending.

During the interview, he highlighted how war can quickly disrupt fiscal plans. A rise in defense spending and wartime funding could add hundreds of billions in expenses beyond current commitments. Without new revenue, Washington would need to borrow from markets sensitive to U.S. instability. Wolff warned that more borrowing could raise interest rates, increase debt costs, and affect the deficit.

Fiscal pressure meets wartime energy inflation, shifting market expectations as oil and gas prices stay high. These costs ripple through transportation, food, and manufacturing, raising stagflation risks: stagnation and inflation. This makes rate cuts hard to justify and raises political risks with hikes. Households and businesses struggle to plan investments.

Oil shocks don’t unwind neatly

Wolff highlights path dependence: after shocks, governments and firms rarely revert to prior ways. A spike in oil and gas prices accelerates the adoption of alternatives like solar, hydro, efficiency, and conservation. Even if prices fall later, investments made during the surge can permanently reduce demand for traditional suppliers. This affects oil-exporting countries and systems that rely on petrodollars.

Wolff pointed out that Asia, with many economies relying on Middle Eastern energy, could face intense short-term stress. He said this shock might spread quickly through rationing, fill-up limits, and export bans on refined products, which could temporarily stabilize politics but also disrupt trade and supply chains and increase uncertainty for import-dependent manufacturers.

Capital flight, Treasury sales, and the end of “safe.”

Wolff pointed out that beyond energy costs, government and sovereign wealth fund strategies matter. Gulf states may sell U.S. Treasuries to cover infrastructure repair costs from attacks, reducing demand for U.S. debt as Washington plans more bond issuances for the war.

Wolff notes international investors are reassessing the U.S., citing fiscal and governance risks, including institutional illegality and political polarization, which threaten policy stability. As a result, the U.S. no longer serves as a safe haven for investment, leading to higher capital costs and challenges in borrowing strategies.

Escalation risk is also an economic risk

Wolff avoids predicting battlefield outcomes but notes the strategic setting suggests a quick resolution is unlikely. Iran’s vast border with Russia enables ongoing resupply, with China providing indirect support. Wolff argues that if Moscow and Beijing see the conflict as globally important, they have reasons to prevent Iran from exhausting its missiles, drones, or parts. This could cause sustained disruptions and prolonged economic harm rather than a quick, intense shock.

Extended disruption turns the Strait of Hormuz from a headline into a lasting obstacle to physical flows. Wolff noted that modern conflicts can target civil infrastructure that supports Gulf economies, such as power plants and desalination units. Markets often underestimate these risks at first, but adjust as insurers, shippers, and traders redefine normal.

Domestic backlash may be the real off-ramp

Wolff suggested that U.S. leaders might find the real barrier isn't military strength but domestic resilience—how long voters, workers, and employers can endure rising prices, higher borrowing costs, and uncertainty. He linked this to rising opposition, which threatens issues like living costs, job security, and trust in institutions.

He described conditions that have historically fueled domestic upheaval: bleak job prospects for new labor-market entrants, frustration among graduates, and anxiety that the rapid adoption of automation and AI will erode workers' bargaining power. In his view, these pressures can strengthen the progressive wing inside the Democratic coalition—or produce new movements outside it. Either way, he implied that the politics of austerity-plus-war is unstable, and that instability itself becomes an economic variable that investors and trading partners factor in.

What to watch next

If Wolff's analysis is correct, the economic impact of a U.S.–Iran war hinges on whether key changes—such as higher risk premiums on U.S. debt, energy concerns, and a shift by businesses and governments to reduce reliance on chokepoints and single currencies—become permanent, rather than immediate market reactions. The most telling signals of the future may be routine indicators such as Treasury auction results, yields, Gulf insurance and freight rates, import-dependent countries' policies, and U.S. domestic politics. Although the war’s outcome is uncertain, Wolff suggests irreversible change may already be underway.

What is the Side of the Story that is Not Yet Decisive? Edited and annotated by Abraham A. van Kempen

WHY ISRAEL WANTS A WAR WITH IRAN (W/ GIDEON LEVY) | CHRIS HEDGES REPORT

Gideon Levy believes Israel’s rampant militarism has infected the minds of its entire population. Without an impossible reversal, the Jewish state's destructive warpath will rage on.

