The Chokepoint Trap: How Washington's Stupidity Triggered a Cascade That Now Controls the World

Hello everybody and welcome to Geopolitical Trends, where truth matters. Today's topic, I found it very interesting since, uh, usually I don't talk much about my background, professional one that is, but I've spent years working, uh, on, for example, foreign internal defense and regional security inside Washington. That was part of what I did before. Uh, why am I saying this to you? Not about credentials or whatever, beside the point. Because this is the kind of work where I've learned that when a state, for example, threatens a choke point but does not close it, it does not mean weakness. That is a calculated message, that is a calculated strategy. And right now we have the Hormuz Strait. We have Babylon that are both under sort of threat at the same time for the first time in modern history. And almost— I'll say almost everyone covering it missing why neither side has pulled the trigger all the way. So I'm going to show you, I'm going to show you the playbook for something like this because I've encountered it before during my professional career, my time in the military, and my time being on the ground in the Middle East. So that is why it's important to understand, uh, and I decided to do this. So, so what I can tell you now is that, uh, oil, for example, crossing $100 a barrel, which is just the beginning by the way, isn't the real story. That's not the real story. No, the real story is that you have now three specific, uh, uh, waterways. Those are narrow strips of water. You have Babel Mandeb. Let me show you the map. I got a picture for— I think I had a picture for all of them, but let's just go with what we have. You have Babel Mandeb. Okay, you have the Strait of Hormuz. Okay, and you have the Suez Canal. Here's a picture of all three right there. This is Strait of Hormuz, Bebel Mandeb, and the Suez Canal. So now it matters more to global power than any, for example, G7 or G20 economy. So if you want to understand who actually controls the world right now, it's not who you think. That is where the issue is. That's what Washington now is shocked by, the outcome of its misguided, uh, strategy and ill-conceived calculation about attacking Iran. So to put this within its proper context, given where things actually are right now. You know, and I'm not sort of— when I think about this, I'm not thinking about hypotheticals. No, no, no, no, no. What I'm addressing with you right now is a live event as we see it manifest itself in 3 different parts of the world. So think about it this way. And we're gonna— well, I'm gonna break it down for you as part of my own analysis, how I see it. Let's start off as of late July. Roughly 350 transits have gone through the Strait of Hormuz for the entire month. Okay, that was back June, versus 1,000 through Bab-el-Mandeb. And on July 22nd, uh, 25th or 26th I think 26th, at least that's what the data is showing. Alone, traffic across both straits— we're talking about the, uh, Bab-el-Mandeb and the Strait of Hormuz— combined dropped to just 18 vessels. That's it. The lowest in months. So you have Ansarullah declared the naval blockade against Saudi Arabia on July 20th, specifically targeting Yanbu-linked tankers, which we already covered all this. For those who've missed the video, just go back and, and, and pull up that video, uh, from my channel and you can watch it. Which matter because Yanbu has been one of workaround Riyadh built to route, uh, crude around the Strait of Hormuz closure via pipeline to the Red Sea. This is where you see the harsh reality. So for the first time in modern history, at least since I've been aware of geopolitics when I turned 15— that's how long I've been dealing with this, by the way, goes way back when I was still in my early teens— uh, in modern history, you have the two main choke points: Strait of Hormuz Okay, and Bab-el-Mandeb. Those two aren't taking turns being unstable. No, no, no, they are closing simultaneously. And what you have left? You have left the Suez Canal. While the Suez Canal still technically open, but it's incapable— it can't fully absorb the overflow because of the tanker draft limits through that canal. So where is canal? Um, here is a satellite image, very narrow. The, the, the cargo is not going to fit there. So, so, and this is where you have to understand, and I'm going to tell you later on why is this important for you, for all of us to grasp an understanding of it, because this isn't just a temporary, uh, a temporary war disruption. As some might have called it, but rather a live demonstration of chokepoint geography. You all remember political geography, that is the term also for geopolitics. Geo has to do with the geography as the real— some sort of a substrate of global power, because this one is more, in my opinion, is more decisive than, let's say, GDP. For example, when you do GDP ranking of the world, this country, this and that, this geography has now caved in all those. Or even when you think about a diplomatic communiqué, that's why every summit they issue this diplomatic communiqué. No, because when I'm gonna walk you through each each strait to highlight to you the leverage point to make sense to you. So we'll start with the Strait of Hormuz. And again, I have them all in one, but I'm gonna— I rather show you the one separately. Let's go with the Strait of Hormuz. Hormuz as Iran's structural veto. That's what it is. Over what? The veto over 20% of global oil and LNG. That's just on this location. If you move to the next one, which is Bab el-Mandeb, okay, Bab el-Mandeb has the Ansarullah's ability to convert this narrow 18-mile gap into a lever over Gulf exports and even Russian crude bound for Asia. Again, just, just follow me here. Then we go into the Suez Canal. The Suez Canal as the last resort valve, that is, that is now absorbing rerouted traffic, but at a cost and speed penalty that makes it a poor substitute, not a solution. To those who say, oh, they can use the, uh, uh, Suez Canal— no, it's not going to work. Because here is where you have the mainstream media, how it's framing it. First, they framing this as Iran war spillover story.

