From the outset of Putin's crassly conceived invasion of Ukraine, this blog has consistently criticised the sheer military and strategic incompetence of it. We can hardly forbear to do the same for Trump.
The Donald's theory of victory appears to be this:
- prolonged, well-telegraphed buildup of forces
- decapitate[1] the leadership
- tell Iran to install new leader acceptable to Trump
- new leader to hand over lots of oil via some splendid "deal"
- walk away after a couple of weeks, handsomely in profit
- not crow too openly about having tweaked Xi's nose
- approach the mid-term elections as the Man Who Brought The Mullahs To Heel
We needn't dwell on how the reality is best described as Netanyahu coopting[3] the military might of the USA to make real Bibi's longstanding wet dream: it's how the whole world openly discusses it including, belatedly, 99% of the American public, which until now had been either (a) hoping Trump might somehow work out for the best (Maga Republicans) or (b) not daring to oppose Trump openly, for fear of some vaguely defined domestic retribution (Democrats plus liberal elites of all colours[4]).
If you want to lose sleep seriously this weekend, have a read of this. Small-boat crossings on the increase? We haven't seen a tenth of it.
ND
_____________
[1] Well, tag along with Netanyahu's decapitation plan & pretend to be in control - read this, too.
[2] Funnily enough, the Venezuela gambit was working quite well, and Cuba was being lined up for a "quick deal" too, which could have played very nicely for the mid-terms[5]. Not any more.
[3] Did I say "coopting"? How about "hijacking and expending"? All Hesgeth's blather about "effectively unlimited magazine depth" was always, even a week ago, absolute nonsense. Stocks are already being drawn down from US forces in S.Korea. Taiwan looks increasingly like a lost cause, and S.Korea will presumably be readying its own nuclear programme. Indeed, probably the only reason L'il Kim doesn't chance his arm right now is the recognition that DJT is capable of anything.
[4] It was really noticeable how The US Establishment (media, judiciary, academia, NGOs, think tanks, institutes etc - even those that are essentially on the right) - initially went completely silent after November '24, and withheld much-needed criticism all through last year. Presumably they all feared for their funding (or worse) - and rightly so in many cases. That winter of silence has been thawing of late.
[5] The Dems had better not be complacent in their approach to the mid-terms: conventional wisdom of the "don't worry, it'll all be over soon" kind has been the downfall of many a lazy politician. The whole of the British left thought that about Thatcher in 1981. And we must be very cautious before assuming the US military will "refuse to obey illegal orders", as some spineless Dems have been urging.
51 comments:
"It was really noticeable how The US Establishment (media, judiciary, academia, NGOs, think tanks, institutes etc - even those that are essentially on the right) - initially went completely silent after November '24, and withheld much-needed criticism all through last year."
Yes because that lot were paragons of balanced and fair criticism of Trump Mk1............
I've taken to calling it Operation Epic Fubar.
On a different point: your ref (1) says
"Within weeks, Germany was at war with France, Russia, and Britain. Not because any of them threatened Berlin, but because an unconditional commitment to a smaller ally with a regional obsession had eliminated every reason for that ally to show restraint."
That's balls. The whole point of the blank cheque was that Kaiser Bill and his circle wanted a casus belli to let them fight a war with Russia, because Russia was industrialising so successfully that they felt that if they didn't fight her soon she'd be too strong to attack.
Professor Fischer explained this at the end of the fifties.
An alternative worst case scenario is that Usrael goes for the Serbia/Gaza option of destroying power supplies in Iran, and Iran responds by demolishing as many Gulf desalination plants as it can. Nasty.
And another thing: your link says "Secretary of State Marco Rubio ... was not whether to fight but whether to strike alongside Israel or wait until Iran retaliated against American forces in the region."
Why no third option? For example telling Israel "Your proposed action would damage American interests so don't do it. Don't forget who pays foots the bills for Israel."
The fact that such an option is unthinkable is surely revealing?
Not entirely convinced.