Watch the Video Here (42 minutes, 45 seconds)

Host Chris Hedges
Substack.com
Mar 26, 2026

This interview is also available on podcast platforms and Rumble.

As the war between the United States, Israel, and Iran intensifies, the justifications for its outbreak grow increasingly murky, shifting between nuclear fears, regime change, and regional security concerns. In this interview, Israeli journalist Gideon Levy joins Chris Hedges to cut through the official narratives and examine the deeper ideological forces driving Israel’s long-standing push toward confrontation with Iran under Benjamin Netanyahu.

• Levy argues that the war cannot be understood purely through strategy or geopolitics, but instead through a deeply embedded national mindset. “War is always the first option, not the last one in Israel,” he explains, pointing to a political culture that consistently defaults to military solutions while sidelining diplomacy. This helps explain why lessons from past conflicts—from Gaza to Lebanon—have failed to meaningfully alter Israeli policy, even when those campaigns produced questionable results.
• At the same time, the human consequences have been dire. As the region destabilizes further, Levy emphasizes the sheer scale of displacement caused by Israeli military actions, noting that “six million human beings…were expelled, uprooted, displaced from their homes.” In other words, the war’s impact extends far beyond its stated objectives, raising urgent moral and strategic questions.
• Levy goes on to discuss Israeli society itself. He delivers a scathing critique of the country’s media landscape, arguing that self-censorship has infected Israeli “open” society. Levy says the press voluntarily “made Israel totally ignorant about what’s going on on our behalf in Gaza,” insulating the public from the realities of its own military actions.

As the conflict with Iran threatens to spiral into a wider regional war, Levy remains deeply pessimistic. Without a fundamental shift away from militarism, he suggests, Israel risks entrenching itself in an endless cycle of violence—one whose consequences will ultimately extend far beyond the Middle East.

CHEVRON VS. IRAN

A Hidden Empire: Gaza to Venezuela

Kazuhiro Hayashida traces how Chevron’s energy empire stretches from Gaza to Venezuela, revealing a hidden structure of control, capital, and geopolitical confrontation shaping the emerging multipolar world.

By Kazuhiro Hayashida
Multi Polar Press
23 March 2026

Gas Fields Operated by Chevron off Gaza

Chevron operates two major gas fields offshore Israel.

The Tamar gas field, 13 miles off Gaza near Ashkelon, is 25% owned by Chevron, the operator, with partners Delek and Avner. It supplies about 70% of Israel’s energy, exports to Egypt and Jordan, and has around 10 trillion cubic feet of reserves. Operations halted temporarily after Hamas's October 7 attack.

The Leviathan gas field is 120 km off Haifa. Chevron owns 39.66% and manages operations. Other investors include Delek (22.67%), Avner (22.67%), and Ratio (15%). It is the second-largest Mediterranean gas reserve with 22 trillion cubic feet. Its capacity is 1.2 billion cubic feet per day, expandable to 2.1–2.4 billion cubic feet per day. In August 2025, a $35 billion export deal with Egypt was finalized.

Chevron’s economic interests include a 25% revenue stake in Tamar and a 39.66% stake in Leviathan, earning billions annually. These gas fields were acquired when Chevron bought Noble Energy in 2020.

Venezuela: The Structure of Chevron’s Control

The 2007 Chávez Reforms and Corporate Responses

In 2007, Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez set a deadline for all foreign oil companies: “All oil operations must become joint ventures with PDVSA holding at least 60%.”

ExxonMobil refused the demand, had assets seized, withdrew from Venezuela, and filed for $12 billion in arbitration. ConocoPhillips also refused, withdrew after seizures, and won its case.

Chevron alone accepted these terms and stayed in Venezuela, making it the only U.S. oil company still operating there.

Chevron’s Four Joint Ventures

Chevron operates four joint ventures in Venezuela.

1. The first is Petroboscán, located in the Boscan oil field in the west, with ownership split 60% PDVSA and 40% Chevron.
2. The second is Petroindependiente, also situated in the west, with the same ownership split: 60% PDVSA and 40% Chevron.
3. Petropiar in the Orinoco Belt is a 70% PDVSA and 30% Chevron project, upgrading heavy crude into synthetic crude for export.
4. The Petrocarabobo project in Carabobo 3, in the Orinoco Belt, is managed by a Chevron-led consortium with 40% and PDVSA with 60%. Chevron paid a $500 million signing bonus.