Nope.

Then the same mainstream media does not want to admit the truth. And the truth is, which I am pushing back against the mainstream media, the truth is that Washington initial strikes on Iran is what activated the chain reaction across all 3 choke points. This is what the media, mainstream media does not want to disclose. So, so, and the resulting, which is straightforward, is the price spike. Yeah, over $100 a barrel. Insurance repricing show how a handful of narrow waterways— now not carrier fleets or reserve currencies, just a narrow strait— geography still sets the ceiling on what any power can actually project, including the US. This is the harsh reality. So, and that is where my background working on these issues for the last 15, 20 years allow me to sort of put this within its proper context. So, and this also is going to have to lead me putting my geopolitical analyst hat on into the thesis of multipolarity, because that's what part of what this is all about. And the simple reason is this: choke points, when you think about them, are becoming now a, a, uh, some sort of a contested infrastructure. Rather than just look at them as Oh, those are just neutral transit lanes. Not anymore, especially when you consider, for example, Gulf States. When you consider now Gulf States, that is part of where the problem is. They don't know how to handle this one right now. So And that is where I am convinced of, of, of having those choke points now becoming a contested infrastructure. It's because you have now the Gulf States watching, you have of course China watching over in Malacca Strait, you have Russia rerouting crude through the same Red Sea corridor all of them recalculating dependency in real time. So, and that is again the importance of, uh, when, when you listen to what mainstream media— what, uh, just be careful as to what you are consuming. So, because what I'm finding out, many and many and many and many with no background whatsoever— and again, nothing against anybody I respect everybody, but I have to push back when just people start floating ideas that have nothing to do with the reality. And why am I bringing this multipolarity arguments into this, uh, brief analysis or argument or conversation? Because it does accelerate this genuine multipolar reordering that we are going, uh, through right now. And this reordering of what? It's not about diplomacy, it's about the trade routes.

Yeah, yeah.