Seems to me that with Venezia, Trump kneecapped one of Xi’s supply legs for oil. Now with Iran, he’s kneecapped the other leg.
Not much talking about that “multipolar world” Xi has been cheerleading for the last few years. China reduced, publicly, to asking Iran to please, please pretty please let its tankers through. And to Trump, would you. If you don’t mind, stop being so beastly to our allies?
“But muh oil price!” I hear some just about to hit the keyboards to complain. The US is in a much stronger position than China on that score. It’s a net exporter of oil and, while some grades of crude are imported to match refinery capabilities, thanks to Trumps new friends in Central America, it’ll likely not go short on that, either.
Sure, “world prices” blah blah blah. High crude prices spur investment in US energy production (which was in the doldrums—we were in a supply glut ways back in, oh, I don’t know, February). And the US’s energy intensity per dollar of GDP is pretty low. China? Not so much.
Adding, for completeness, “wot ah-baat duh yookay, though?”
To which I can only present, for your delectations, the current UK energy mix for electricity generation: https://enact.lcp.energy/
“wE neEd t0 pROdUce ANd bURN MoAR GAs” never seems such a dubious proposition. Trump making Ed Milliband the hero of the hour? Who’d have thought it…
Don’t know where “ Venezia” came from… it should of course be “Venezuela”.
I take Clive's point about Chinese energy, but ...I was considering the US v China in the context of the late 19th and 20th century UK v Germany battle.
Although the Germans were and still are probably better industrialists than the UK, nonetheless the end of the confrontation was disastrous defeat for Germany. And at the moment Trump, without fixing US industry first, is stopping a big chunk of China’s oil supplies.
But Britain in her confrontation could and did call upon a big cousin, the United States, Churchill’s “gigantic boiler” with almost untapped resources. The US, which has changed hugely for the worse since 1939, has no such cousin to call upon, indeed the only possible candidate, the UK and Europe, has been enormously disadvantaged by the loss of Russian oil and gas. Almost daily I read bad news from German industry.
"the current UK energy mix for electricity generation" i.e. a day when walking in the woods makes you somewhat nervous and very glad the leaves aren't out yet.
The helicopter pilots taking people to Cheltenham are earning their money, as are airline pilots landing at Leeds and Birmingham.
US are moving all their THAAD systems from Korea to the Middle East.
In isolation, the removal of the Iranian regime would be an unalloyed good. In the context of the wider Middle East, without some post-removal plan, not so much.
Trump really doesn't understand geopolitics, through his lens it's all real estate deals, he'd probably sell Alaska back to Russia for the right deal and then wonder why he'd be being blamed for undercover Russian military assets flooding western Canada and the north western US...
Risk for the West is this is currently another war we're likely to lose, all the Mullahs need do is not collapse. Upsides are that Netanyahu may find himself brought to task. Successive US Presidents have been fed up to the back teeth of his arrogance, maybe Trump will do something about it.
The current trajectory puts this as his GW2 or Afghanistan.
On the plus side, on sites like the Speccie, the pro-Trump crowd are in full swing. If the old remainers want to see actual swivel eyed loons, there's an entire safari park's worth there.
Pretty typical day nowadays, February wind share knocked natural gas for powerburn well into second place (https://www.neso.energy/energy-101/great-britains-monthly-energy-stats) just as it has done all winter.
Natural gas for electricity generation will be down to 20% of the energy mix by the end of the year (even in winter) *just on the current build-out*.
Would have been even higher if it wasn’t for curtailment, but again, grid reinforcements *already in build* will take care of that in the next couple of years.
But sure. You keep kvetching for more natural gas dependency. Even if more licences for exploration and fracking trials was inked *right now*, any possible well flows that might, just, perhaps, come in stream in five years or so would immediately be diverted into natural gas for powerburn *just to replace what’s currently provided by renewables*. Way to go, energy policy genius.
Of course, far more likely would be LNG cargos. From some of the most unpleasant, unreliable and generally dubious countries in the world. And yes, I include the US in that. At nosebleed pricing.
