Where Are They Now.

We all know this old cliche'--one begins to recall some decades old TV show or film and then this question pops up regarding those actors who played our favorite heroes and what they are doing today. The Goddess of TV, the greatest mind of our time and moral compass of civilization, Oprah, even had a show titled "Where Are They Now?" Well, folks, today, it seems, the cycle of "where are they now" shrunk dramatically from decades to years, to weeks and even hours. And that is my question: where are those Bloomberg's, Russian liberda and other "experts" who even two days ago were spreading all kinds of BS about OPEC++ deal. This whole "where are they now" issue has, apart from very practical pure geopolitical and economics side, a huge academic issue--those are not "experts". Those are people who have some insights, often due to their social status, into rumors circulating on a fairly high level but have absolutely no professional apparatus to judge complex industrial processes, not to speak of a true systemic analysis. So, where are those "experts" now? Anyone cares?

Some people, however, begin to speculate if Russia and KSA are "in the same boat" in relation to US Shale oil unfolding catastrophe:

OPEC may have reached a deal to cut 10 million bpd, but for many U.S. shale producers, it is too little, far too late. Much ado has been made about Saudi Arabia and Russia’s push to end their cooperation in the production cut deal a month ago, flooding the markets with oil at a perilous time. While some have suggested that it was a deliberate attempt to break the U.S. Shale industry that has run roughshod over the oil industry in the last few years, upsetting the market balance of the oil cartel. Both Saudi Arabia and Russia have outright denied the claim that is was a purposeful attack on the shale industry—a wise proclamation given shale’s fastidious ally, U.S. President Donald Trump, who has praised the shale industry that has served as the platform for America’s energy independence efforts.

I agree, much ado about nothing since reality always trumps (pun intended) wishful thinking. As the piece continues:

Those efforts have been wildly successful by any measuring stick, and for that reason, shale will not be allowed to die no matter what Saudi Arabia and Russia dish out. But that doesn’t mean that some of the weaker U.S. shale players won’t wither up and die along the way, drowning in extra crude inventory and debt, saddled with inefficiencies and a business that couldn’t make it at even $50 crude, and without the lifelines of increased oil demand or stimulus money. For shale players in this category, your days are numbered—all signs point to this inevitable conclusion.

The conclusion is indeed, inevitable, and it is the fact that Trump can do whatever he wants and print as much money as he wants, US shale is dead to the level which will keep the United States a net IMPORTER, not a net exporter of oil. Of course, the issue here is what's the deal with Saudi-Russian alleged "collusion". I don't think there is any collusion at all. Remember, unlike all kinds of "experts" none of who ever worked a day in a productive capacity, I openly and readily admit that I am NOT an expert in oil industry. But I also know that in any combination of relations between Russia and Saudi Arabia, even despite Saudis' importance as a oil superpower, Saudis' status (read my latest book) is too insignificant to have a fully independent position vis-a-vis Russia. In other words, as events since Vienna OPEC+ summit demonstrate, it is legitimate at this state that Saudis do not really have much agency in these oil wars being allowed to do only what they can (oversupplying the market, thus crushing prices), while being used by Russia for a much broader set of geopolitical objectives which are simply beyond the grasp of Saudis. 

This may explain the fact that starting from Mnuchin's sudden change of MO and meeting with Russian Ambassador Antonov on March 9, to Trump's and Pompeo's one after another phone calls to Moscow, to suddenly "funny" issues of Russian-American cooperation in space, to discussing sanctions (why?) and investments (that is a wowser) seems to point out to Washington having a reality dawning on them that not only "oil market" (most of it a fraud drowned in paper derivatives) is not going to be the same but the same applies to Russian-American relations, you know "strategic stability" and all that jazz. As was stated from the very onset of this oil crisis--Russia was ready to ride this out for years, in fact Russian budget recently was recalculated to the oil price of $20 per barrel. Yet, all this "expert" community, including people who cannot have a clue by definition (Kortunov, are you reading this) continued to deny a reality of Russia gigantic currency (and gold) reserves being engaged. Yes, Covid-19 did play a role and threw the curved ball of sorts, but it was not just for Russia, the United States had ball flying at her too. Meanwhile reality on the ground is dramatic and even Reuters can not hide it anymore:

Oil fields from Texas and New Mexico to Oklahoma and North Dakota are going quiet as drilling halts and tens of thousands of oil workers lose their livelihood. Fuel demand has plunged by as much as 30 million barrels per day (bpd) - or 30% - as efforts to fight the coronavirus pandemic have grounded aircraft, reduced vehicle usage and pushed economies worldwide toward recession.