Because it leaves us with the other part of it in a form of question: or does it just prove that the old choke points still own everyone regardless of who is in charge Or who is rising? Those are legitimate questions. I, uh, I had a chance to write yesterday, uh, an article on Substack. To those who do not know, I do have a Substack account. If you want to subscribe to it, I'm going to put the link for you there. You can go and read it later on, addressed this in more detail, of course. And with this, you ask yourself the other legitimate question, which is how significant is this shift? You know, because this, in my opinion, and I am sort of in, in the thick of it because I'm, I'm alive watching all this happening. I was back day, back in the days in Washington, in the middle of it, behind closed doors, in, in rooms and all that stuff. And we used to deal with this kind of questions and the consequences geopolitically and strategically. So I do know what I'm talking about here, because this is about as significant as maritime chokepoints disruption gets, what we are witnessing right now. And the reason is simple, is the simultaneity. Simultaneity in a sense that all of them happening all at once, not any single event It's all at the same time. Hormuz, the Strait of Hormuz— let me put, uh, back the map, uh, for you to see. The Strait of Hormuz has been at a near standstill since the February strikes. And as I mentioned again, used to run around 350 transits, okay? That was the baseline. That's what it was. As a matter of fact, it used to be over 1,000. That alone will be a major energy security story, just for that. Then now you have to add Bab el-Mandeb and you have to add Ansarullah. The addition of the Ansarullah blockade against Saudi Arabia, which started on July 20th, means what? It means the one workaround to the Gulf states, not just Saudi Arabia, Gulf States built the pipeline crude to Yanbu on the Red Sea. The purpose of it was to bypass the Hormuz entirely. Is now also under direct threat. That is where the difference is. We tankers documented— you know, I've, I've, I've read about it— we tankers documented to have turned back mid-transit towards the Suez instead. Yeah, to my knowledge, from reliable sources, there were about 20 Saudi oil tankers had to start the, the journey and turned around in the middle of the route. Couldn't go because of the Houthis' threats. 20, to my knowledge. And my source is not gonna just share whatever, because you know me, I will, I will check and double-check that information. But the point is, the point is, this is where you have now— but the Swiss, kind of like I mentioned earlier, is incapable of handling this. And this is why I push back against mainstream media. Why? Because mainstream media treats this kind of events as two separate crises. No, that happened to be running concurrently. No, no, no, no, no, no. I will push back against that. This is a single cascading collapse of the region's two primary export corridors, Strait of Hormuz and Bab-el-Mandeb. And it's in the first time in modern history, to my knowledge, So this modern history that includes the modern shipping era, that both Strait of Hormuz and Bab-el-Mandeb have simultaneously degraded rather than one compensating for another. And this is what the mainstream media does not want the masses to understand. So they're going to be wording it certain ways. Those are two separate events.

What?

No, they're not.

Enough.