Turkey - "There should be no questioning of Iran's territorial integrity, and no pursuit of regime change. We are against plans aimed at triggering a civil war in Iran and provoking conflicts along ethnic and religious fault lines," Fidan told a press conference with his German counterpart. "We are warning about this. No one should pursue such a fantasy. We would not allow it."
Venezuela is the diminutive of Venezia
One to remember for the triple word score square in Scrabble,
Trump is on the receiving end of a long chain, jerked around by Israel and Iran. One has played its game since pre WW2 and now owns most of the keys to the White House. The other was clumsily mishandled by the US and the Brits. Was really just a marginal player who could have been a useful counterweight.
The nuke threat is moonshine. Hard(ish) to make a real one, delivery is a problem, a donkey won't do and even if you did try it you get your entire country green glassed 30mm thick. A big expensive willy that can never be used.
The US can't beat Iran into the ground and unless all the Ayatollahs swing from lampposts we have the same problem in a few years. That means bodybags and the US is very uncomfortable with those - especially in an election runup. Time for the off-ramp.
Harsh words and deeds done, probably better for Trump to fold his tents and steal quietly away. Sure thing Donald - you won. Oil profits are good and can pay election expenses for Republicans and Democrats, the question is which looks the best worst buy. Game is over for Trump. So who next, Republicans look crazy as a box of frogs and the Democrats still have the curse of the Clintons and Sleepy Joe upon them. Hard choice.
The WEB show us a huge number of Think Tanks and Foundations etc etc all with wise words and an agenda. Beats working for a living, in fact it looks like scribblers outnumber the workers - whoever they are.
"That means bodybags"
In one university long vacation in the sixties I spent many weeks labouring in a small paper-and-plastics factory in New Jersey. We made two sizes of plastic bags: small - for carbines going to Vietnam, and large - for bodies coming back.
And here we are nearly sixty years later with the US involved in another foolish war in Asia. People don't learn much, do they?
My terrible conclusion is that the electorate was right to vote for Trump because the alternative would have been a Dem administration that would have snuffed out any last chance of the American republic sustaining a liberal democracy. (That's "liberal" in the classical sense, not in the American sense of illiberal.)
Whereas with Trump it might have staggered on a bit longer or even have been restored to some health. But now? And all because the vain old bugger ...
And yet another thing: from the Tel, concerning Iranian drones attacking British troops in Iraq.
John Healey, the Defence Secretary, said: “No one will be surprised to believe that Putin’s hidden hand is behind some of the Iranian tactics and potentially some of their capabilities as well.”
A: Why on earth do we have troops in Iraq?
B: What does Mr Healey's gibberish mean?
It's apparently fine for our MOD to learn as much as possible from the Ukraine conflict to pass onto our troops, but it's really bad for Iran, who gave the drones to Russia in the beginning, to profit from the Russian frontline experience.
What I find interesting is that a few weeks of oil at $100/barrel apparently is about to destroy Europe, yet we keep getting told that we need to fight Russia within 5 years. If we can't deal with a bit of expensive energy (and its not even that expensive - oil was around $90-100/barrel for 3 years from 2011-14) then how the f*ck are we supposed to cope with a proper shooting war with Uncle Vlad?
Vlad only needs to hit our offshore wind turbines and we're up the Swanee. Don't even need explosives. One drone per turbine. Just unbalance a blade ...
Jeeze. Where do they get these people from? There are 12,107 individual operational wind turbines installed in the UK (both onshore and offshore) as of early 2026
And just how far do you think is the range of a drone, anyway?
Should be obvious but “wE neEd t0 pROdUce ANd bURN MoAR GAs” when the wind don't blow and the sun don't shine. It's common enough in Northern Europe that the Germans even have a word for it - dunkelflaute.
Batteries won't cut it for more than low single digit hours.
Yes, I wondered, what exactly their mission was supposed to be?