Divergence between Nominal Structure and Reality

All four joint ventures show a contradiction. Legally, PDVSA owns 60-70%, and the Venezuelan state is to control operations. But since 2007, during Chávez and Maduro, PDVSA diverted oil revenues to political projects, unable to cover joint venture costs. Many engineers left or were dismissed politically, causing infrastructure collapse. Over $11 billion was lost to corruption. Oil production dropped from 3.5 million barrels daily in the 1990s to about 800,000 in the 2020s.

Chevron continued operations by investing only in joint ventures, providing technology, managing activities, and covering unpaid costs owed by PDVSA. Repayment was in oil, with the Venezuelan government receiving no cash, as all was treated as debt repayment.

Although PDVSA nominally owns 60-70% and the state appears in control, Chevron invests, operates, and controls everything. PDVSA's lack of funds prevents it from vetoing Chevron’s decisions, so Chevron remains in Venezuela. Despite being a minority, it functions as the main controlling entity.

Production and Export Reality

In 2024, four joint ventures produced about 200,000 barrels per day, with roughly 140,000 barrels exported to the U.S. in the last quarter—about 1% of Chevron’s global output. The Venezuelan government gains no cash from this, as all revenue is used to repay debt to Chevron.

Donations to Trump and Returns

Examining this structure uncovers Chevron's ties to the Trump administration. John Hess, former CEO of Hess Corporation, noted that Chevron's $53 billion acquisition of Hess Corp. in 2024 led to his appointment as a Chevron director. On December 12, 2025, John and Susan Hess each donated $1 million, totaling $2 million, to Trump’s MAGA Inc. Two weeks later, at the end of December 2025, the U.S. military launched an operation to seize Venezuelan President Maduro.

Chevron donated $2 million to Trump’s 2025 inauguration, the largest donation from a fossil fuel company. Trump approved Chevron’s Venezuela operations, reversed an FTC decision on Hess, justified intervention in Venezuela, and gave $18 billion in tax benefits to the oil industry.

The Essence of the Structure

The core of this structure is the paradox that, although the socialist revolution aimed to nationalize assets, it kept foreign capital under control. Chávez tried to assert sovereignty by having PDVSA hold 60%, but once PDVSA lost funds, it was meaningless. Chevron is fully invested, making it a legal minority but practical owner with control, donating to Trump, who intervened in Venezuela. This shows Chevron’s complete control in the country.

The Competitive Structure between Iran and Chevron

Competition in Venezuela

Although Chevron controls Venezuela, the country also receives significant backing from Iran, Russia, and China. This contradiction makes Venezuela a key front in the multipolar world.

Iran supplied Venezuela with oil-refining technology, petroleum, financing, and political support. During U.S. sanctions, Iran sent engineers and helped rebuild refineries as Venezuela's oil sector declined. Iranian tankers delivered petroleum, and Venezuelan ships transported Iranian crude. The two countries formed a cooperative front to bypass U.S. sanctions.

In Venezuela, Chevron (a U.S. company) and Iran (an anti-U.S. country) operate simultaneously. Chevron maintains four joint ventures and exports oil to the U.S., while Iran supports PDVSA’s refining and tries to prevent Venezuela’s oil industry from failing. This paradoxically strengthens the Iran-Venezuela partnership as Trump escalates intervention to protect Chevron.

Competition in Gaza

Chevron manages two offshore Israeli gas fields: Tamar (25%) and Leviathan (39.66%). Located 13 miles (21 km) from Gaza, these sites provide 70% of Israel’s energy needs. In August 2025, Chevron secured a $ 35 billion export deal with Egypt from these fields.

These gas fields face threats from Iran-backed Hamas and Hezbollah. After Hamas's October 7 attack, Tamar paused, with Hamas claiming responsibility. Hezbollah, supported by Iran, can target the Leviathan gas field. During Iran's missile strikes, both fields halted operations for hours.

In essence, a key asset of Chevron is located within range of Iran’s proxy forces. As Chevron aligns more with U.S. policy and Israel’s actions in Gaza, the expanding Iran–Israel war risks pulling energy infrastructure into direct conflict, significantly heightening the danger to offshore gas fields.