That's one of the reasons why I decided to do this, uh, brief analysis for you. So when we talk about the, uh, when we touch about the roughly a fifth of the global oil and LNG supply through the Strait of Hormuz alone, plus you add roughly about 6 million barrels a day that normally cross Bab el-Mandeb, including Saudi and Russian crude, bound for Asia buyers. When you are thinking in those terms and seeing oil pushing past $100 a barrel for the first time since May, and at the same time you have insurers— insurance companies that, uh, insure the, the transit of tankers and so forth— repricing war risk cover within days rather than within weeks. So, and you know who's the real verdict on this? Who owns the verdict? It's not Washington, it's not Moscow, it's not Tehran. It's the market. Market's own verdict of how, on how structurally serious these developments are. So, and this is where you're gonna have the, uh, those that works for, uh, uh, the, the Maersk and all that, those big, big, uh, shipment companies. You have their underwriters now. Don't move that fast for noise anymore because, yeah, even though you do have Suez Canal that is still open as of, as of now, okay, but it's very costly. It's very slower, very, very slow as, as a substitute at best. So, and this is again where you have this serious, uh, a problem that is going. And when I found myself really pushing back against the, the narrative, especially coming out of the West because the Gulf states are now sort of really at a crossroads. And I'm going to share a clip with you to highlight to you the big concern that Washington has right now, because it was a miscalculated adventure to begin with. The whole idea— maybe one day I'll do a live— I, I do a, a recorded video for you, uh, an analysis about this whole idea of Iran. It goes beyond just war and the US miscalculating that. And where I differ, and again based on my professional background, because again, and I'm not bragging here, guys, I'm just highlighting to you the fact we've dealt with— I've dealt with some of this back then, and that's why when I see the Western narrative, I have to push against it. And why I differ and why I push back, because I differ and I push back on two things, on the causality and the direction. Because this is about, this isn't about just Iran being disruptive. No, no, it's a demonstration that the initial US-Israel strikes on Iran, that's what caused or set off this chain reaction that now handed— yeah, handed over leverage to Iran and its actors, aligned actors, Ansarullah for that matter. And what just happened in Iraq last night, which I will, uh, uh, do a video for you later on. So because what those actors now acting beyond Iran's own borders And that leverage that now they have is now being used against the US security partners in the region— Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, and Jordan. But we're going to focus on the ones with oil— United Arab Emirates and, uh, and, uh, Saudi Arabia. Of course, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait— Kuwait and Bahrain limited into the amount of oil vis-à-vis, or in comparison to United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia. And that is why this leverage, as I said, is being used against those US security partners, not against Washington directly. No, no. And that is the real significance for this multipolarity that I brought up at the beginning earlier. Why? You have to think of it this way: the choke points didn't just get disrupted. No, no, no, no. They got weaponized. And weaponized in a way that sort of shows how geography still overrides alliance structures and reserves some sort of a currency status when it comes to who actually controls a global trade flow in crisis. That is the key important, uh, aspects that I want you to get out of this so far. If the truth matters to you, hit like, subscribe, and tap that bell. No spin, no agenda, just the stories they don't want you to know. Don't watch from the sideline. Be part of the movement. Your support keeps the truth alive. Thank you. So what I want to do in the second part here, because I'm going to keep this short this time around, uh, I just wanted to— I, I just had to share this brief analysis with you because what I've been reading coming out of mainstream media regarding this development. So, and for this, I'm going to use my background in foreign internal defense, known as FID, and also in addition to regional security, because Part of my academic background is in international security, so we used to deal with regions, uh, Asia security matters, Latin America, Africa, Europe, uh, and even the Arctic for that matter. So using this, that background, I wanted to explain to you why states calibrate this kind of threats short of actual closure. You need to understand, because the interpretation that is coming out of Washington— oh, those states are too weak to close completely the Strait of Hormuz and Bab-el-Mandeb. No, no, you idiots in Washington, they don't want to close them. There is a reason why they don't want to close that completely, and that's what I'm going to be explaining to you. So you think about it, calibrated threats. Against choke points. What are they? Straightforward, they are a coercion strategy, not a capability limit. No, because full closure of either the Strait of Hormuz or Bab-el-Mandeb is almost always a worse outcome for the actor making the threat or initiator of the, the, uh, the action than sustained ambiguity. Another word in a simple language, you want to make— you want to remain ambiguous about whatever the outcome is going to be. So Ansarullah blockade Saudi links shipping rather than mining the strait outright. So let me, let me show you, uh, and I, I kept, uh, Houthi Ansarullah could get this from Iran. Do you think they couldn't? Yeah, they could if they want to, but they didn't want to. And they could have this and put them on Red Sea in their, in their location, right, right here. But they didn't want to. So, yeah, because they could mine the Strait outright. Yeah, the same will apply to Iran. Iran did put some, but not in its entirety. Because Iran— or because you think about it this way, that's why the Houthis want to hit, blockade Saudi. Iran restricting rather than fully sealing Hormuz Strait, closing it. Why? The two approaches have one objective, and you know what that objective is? Preserves an off-ramp exit. It's because What the message and the signals they are sending. It signals resolve and imposes a real cost, and at the same time, a real cost on the countries, on the US, on Gulf States, Israel, and what have you. But at the same time, leaving a room to de-escalate without losing face. That is the strategy of it.

Yeah.

And even if you are to go further than this, thinking critically, you will say to yourself— and I think also because they don't want to trigger the kind of overwhelming multinational naval response that an actual closure of either strait, especially when you think about Strait of Hormuz carrying 20% of world oil, would usually guarantee— That is the reason why a closed choke point is almost like a cautious belly in a way that elevated the risks and at the same time targeted attacks. Those are not escalation managements. So they're not— it's backed by or, or sort of directed into a choice of a tactic itself.

Yeah.