This must be the sort of inanity that really pisses off the professionals in the military. A waste of scarce resources and a fairly easy target without the sort of scale to offer any sort of depth for whatever operations they are posted there for.
If you can’t differentiate between natural gas combustion plants operated as gas peakers and plants operated to cover baseload (the former being required for only a few weeks in a typical winter and easily satisfiable for their fuel demands from storage or UKCS domestic production, the latter needing to be supplemented by Norwegian imports and/or LNG 24/7) then:
a) I can’t help you, and
b) wonder what you are even thinking to be trying to comment on energy policy
Because UKCS production is being wiped out by retarded government policy, LNG might be stuck in the Gulf and Norway may sell to the Germans instead of the UK during dunkelflaute.
E'en now the crafty Putin is developing drones disguised as birds, windmills for the destruction of. Every night a Russki submarine will surface and send hundreds of the ruddy things hurtling towards the blades. Any anti-drone devices will prove ineffective, mainly shooting down near-indistinguishable sea birds.
“Seagulls sir. ‘Fahh-sands of ‘em!”
You have absolutely no idea at all how any of this stuff works, do you?
Peaker natural gas volumes, durations, flow rates and stock requirements for, say 30GWh, for 5 days? As a percentage of pre-energy transition daily demand? And projected UKCS supply, even runoff?
This is like talking to people who 1) not only just read the Daily Mail but 2) also only ever read the headlines.
I would think Putin has got North Sea gas, electricity and windfarm lines mapped out already.
Completely off topic: I see from some Reddit article a graduate expects background checks for a DEFRA job to take 6 to 8 months. From other reading this seems par - unless your name is Mandelson. The scheme is to say yes to any job while these long checks take place and then bale out.
Now if I were a bit cynical I might think this sort of thing is designed to take as many people as possible as long as possible to achieve something that no one cares a s^&t about. Very sensible, helps the employment numbers.
I suppose if one has an Upper First from Balliol one's choices might be wider but a 2.1 from BogTown does not seem a great buy. Mind you, a very long term plot to infiltrate the highest reaches might start with DEFRA, one can't be too careful can we Mandy.
Russia produces maybe 50k drones a year, London is 900 miles from Kaliningrad. The range of a Geran 2 is around 900 miles, though a blade buster wouldn't need a Geran's explosive charge.
Russia produces maybe 50k drones a year - ? And the rest.
And (another point in support of anon's view) check out Operation Spiderweb. Oh, and check out how easily UK airports are brought to a standstill when someone spots a kiddy-drone somewhere nearby.
"Can't go out into the North Sea and repair that turbine - sea is too rough and there are drones about. 'Elf n safety, innit?"
That said, how secure do you think a gas terminal is, anon? We have more of them than we have seaworthy destroyers with AA missiles aboard.
To Nick’s point, I would though consider that Russia has spent billions on various ordnance of one sort or another and fired them all at Ukraine with the aim of destroying or at least severely incapacitating their electricity grid.
Each year, this has supposedly been “the winter when Ukraine’s grid collapses” and this year is another winter where it didn’t. That’s not to say it wasn’t pretty miserable for many, with 12+ hour rotating outages, I suspect many were cold and fed up. But they survived, as did their grid.
I’ve always suspected this strategy of trying to destroy the electricity grid was an old Soviet plan, they dusted off. But what they had not figured out what that this old strategy was, like everything, vulnerable to technological innovation. Specifically:
- networked digital control systems in grid switching and transforming stations
- development of highly diverse and distributed generation
- the growth of interconnectors
To which we can also add for non-Ukraine contexts the dreaded smart meter, enabling grid restoration and load limiting until a damaged system is stabilised. Spain, for example, got its grid back up and running is less than a day after a complete shutdown, when many forecast weeks.
But to Nick’s other observations, yes, the resourcefulness of the Ukraine engineers seems boundless and they cannot have been infected with the malaise of ‘elf ‘n safety we succumb to here.