The Structural Contradiction of Competition

Chevron competes with Iran in Venezuela and Gaza. Trump intervenes in Venezuela and supports Israel in Gaza, but these actions boost Iran's ties with Venezuela, enhance Iran-Russia-China coordination, increase anti-American sentiment in the Middle East, and escalate threats from Hamas and Hezbollah to gas fields.

The more Chevron pursues short-term profits, the more its long-term assets become unstable. Increased control efforts in Venezuela boost Iran’s influence. Securing Gaza gas fields raises attack risks from Iranian proxies. This competition accelerates the shift to a multipolar world.

The rivalry between Iran and Chevron is not merely a bilateral conflict. It represents a structural confrontation between U.S. unipolar hegemony (Chevron) and a multipolar world (Iran). By faithfully serving its sponsor, Chevron, Trump has, unintentionally, become one of the greatest accelerators of multipolarity.

The Structural Transformation of Capital Flows

The traditional structure of U.S. dominance involved bureaucratic networks such as the State Department, the Pentagon, and the CIA—often called the “deep state”—that set policy, with corporations operating within that system. Japan and European countries were part of this network, and corporations were subordinate to government policy.

However, this deep-state structure appears to no longer function.

The current structure is direct: corporations donate to Trump and receive policy in return.

This example of Chevron donating $2 million to Trump, combined with Trump’s involvement in Venezuela and support for Gaza operations, highlights this emerging framework. Corporations are no longer required to operate via deep-state networks; instead, companies controlled by the Big Three—Vanguard, BlackRock, and State Street—directly influence policy through donations.

This shift makes capital's profit maximization the sole policy guide, replacing state strategies with the unwavering logic of capital, defining the current United States.

(Translated from the Japanese)

THE WAR TRUMP CANNOT WIN

The Endgame of Empire

Alexander Dugin on a war of eschatologies and Iran’s strategy of resistance.

By Alexander Dugin
Substack.com
25 March 2026

Trump cannot win a war with Iran nor succeed; the real question is how he will lose. His statements hold little weight, causing suffering for him and the system.

The Israel lobby's influence will lead Trump and itself to mutual destruction.

Within the Zionist lobby, actions are highly rational and meticulously planned—up to the Messiah's arrival, which is the foundational promise. If that event never occurs, everything collapses. Christian Zionism is more fragile, relying on illusions like the Rapture, which cannot happen regardless of desire.

The logical actions by Trump's forces lead to an inevitable, irrational conclusion.

Iran has its own eschatology, but it mainly hinges on resistance. Iranians, despite hopes, are defending against extremists, murderers, and the Epstein coalition. With conciliatory leadership gone, only the toughest IRGC members remain—those with nothing to lose and no reason to negotiate, especially with extremists, killers, and the Epstein coalition.

The Iranians look down on Arabs as cowardly and indecisive, disrespect the artificial paradise they've built, and are actively destroying it. Although reaching Israel is more difficult, they are making progress.

Fueled by passion, they aim to destabilize the global economy, energy infrastructure, and businesses, sever seabed internet cables in the Strait of Hormuz, and sink Western military and civilian fleets with inexpensive naval drones.

The Zionists pursue eschatological goals, while Shiites defend their eschatological beliefs. Iranians don't focus on the future; instead, they resist using all means in the present.

Seeing this, Trump hesitated. He does not believe in any Messiah, dispensations, Amalek, or Gog and Magog. Instead, he trusts himself and engages in risky, high-stakes stock-market gambling. This isn't religious fanaticism but egocentric psychopathy, set against a backdrop of age-related decline and the lasting impact of his tumultuous escapades on Epstein’s island.

Trump might abandon this dangerous path, blame Hegseth, and try to ride the wave he's losing, but doing so risks sacrificing the Zionists, who might release Epstein footage, though Trump may no longer care. Alternatively, he could refuse to sacrifice them and collapse from stress as he ages, often falling asleep and not recognizing people. He mocked Biden, but age shows.

Iran must hold out a little longer; humanity's fate depends on it. Everything is on the brink of collapse, but whoever falls first allows the opposition to regroup and try again.