And if this is not enough, you have to think about the legibility problem states are deliberately exploiting. Why is this important? Once again, ambiguous, below the threshold action— what does it do? It attracts or attacks attributed to proxies. Then in this case, for Iran, You have Ansarullah and you have the militias in, in, in, in, uh, in Iraq. We're not talking about the Iraq one because we focusing on the, uh, the, the choke points, the waterways, because those will be the warning rather than a declared blockade. That's what they doing, what they doing, a selective targeting, if I may use the term. And that in itself, it makes it very hard for adversaries, in this case US, Gulf States, and what have you, to build the legal, to build the coalition, even though the US reached out to Europe to help with escorting ships and they said no. So, or even for domestic politics case needed for forceful response, ask anybody here in the US, ask anybody in Congress, in the corrupted Congress, you know, they all, they don't want to get involved any longer. So, and that's just to let you know, that's the classic FID, the Foreign Internal Defense, that area that I used to work in. So, because that thinking applies also to maritime domains. And if I am to tell you, I'll tell you, we played the scenarios for Malacca Strait, for example.

Them.

You know, we run that scenario more than once to think in terms how it could work. So I even went as far as— I remember I had to do a private, uh, presentation to some high-ranking, uh, military. As a matter of fact, some of them were sitting in front from NATO, because I could tell, because one of those generals asked me a question and I could hear the accent, British. And I did ask him, I said, British or Australia? Oh, I said I'm British. So, and in back of my mind it was, why the heck a general from NATO coming all the way here to listen to what I have to say? And it was a private for the military. And I did talk that time about the Arctic, because the same argument I'm making now can be applied to the Arctic. And this is why I'm saying this kind of thinking applies to maritime security aspect. So because what you are watching right now, you are watching Iran and Ansarullah run an economy of force campaign with specific objectives. One of them is generating maximum strategic effect. And what will be that? Insurance premium is going to have to reprice, go up. The rerouting. You're gonna have to figure out— meaning the companies, they're gonna have— I'm putting the map for you here— they're gonna have to figure out how they're gonna move around now. And also you have to think about price spikes of oil, which translate soon— it's already translating to the American, at least for us, and even for you, whatever part of the world you're in. And all this, all this that Iran announced are allowed to win for a fraction of the cost and risk of an actual closure, which will invite— and I am sure of this— it will invite direct US carriers groups and other countries and all that intervention to unify in support of the Gulf states. So Europe and Asia imports interests. So that is the smart strategy strategy moving forward. That's why I couldn't, I couldn't help it, but I wasn't about to do livestream today, but I figured, no, you need to know. It's my responsibility towards you. So, so, and the last part of this reversibility, it has to do with a leverage. Think about it. A threatened chokepoint retains coercive value Precisely because it can be reversed. You know, if I am Iran or I am Ansarullah, I'll threaten to close the Strait of Hormuz, I'll threaten to close, uh, Bab el-Medam completely, you know. And why I wouldn't want to do that? It's because, as I said, threatened choke points retain coercive value because I can reverse it. I can re— I can, uh, unthreatened, I can reverse course. And its lover state can pull back on the extract concession. If I am to do this, it's because I am gonna ask— I'm not gonna do it willy-nilly. I'll tell them, here is what I want. I want sanction relief, for example. I want ceasefire terms. I want security guarantees, and, and, and, and, and them. So, and this is why, in a way, you think about it, uh, the strait doesn't actually being mined or physically blocked cannot easily being unmined once the political and the military— you have those two— costs of closure have already been paid by both sides. Now you know why Iran and Ansarullah did not fully close the Strait of Hormuz and Bab-el-Mandeb. But don't get me wrong, Iran and Ansarullah do have a firm grip on these two locations, just didn't want to close it completely. And with this, I lead to the next question: why should you care? Why are you sitting here and listening to what I have to say? And why does it matter? Not just to you, to me as well, to all of us. So, and I'm going to share with you 4 reasons straightforward, and I'll play a clip for you to put this in perspective. 4 reasons this earned their time, this will earn your time and attention to it. I don't care, geopolitical analyst or not, it's common sense, common basic economics. Is the fastest moving inflation story that isn't being covered as one. And let's start with my own country for how much they are, you know, the CPI, the Consumer Price Index, you know, they're trying to hide the cost that is not trickling down to the person who's living paycheck to paycheck. And remember, in America we have over 64% of the population living paycheck to paycheck. So think about it this way. Oil passed the $100 for the first time since May. Shipping insurance repricing within days. These choke points are a leading indicator for fuel, for freight, for consumer goods prices, well beyond— it shows up at the sort of the CPI, the Consumer Price Index numbers. And for you who understand this early you will at least stay ahead of the curve as far as the cost of living, as far as planning, as far as even geopolitical trivia, because I want you to be armed with knowledge. Let me play two clips for you. I'm gonna play the first one here. Uh, oh, I'm sorry, I didn't move this one here. Sorry. Uh, let me share the screen here. We'll play the first one and I'll play the second one for you. Take a listen, please. It's more expensive.