And, to circle back to the bigger picture, there was nothing — superficially — wrong with Putin’s energy infrastructure attack strategy. It certainly *should* have worked, on paper at least. But the enemy just does not have to be nice and read your script. Conflicts have a habit of never quite working out the way everyone planned (or hoped, if they used hope as a plan). This certainly could be true of Trump’s Iranian escapades.
It could also be equally be true of Iran’s responses. Far too many unknown unknowns right now for anyone to start being definitive.
Clive - all good points. Thucydides stated that few nations have survived a siege (i.e. the city being cut off from the countryside & its supply sources) that lasted a full winter; and no nations have ever survived two winters in a row. As you say, the resourceful and dogged Ukrainians have re-written history.
The other factor in their favour has been ... the good old diesel genny, of all sizes. Of course! Anyone who's ever been to Africa would tell you that (and mark my words, it'll come to the UK on an even bigger scale than at present, if Miliband is allowed to carry on the way he is.)
I know of a Ukr refugee family living here: the youth who came over in 2022 has grown into a (wealthy) young man running an entrepreneurial diesel genny export business. Draft-dodger he may be - but he might also be best employed doing what he's doing.
I think Trump's mistake is worse than Putins. WIth Ukraine they fucked up royally initially, but it can be seen as existential to Russia as is. In this Trump has been lead by the nose or is it the Epsteain Files by Netanyahu. The assumption of decapitation was stupid on so many levels and just shows hubris, the Israelis showing that? Never. Decapitation showed that killing legitimate recognised heads of state is now considered Statecraft.
There is and was no upside in the Iranians surrendering. Attacking in what looked like good faith negotiations is lower than Peal Harbour. At least the Japanese intended to declare war prior to the attack rather than sneak around thinking they were very clever like the US/Israelis did.
Additionally the Iranian have popped the Gulf bubble. People I know n the ground (there including some old Africa hands who know hinkey when they see it), say it is hairy and simply not getting reported, despite the effective news blackouts.
Dumb and Dumber and in all this if we didn't have utter fucking cretins and traitors n charge, London could regain a bit of luster as it has fallen down the tree as a financial centre massively. But people wont come due to the tax the rich bullshit even if bombs are falling.. kerching for Singapore and Mauritius.
H
Also what's all the bullshit that Russia is supplying co-ordinate to Iran, quelle suprise! Oh look axis of evil (not) ..it's not like US/UK troops havent been LARPing as Ukrainians and firing on Russia directly - FAFO
H
I can tell you’ve never worked in finance.
Taking each in turn, good luck getting a case heard fairly or competently in the Mauritian legal system. Disputes happen all the time and the fate of billions of dollars turn in the outcomes. It’s not just fairness, you need both breadth and depth of legal experience in the judiciary and lawyers which means a huge body of case law and precedents, you need capacity of the courts (to avoid delays in the case being heard), an entire ecosystem.
Singapore is generally fair but that brings me to another requirement, probably more important than any jurisprudence. People with huge amounts of money need suitable opportunities to spend it. High end shops, social events, schools, houses, country estates, and people like them to spend time with and compare themselves to. Most people in finance who’ve tried their hand in Singapore are bored out of their tiny minds after a few years (the average is less than five) and head off for somewhere and something less mind-numbing dull.
Dubai figured out all of this. While somewhat still a cultural vacuum, the rulers there made sure that the place resembled bootyville, with an endless supply of tarts, booze, other stuff if you’re discreet, McMansions, the “right sort or people” (who are rather dreadful but that’s what people who have these sorts of careers and that sort of money want). Good luck getting that in dull-as-ditchwater Singapore.
Same rubbish as you were taking there was talked about Frankfurt (Frankfurt, for goodness sakes!) after Brexit. You were probably one of the ones taking about it. Nev’ah happened. For finance types, it was like you’d won the lottery. But had to live in Swindon.
Yes, GenSets. Ambrosia for so may ills.
Only two aspects I think worthy of mentioning.