Some even proposed that Putin is exacting a revenge on the United States fro 1990s and 2000s. Possible? Possible, but how probable? Putin and his team do not seems as overcome with emotions in this matter, it is one thing to crush economies of the rabidly Russophobic Baltic states, totally another--to deal with superpower, however dysfunctional and largely ungovernable. In simpler words--we don't know the whole of a game, we observe only some partial manifestations of it and we surely do NOT have a massive and highly efficient, as events of the last 7 years demonstrated so dramatically, intelligence-analytical strategic forecasting apparatus at Putin's disposal. He knows what we don't and that makes the difference, a gigantic one. Is the United States being taught a lesson? Definitely possible, but for now I still stick to my proposition of superpowers' Noblesse Oblige because Russia is NOT interested in the US disintegrating or becoming completely ungovernable while having a vast arsenal of nuclear weapons on her territory. Yet, Saudis could be sacrificed in this game, in fact, Saudis' "cut" may happen "naturally" by the Kingdom disintegrating (which is a highly desirable outcome) and someone else taking control of oil fields, someone who is not used to driving Ferraris and living in mansions doing absolutely nothing of value. Is it possible? Absolutely, otherwise they wouldn't be desperately needing a truce:

DUBAI, April 14 (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia has resumed indirect talks with Yemen's Houthi movement to cement a faltering ceasefire, sources familiar with the discussions said, as the United Nations pushes for a de-escalation to prepare for a coronavirus outbreak. The Iran-aligned Houthis have yet to accept the nationwide truce prompted by the pandemic and announced by the Saudi-led coalition last week, and violence has continued on several frontlines.

Ah, Houthis, God bless your soul in your fair fight for freedom and democracy, wink, wink. If to remove, by force or by agreement, all those Pakistani, American, West European mercenaries from the front lines, I wonder how long will Riyadh defend itself against Houthis? But I am running ahead of myself here. 

Some Fast Geopolitcal Thoughts On The Run.

I seldom mention The National Interest as an expert publication--it is not--but when Colonel Daniel Davies or Douglas Macgregor publish their thoughts there I read them. So, Douglas Macgregor is Breaking The Phalanx yet again when states in his TNI's piece that:

Trump knows that the American Empire is crumbling. What is he going to do about it?

He then elaborates: 

Last week, President Donald Trump directed his cabinet secretaries to cut 5 percent from their budgets for the next fiscal year, signaling a potential a 2.2 percent cut in defense spending. Trump specifically mentioned the defense budget saying, “I made deals with the devil in order to get that done because we had to improve our military. Our military was depleted. It was in bad shape.”

Translation: Get ready. “America first” in foreign and defense policy is about to begin. Defense cuts are on the way. The cuts aren’t coming as the result of a dispassionate Eisenhower-style strategic defense review or because current defense funds are being squandered on equipment and forces we don’t need. They are coming because the international system has changed and the U.S. government is sliding deeper into debt .

And finishes with a doom-spelling scenario for Pentagon bureaucrats who already arranged their retirement on executive boards and "consultant" sinecures of Military Industrial Complex big corporate movers and shakers:

Whether the generals and admirals like it or not, the U.S. Armed Forces will be compelled to reorganize and “right-size” for the United States’ real security needs without the inefficiencies and massive overhead in the current force structure

Let's be very honest--much of the American military in the second half of the 20th and especially 21st century was built around US Dollar as a main global reserve currency. In fact, the world largely financed US economy and, with it, its military through what (strangely how coincidental with Macgregor's today's piece) Ivan Danilov in Ria calls America's Absolute Weapon--a US Dollar Vacuum Cleaner (in Russian). This weapon is broken, it was for some time, just not everybody wanted to hear (or read) about it. The chickens, however, are coming home to roost. I've been preaching this gospel openly since 2014, including the fact that real American economy, while still large, is much smaller than it is officially presented.

So, the main issue thus is what is the "right size" of the US military? It is an extremely difficult question to answer since, before this question could be answered, a much larger one must be asked--what REAL national interests of the United States of America are. Good luck answering this one against the background of a complete mental breakdown of a nation--courtesy of its so called "elites". But this question MUST be answered. I know only part of this answer. And that brings us to another point--I am finishing John Mearsheimer's latest The Great Delusion, and while I am sympathetic to Measheimer's brand of Realism, I still have some huge issues with the way some of his argument is presented. How about him repeating Fukuyama's ignorant statement that Liberalism as system defeated Fascism. Really? Then there are other things related to the issues of power, but I will make a very brief review of the book later. 

It is clear in the nearest future that America will become poorer, in fact the progress towards a much more frugal and less "wealthy" existence is tangible. The signs of it are everywhere and material expression of an American Dream is long dead. What's left is a fight for what remains of an American soul, there is still a lot of good what remains but it is different America, not of the large urban centers. We all here either avoid Balkanization with as little blood as possible or the country will break up and then we will have a gigantic issue of some, far from benevolent, newcomers fighting for control of the American vast nuclear arsenal. It is a nightmarish scenario globally. I am about to go out on a limb and propose--get Trump this last chance, let him (well, GOP) retain majority after mid-terms, then, after that, we will pass a final judgement. It is obvious that Democrats are going to plunge country into the civil unrest and, possibly, civil war if they bring their suicidal plans to fruition. In that case the issue of cuts will be the least of the problems for all of us.