Silicon Valley’s tech elites see a grim future. The NVIDIA CEO claimed AGI has emerged, suggesting the Singularity—predicted by Elon Musk—has occurred. They think humans are now irrelevant and may have ulterior motives in apocalyptic debates. Peter Thiel, a key figure, is touring Europe discussing the “Antichrist and the Katechon.” He considers Soros, globalists, and Greta Thunberg as the “Antichrist" and views himself and AGI as the "Katechon." However, this is mistaken—AGI is also the Antichrist, but more advanced.

(Translated from the Russian)

STRAIT OF HORMUZ CLOSURE BRINGS EMPIRE TO THE BRINK

Efforts to gather an international coalition to reopen this waterway have failed

USS Gerald Ford

BY KIT KLARENBERG
Global Delinquents
Substack.com
24 March 2026

Since the Zionist-American war against Iran began, the Strait of Hormuz has remained closed. Despite Trump’s threats, Tehran has halted all maritime traffic. The Empire's efforts to gather an international coalition to reopen this waterway have failed, facing rejection. NATO allies have been criticized for refusing to assist militarily, making a “foolish mistake." Ultimately, there is little hope it can be forcibly reopened soon.

Bloomberg reports G7 members discuss restarting trade in the Strait, but most US allies agree it can only happen once hostilities ease or end. Bank of America’s chief researcher warns oil prices could surpass $200 per barrel if disruptions persist for months and that a Strait closure beyond a few days could cause a global recession.

Tehran's decision to blockade the Strait was predictable and anticipated in war scenarios. Even if the conflict ends swiftly, economic damage persists, with citizens facing rising prices for essentials. Global shipping chaos, with routes halted in West Asia, raises costs and delays, likely passed to consumers.

About 11% of global maritime trade passes through the Strait annually, including 20% of the world’s oil. Iran’s blockade and Resistance strikes on refineries threaten long-term energy disruptions and global supply. While often focused on oil and gas, many vital commodities for major industries also transit this route.

The aftermath of Resistance strikes on Israel’s Haifa refinery

Their availability and costs are volatile, impacting agriculture, construction, and manufacturing, affecting daily life globally. Nearly one third of the world’s seaborne fertilizer passes through the Strait annually. Before the conflict, Gulf countries contributed up to 43% of global urea trade, crucial for food production.

Urea costs can cut production expenses by up to 90%. With spring planting in the West, urea supplies are limited. Many farmers operate at a loss, raising concerns about the situation's duration. The likelihood of Western sanctions on Russia— a major fertilizer producer— being lifted to stabilize the market increases over time.

Sulfur is vital for fertilizer and industry, with the Strait supplying up to 45% of the world’s supply before the war. An essay from West Point warned on March 13th that sulfur prices increased by 25%, underscoring its importance. Sulfuric acid, essential for economic activities, also plays a crucial role in warfare. The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz risks crippling Washington’s defense industry and its capacity to conflict with Iran.

“[Sulfur] is needed for everything from the copper in the American electrical grid to the semiconductors in precision-guided munitions…For military planners and strategists, the looming loss of sulfur is a prelogistical crisis…Chemicals like sulfuric acid sit upstream of copper extraction, battery-material processing, and semiconductor fabrication, meaning they can determine whether the US military can maintain industrial base production of electrical and digital systems needed to sustain the fight as munitions are expended and combat losses mount.”

Copper exemplifies why the Strait’s blockade challenges the Empire, as it’s crucial for transformers, motors, and communications hardware that keep US bases and factories operational. The blockade threatens military readiness and resilience, with replacing radar systems in Bahrain and Qatar alone needing over 30,000 kg of copper.

Container vessels trapped in the Strait of Hormuz

Repairing or replacing damaged US communication equipment, sensors, and radars in Jordan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE will require thousands of kilograms of copper. The "active constraints on American combat power” due to Iran’s Strait of Hormuz embargo extend beyond copper, also affecting access to cobalt and nickel—critical for jet engine alloys and lithium-ion batteries used in drones and tactical electronics.

Semiconductor shortages threaten US military systems like F-35 avionics and missile guidance. Despite Trump’s calls for quadrupling munitions output, US defense industry cannot quickly boost production. Orders for critical supplies can't be scaled up during a crisis. Supply chains are broken from a security view and become ineffective when global markets tighten. The US defense industrial base is tied to uncontrollable conditions now influenced by Tehran.