First is they have had a step-change in the past ten to fifteen years or so compared to the flakey older models. Reliability of the combustion components is stellar. 10,000 hours of runtime before anything needs maintenance. The diesel engines are very economical and fairly efficient (not compared to grid supplies but well ahead of what the units of yesteryear could do). The natural gas powered ones will happily run continuously connected to a gas main. The voltage control and stabilisation electronics means a nice, clean stable output — no voltage sags or surges. And they ramp down to part loads quickly. Costs have fallen through the floor, too (thanks China). I don’t suppose Putin or his equally superannuated planners ever bothered to consider any of this.
And for the more local context, have a nosey round the back of any supermarket, moderately sized office block, hospital, anything of any vague importance, and you’ll find one of these things standing by quietly waiting for their moment to shine. It is usually an insurance requirement — they are so cheap, it’s a no brainier for the insurance underwriters to inset on this, given a potential loss (eg on a supermarket having a power outage) of a million pounds of stock and business interruption.
Go long gensets, folks.
Clive, strangely enough I have worked in Finance. I understand your position, but given that London has fallen from 1st or 2nd in the world to what 8th or 10th now, it sure as hell ain't coming back anytime soon. Add to that the challenges Lloyds will face as an insurance market and it looks worse.
I'd agree that Frankfurt was never a goer. but you can't tout London as a serious option anymore. Your appeal to getting a case heard fairly was blown out the water with the Russian sanctions and shenanigans about seizing Russian assets, yes that is the EU but tarred by proximity, if you want to launder the worlds wealth you cant be squeamish. I can't see politicised English Courts ruling against political intervention, when touted as "for the good guys".. same result even if it's not Mauritius, the non European money isn't going to flow to London.
You didn’t specify what methodology you used to compile your “8th to 10th place” ranking so I don’t know how to judge it but the GFCI doesn’t agree with it at all https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Financial_Centres_Index
And if nothing else the straight of Hormuz shenanigans show that for insurance, London is the only game in town.
No-one is going to risk hundreds of millions of dollars on the chance of ending up with junk insurance by taking coverage outside of English law jurisdiction. You would not risk your own money on the whims of a Russian, Chinese or any other similarly compromised court. So your notions asset owners would do with theirs is self-evidently hokum.
And the UKSC’s judgment in respect of Russian assets was absolutely legally water-tight. If there’s any quibbling over any judicial activism, it’s about courts being *too* ready to side with litigants against the British government.
If I buy a diesel generator how do I stop someone stealing it? I sold my rifle decades ago. I'm an old man and can't afford to hire "security".
Would it be wiser to emigrate to somewhere that these problems won't arise, if (i) anywhere would have us, and (ii) such places exist anyway?
The small (1-2kW) can be put in a metal storage box bolted to the floor (or a concrete pad) although you have to make a suitable opening for the flue. 10kW to 20kW can be chained in place (a two man job to lift them and good luck heaving it into a van).
Anything more and you need a fork lift. 100-200kW is a shipping container.
And I share your musings about where to go. You’d need to have a heart of stone not to laugh out loud at the newbie denizens of the UAE (and similar) in the past fortnight, on their bumpy journey from “safer than London, in’nit” to the ignominy of not only having to come crawling back, but facing a tax bill they had been trying to avoid if they can’t return to the UAE in time to avoid losing their non-dom status
For what it’s worth, for me, I’m even more convinced than I ever have been that we won’t solve, collectively, our problems of humanity by running away and hiding. You can keep trying to climb the mountain, higher and higher to keep out the fray. But sooner or later you have to stop that and build a moat.
Remember Trump strong-armed Panama into ceding formerly Chinese control of the ports at either end of the canal? Winning bigly?