Gas is more expensive. Heating is more expensive. Clothing is— Walmart's more expensive. Gas is more expensive. Heating is more expensive. Clothing is more expensive. Why? Has everything in the world become more precious all of a sudden? Absolutely not. But the value of the dollar, the purchasing power of my employees, of the working class of America is getting demolished. Walmart's mortgaged.

He's right. He is right. And you don't— I forgot his name. He's, he's, uh, he's one known here in the US. And, and, and, and, uh, the government here, it's not disclosing the truth. It's not disclosing the disaster that is on its way here. And again, I am an optimistic guy, but I can't sugarcoat the reality. It's my responsibility towards at least the American viewers to understand what's coming. I'm gonna play a second clip for you. And by the way, this particular individual, I just found out they took down one of her clips because she disclosed the truth. Oh man, can't believe it. Take a listen, please.

I didn't have bad news for you today, but things are spiraling really badly. Out of control. We have 3 of the wealthiest Arab nations that are now considering pulling out of the U.S. economy, pulling out investments because of the cost of this war that has been waged by Donald Trump. And when I say that they are, they are the foundation of our economy, that if they pull out their investments it could crash our economy, that is an understatement. And now we have this letter that was just sent to Donald Trump and published for all of us to read by the leading businessman of the United Arab Emirates. His name is Khalaf Hamad Al Habtoor. You're going to need to sit down for this as I read this. His Excellency President Donald Trump, a direct question: Who gave you the authority to drag our region into a war with Iran? And on what basis did you make this dangerous decision? Did you calculate the collateral damage before pulling the trigger? And did you consider that the first to suffer from this escalation will be the countries of the region itself? The peoples of this region have the right to ask as well: Was this your decision alone, or did it come as a result of pressures from Netanyahu and his government. You have placed the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council and the Arab countries at the heart of a danger they did not choose. Thank God we are strong and capable of defending ourselves, and we have armies and defenses that protect our homelands. But the question remains: who gave you permission to turn our region into a battlefield. For before the ink has dried on your Board of Peace initiative that you announced in the name of peace and stability, we find ourselves facing a military escalation that endangers our entire region. So where did those initiatives go, and what is the fate of the commitments made in the name of peace? Most of the funding proposed in your initiatives came from the countries of the regions themselves and from Arab Gulf countries that contributed billions of dollars on the basis of supporting stability and development. And these countries have the right to ask today, where did this money go? And are we funding peace initiatives or funding a war that exposes us to danger? More dangerous than that, Your decision does not threaten only the peoples of the region but also reaches the American people whom you promised peace and prosperity. And here they are today, finding themselves in a war funded from their money and taxes, which costs are ranging, according to Institute of Policy Studies, between $40 to $65 billion for direct military operations and could reach $210 billion including economic impacts and indirect losses if it lasts 4 to 5 weeks. Not to mention the sacrifice of Americans themselves in a war in which they have neither camel nor she-camel, which I take that phrase to mean being on foot. You have even broken your promises not to get involved in wars and to focus only only on America and put it at the top of your priorities. As you ordered foreign military interventions during your second term that included 7 countries— Somalia, Iraq, Yemen, Nigeria, Syria, Iran, and Venezuela— in addition to naval operations in the Caribbean and the Pacific Ocean, you directed more than 658 foreign airstrikes in your first year in office. Which equals the total number of strikes in Biden's entire term, for which you directed your arrows of criticism for involving the United States in foreign wars. Your Excellency the President, these numbers have severely reflected on your approval rating with Americans, which have declined since your inauguration for the second term by about 9% in just 400 days. These numbers say something clear. Even within the United States, there is growing concern about being dragged into a new war and about exposing the lives of Americans, their economy, and their future to unnecessary risks. True leadership is not measured by war decisions, but by wisdom, respect for others, and pushing toward achieving peace. And if these initiatives were launched in the name of peace, then we have the right today to demand full transparency and clear accountability. Well, good luck, because we are not getting any of that from the Trump administration, and we never have. And we've been asking, where is our money? Where is our money going?