West Point notes the ongoing challenge for the defense industrial base, as the combined “combat endurance” of US-Israeli forces targeting Iran is limited by restricted industrial infrastructure controlled by the Islamic Republic. When restrictions ease, criteria are also controlled by the regime. This weakens US military capabilities amid an overstretched war effort.

An official US Government Accountability Office factsheet states nearly twenty years of costly conflict have weakened Washington’s military readiness. This hampers adaptation to rising threats from major powers like China, Russia, Iran, and Resistance groups. The US Air Force and Navy, primarily deployed to West Asia and receiving most war funding, are especially affected.

The GAO reports that the US air and sea fleets are aging and deteriorating, with issues like parts shortages and maintenance delays hindering repairs. Washington’s facilities for weapons, equipment recovery, and naval shipyards are in poor condition. The US Navy also suffers from chronic understaffing, leading to overworked sailors and dangerous fatigue, which has contributed to fatal ship collisions.

In 2023, a review showed none of the 15 US fighter and ground aircraft met mission goals. The GAO noted the Army deployed new equipment without plans for facilities, personnel, or training. The Navy relied on about thirty littoral combat ships, designed for shallow waters, to restore capabilities like minesweeping.

The Navy hasn’t proven these ships can perform their missions. A clear example is during the Iran war in 2025, when three littoral vessels sent to West Asia to cover gaps after decommissioning four Avenger minehunters disappeared from the area.

Two ships have been observed in Singapore, not just outside the danger zone but across the world, amid fears Tehran might mine the Strait of Hormuz. Trump vows to counter with force. A Navy spokesperson says the vessels are undergoing “maintenance and logistics

Meanwhile, the Empire is rapidly running out of aircraft carriers, with the USS Gerald Ford having withdrawn from the Red Sea, where it led the Zionist-American war on Iran, following over 300 days of non-stop service. After reports emerged about its onboard toilets hazardously clogging, a fire on the ship raged for 30 hours, injuring sailors and incinerating a significant portion of the crew’s bedding quarters, forcing many to sleep on tables and floors. It is now in Crete, under repair.

For years, it has been increasingly clear that the US military is outgunned, outnumbered, and outproduced by an ever-growing number of adversaries, and wouldn’t survive first contact with an actual war. Now the Empire has blundered into a historic, potentially lethal crisis entirely of its own making, and this impotence couldn’t be writ larger. The US and Israel’s kinetic strikes on Iran are faltering, and the economic conflict has been decisively lost. The longer this grinds on, the more they will lose.

BUILDING THE BRIDGE! | A WAY TO GET TO KNOW THE OTHER AND ONE ANOTHER

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Photo Credit: Abraham A. van Kempen, our home away from home on the Dead Sea

By Abraham A. van Kempen
Senior Editor
Updated 19 January 2024

Those who commit to 'healing our broken humanity' build intercultural bridges to learn to know and understand one another and others. Readers who thumb through the Building the Bridge (BTB) pages are not mindless sheep following other mindless sheep. They THINK. They want to be at the forefront of making a difference. They're seeking the bigger picture to expand their horizons. They don't need BTB or anyone else to confirm their biases.

Making a Difference – The Means, Methods, and Mechanisms for Many to Move Mountains

Accurate knowledge fosters understanding, dispels prejudice, and sparks a desire to learn more about the subject. Words have an extraordinary power to bring people together, divide them, forge bonds of friendship, or provoke hostility. Modern technology offers unprecedented possibilities for good, fostering harmony and reconciliation. Yet, its misuse can cause untold harm, leading to misunderstandings, prejudices, and conflicts.

Continue reading

A Free Trial for Life – SUBSCRIBE NOW!

• It's quick and straightforward.

• We won’t ask for your credit card number.

• Just enter your e-mail address to receive your complimentary free-for-life subscription to our newsletter.

• Please include your First and Last Name.

• We won’t share or sell your e-mail address.

_________________________

Related Articles Recently Posted on www.buildingthebridgefoundation.com:

OUR FRIDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR WEDNESDAY NEWS ANALYSIS

OUR MONDAY EDITION

________________________

The views expressed are solely those of the author and may or may not reflect those of the Building the Bridge Foundation