Panama are finding that the US aren’t the only ones who can play the strong-arm game:
Chinese ports detained 28 Panama-flagged vessels between March 8-12, representing 75.7% of detentions — far exceeding historical levels. Sources say China’s maritime authorities issued verbal instructions to intensify inspections of Panama-flagged ships, with the first week described as a trial before further escalation. Move looks like latest in Beijing’s retaliation campaign following Panama’s forced removal of CK Hutchison’s operating rights at Balboa and Cristobal terminals.
https://www.lloydslist.com/LL1156612/Panama-flag-detentions-at-Chinese-ports-spike-amid-Hutchison-port-fallout
A LOT of ships are Panama-flagged.
China are also putting pressure on the companies who took over the running of the ports and who do a lot of business with China.
I am a huge trump fanboy but I think letting Netanyahu lead him into war may be his gravest blinder.
Hello Clive, my methodology? Using numbers rather than a sentiment survey. You are leaning heavily on the GFCI, which is broadly a legacy index propped up by London’s deep bench of back-office accountants and lawyers. I'm looking at the actual location of the world's money: Domestic Market Capitalization.
By the definitive metrics tracked by Bloomberg and the World Federation of Exchanges, my '8th to 10th' estimate was spot on. The London Stock Exchange currently ranks around 9th globally at roughly $3.2 Trillion. It sits behind the NYSE, NASDAQ, Euronext, Japan, Shanghai, Shenzhen, India (which overtook the UK in 2022), and Hong Kong. Post-Brexit, Amsterdam stole the crown for European share trading, Paris frequently beats London for the European market cap crown, and London now accounts for barely 2% of global IPOs. Even homegrown UK tech like Arm fled to New York. A financial centre bleeding equities and new listings at this scale is in secular decline.
As for the courts and Russian sanctions, you are missing the geopolitical forest for the legalistic trees. It doesn't matter if the UKSC rulings were 'legally water-tight' under domestic UK law. The signal sent to non-Western wealth from the Gulf, Asia, and the BRICS was absolute: London will weaponise your assets based on NATO foreign policy. That is massive sovereign risk. You can't manage the world's wealth if you're suddenly squeamish and politically aligned. Non-Western billionaires just watched London prove their assets are only safe as long as their home country aligns with Westminster / NATO preferences. That money is quietly de-risking away from the UK.
This brings us to Singapore. Your take sounds like an expat banker from 2005 unhappy about a lack of nightlife. The shift in global wealth isn't about where mid-level traders want
tarts and booze, it’s about the ultra-wealthy parking generational capital. Singapore is experiencing an unprecedented boom in Family Offices from China and the Middle East precisely because it offers a strict rule of law combined with geopolitical neutrality. They don't care if it's 'dull'. They care that their billions won't be frozen by a political whim. London has lost that neutrality.
Finally, you bring up the Strait of Hormuz as proof of Lloyd's invincibility, which is I say is short-sighted. If Washington does attempt to forcefully regain control they won't leave the strategic risk-pricing to London underwriters. The US financial sector has long wanted to capture the Lloyd's specialty market. Washington will use 'national security' as the perfect pretext to force whatever remains of that lucrative marine insurance market under US regulatory (OFAC) and Wall Street control. Whether through Iranian area-denial or an eventual US regulatory takeover, Lloyd's is caught in a geopolitical vice, not sitting on an invincible throne.
Best, H
"The signal sent to non-Western wealth from the Gulf, Asia, and the BRICS was absolute: London will weaponise your assets based on NATO foreign policy. That is massive sovereign risk. You can't manage the world's wealth if you're suddenly squeamish and politically aligned. Non-Western billionaires just watched London prove their assets are only safe as long as their home country aligns with Westminster / NATO preferences. That money is quietly de-risking away from the UK."
And of course something that doesn't happen can't be seen or measured. If foreign billionaire X doesn't invest his money via London, and chooses somewhere else instead, we don't see that. Just because there isn't an immediate measurable effect to an action does not mean that action is not having an effect.
You overstated London’s decline with selective metrics and speculative geopolitics, while underplaying counter-evidence.