I'm going to step All right, I just want you to listen to this, but at the same time, I'll blame those Gulf states as well for allowing the American military presence there. So yeah, as I always say, you can't bake a cake and have it— can have it both ways. You know, they are not willing to make the tough decisions by asking the Americans to leave and invest in their own developments. I mean, you go to— I spent time in Saudi Arabia. The people don't, don't produce anything. Everything is imported, you know. Yes, they do have a lot of oil and, and so forth, but it's just, uh, just to let you know, they are part to blame as well. So number 2, you know, remember I shared the first one is the fast-moving inflation story. Number 2, why is this important for you to know? It's a live case study. In what? In how fragile the rule-based order narrative actually is. Remember, we always push for that rule base, which we never adhere to and never respected. We never honor its commitments because we are a corrupted system. Straightforward. It pains me to say this as an American, but I can't shy away from saying it. The system is so damn corrupted. So here's the thing. Two of the world's most critical trade, our arteries degrading simultaneously with no clean Suez Canal fallback because Suez Canal cannot handle that. And that in itself undercuts the assumption, uh, uh, undercut the— I gotta silence this, uh, somebody trying to get a hold of me— assumption that global commerce runs on stable, guaranteed infrastructure. That's the kind of the structural insight You need to understand, and that's what I do in this channel specifically, to get instead of sanitized mainstream framing, because I will never do that. Number 3, this is like a preview who actually has leverage in a multipolar world, and it isn't who the people you assume or you think. A non-state actor which controls over 18 miles straight, is currently moving global oil prices more than G20 finance ministers. Just think about it. Take a step back and think about it. That reframes power away from GDP, as I mentioned earlier, ranking, and towards geography and asymmetric leverage, which, by the way, is the core, in my opinion, is the core lens. That's the lens that I use in this channel regarding every other headline going forward. And number 4, this will give you a framework, not just a headline, because understanding why states calibrate short of closure de-escalation of ramps legibility or reversibility as leverage is a durable analytical tool. So I told you, back in FID, I used to deal with this kind of issues. So because once you grasp this logic, you know what you're going to do with it? You're going to apply it to the next chokepoint crisis— Taiwan Strait, Malacca, Panama. Without needing anyone else to explain things to you from scratch. That is the reason why. And that the 'what's in it for me' is— that's what keeps people hopefully will subscribe into this channel rather than just watching. So that's my point in all this. So here's my conclusion for you about this, and I'm gonna play 2 or 3 clips for you. Uh, I want to play the first one about a fair question. No, no, I think I only have one here. Maybe I forgot. So let me see here. Uh, just before I'll do this, uh, you're not gonna be seeing me much. Uh, I have some projects I need to get involved in. You remember what I do outside this channel, uh, from both consultancy and the speaking stuff. Uh, there are some work that I have to project to be involved, so you might not be seeing me much. I will still be doing live streams, don't worry. I'm not gonna disappear, I will still be here. It's just, uh there are some things I need to, uh, take care of. So let me share this one clip with you here, uh, just to highlight to you. And this one is, uh, before I— yeah, right there. Before I play it, I want just to let you know I addressed this issue about ASML about a year and a half ago when At that time, it was the Prime Minister Mark Rott, who became now Secretary General of NATO. You know why he pressured ASML to stop shipping the lithography equipments to China? Because he wanted to become a Secretary General of NATO, and that was the price for his decision to do that. Guess what China just did? And that's exactly what this clip is all about. So take a look. Take a listen. I don't know if there's soundtrack on this one or not. Hold on. Yes, there is soundtrack. You know, I'm not gonna play this one. He's just gonna— it's, it's only this one here. ASML stock falls 6% as China begins making homegrown DUV lithography machines. Oh man, oh man, ASML is gone. So that is the, that is the, uh, the important aspects of, of, of this one I wanted to share with you. Let me see this one here. No, this is not a— oh, why not? I'm gonna play it for you. This is a, a question has nothing to do with geopolitics. It's something to just think outside the box. Some of you might find it interesting, some of you might not. Nonetheless, I'm gonna share it. Take a listen, please.

Who gave them the right? Why do we pay to—

oh, sorry—

to exist? Who gave them the right to charge us for water and land they didn't create? We should not be paying anything for our existence on this earth. Let that sink in. Let it scrape against everything that you've been taught. Because, you know, the idea that you owe money just for existing is the most absurd thing that humanity has ever accepted. You were born here against your will on a planet that you did not create, under a sky that no government ever hung, breathing air that no corporation manufactured, and somehow you begin your life already in debt. That is not even sane. Explain to me how land became owned. Explain how water became a bill. Explain how shelter became rent, movement became a license, and rest became something you have to earn after selling most of your waking hours.

You got a point there, because here's— I'm gonna share quick, quick, quick story with you that happened in here in the US. There is a legal battle right now between someone and the court. Why? It's because this guy sort of retained rainwater. You know, I have rain barrels in my place. I retain rainwater, you know, and this guy gets a larger quantity of rain and filters that into drinkable water. And the city went after him and sued him for using rainwater. That shows you how corrupted the system is. Rainwater— who owns the rain? Nobody should. So, and that's why I found this very, very interesting. Anyway, I hope you enjoyed this. And again, uh, I will not— you're still gonna see me, I'm not gonna disappear. Uh, it's just I wanted to give you a heads up on and off. So, uh, let me say thank you to Noel. Hi Noel, greetings Dr. O, and thanks again for your reliable analysis. You're most welcome, Noel, and good to see you. We haven't seen you for a while. I hope all is well. So, uh, Noel and I, we sometimes communicate privately. So thank you, Noel, for your continued support. Truly appreciate you. Uh, I want to give you guys a heads up— not a heads up, rather, I'm sorry, an update, uh, regard— oh, there is someone who, uh, donated to the channel, uh, in support of the channel, bought me coffee for the channel, uh, Hor US. Horus, thank you so much for buying me cups of coffees in support of the channel and its content. So as you know, the— that's, uh, if, if you truly care about what you are listening to here and you find it useful, should you decide to support the channel, that will be so great, and I will be grateful to you forever. So, uh, the other one is my upcoming trip to Asia, and I want just to let you know where we are. We're still at that number here. I'm waiting to reach $7,500 so I can let the donor who, uh, pledge dollar for dollar up to $1,000. So, and again, I was hoping we can reach this by the end of July. The end of July is tomorrow. I think I only have about 2 weeks. That's it. If I don't reach this within August 15th or 20th, then I'm gonna have to postpone the trip till later on, uh, because I won't have enough time, uh, for, you know, to do all the tickets and all that stuff and the locations that I intend to. But anyway, I just want to let you know where things are. So here is the link for if you want to buy me cups of teas in support of my upcoming Asia trip. And just to let you know, most of my previous trips were funded by you, the community. I just want to let you know. And the last thing I'll share, last link is for my books. Should you, uh, decide to get a copy of my books, uh, you can just go to this site here, the link rather, and you get a copy. I, I had to cut the prices down, way down, because now I own everything. The publisher doesn't own, uh, so the, the right to them. So, and as soon once I completed everything, I'm gonna put my new book about China, uh, as part of that. So anyway, hope you enjoyed this, and once again, I look forward to seeing you next time. As always, remember, geopolitics impact your daily life in more ways than one. Till next time, bye-bye.