• GFCI vs. market cap: Fair critique of GFCI as legacy-biased toward services, but it still ranks London 2nd globally (GFCI 38, Sep 2025), ahead of Singapore (4th). Market cap is a narrow proxy; LSE’s ~$3.9T (Mar 2026) places it ~8th-9th, behind NYSE (~$28T), NASDAQ (~$25T), Tokyo, Shanghai, Shenzhen, HK, India NSE, and Euronext—accurate, but ignores London’s strengths in derivatives, FX, and insurance.
• Post-Brexit equities bleed: Spot-on facts—Amsterdam overtook share trading volume; Paris/Euronext often leads European market cap; UK’s global IPO share ~2%; Arm listed on NASDAQ (2023). This supports secular decline in equities, but you had to do that by cherry-picking as London’s overall dealmaking (M&A, debt) remains robust
.
• Sanctions and sovereign risk: Overreaches; UK rulings were legally sound, but the “weaponization” narrative resonates with non-Western investors. No mass exodus documented—sanctions targeted Russians specifically, freezing ~£18B in assets—but perceived NATO alignment could deter Gulf/Asian capital long-term. Evidence of “quiet de-risking” is anecdotal, not definitive.
• Singapore’s rise: Accurate and understated; family offices surged to >2,000 by end-2024 (up 43% YoY), driven by neutrality, rule of law, and Asia’s wealth boom (projected >10,000 global FOs by 2030). But you contradicted yourself in criticism of “dullness” which is apt for UHNWIs prioritising safety over lifestyle but for the high net worths with probably a portfolio of half a dozen properties globally, where they will spend their time and spend their money is where the can get their fun, which no-one is going to domicile themselves in Singapore to get. And the sleazier the money, the more true this holds, which you switched contexts for in your second post compared to your first. So which is it?
• Lloyd’s and Hormuz: Speculative fearmongering; Lloyd’s holds ~40% global marine insurance share (unchanged recently), but no evidence of imminent US takeover via “national security.” Geopolitical risks exist (e.g., Iran tensions), but portraying Lloyd’s as “in a vice” ignores its adaptability and London’s entrenched specialty market role.
Then by all means wake me up when we have something observable rather than someone pulling stuff out of their ass for all we know.
Our anonymous friend there did have a point for risk-averse high net worth individuals and family offices which might wish prioritise a safe-haven over livability but they could only do that by undermining their precious point about how dubious wealth seeks out “no questions asked” destinations (like the UAE). All financial centres have to balance these competing objectives. London is no exception. It tries to sit on a fence but ultimately has to kow-tow to the US.
Which brings me onto how, say, Singapore tries to have this cake and eat it too but, like everybody, finds there’s trade-offs. Because make trade-offs, it certainly does.
Laws like POFMA (2019) and FICA (2021), aimed at countering misinformation and foreign meddling, create uncertainty about permissible speech, lead to overcompliance, self-censorship locally and and a “nothing ever happens” complacency about geopolitical pressures, including US scrutiny over Singapore’s leniency toward Chinese capital potentially circumventing sanctions. All of which add sovereign risks for non-aligned investors.
While no widespread asset seizures occur, these factors could subtly undermine neutrality, with reliance on foreign inflows exposing vulnerabilities to global shifts like increased US muscularity. Trump’s America is epitomising a “you’re either with us or you’re against us” mentality. Good luck, Singapore, in trying to sit in the US/China fence on that one.
The UAE thought it could sit on the US/Middle East geopolitical fence too. And look what happened to it.
"vulnerabilities to global shifts like increased US muscularity"
Is that the US that's asking for help getting vessels through Hormuz, to zero response?
Trump may have screwed up, but it's the UK and EU who are paying the price - energy costs are killing what remains of UK industry. Even the BBC seem to have woken up.
Is Trump or Bibi trying to destroy the entire Middle East as an energy source?
US and Israeli planes have attacked South Pars oil and gas field, IRGC have warned staff in Saudi, Kuwait and a couple of other places to leave the oil and gas producing areas. Brent back above 100.
Post a Comment