Why I now seek strategic metal deal flow to hit 5X paydirt?
The India-Pakistan war in May and the Iran-Iraq war that rages as I write only reinforces my conviction that wars will be won or lost via a access to the latest missile air defense, stealth fighter jet platforms, ballistic hypersonic missile, power projection capabilities and state of the art ISR (intelligence surveillance reconnaissance) defense technologies. A nation without these capabilities is akin to a Stone Age tribe whose only weapons are bows and arrows and whose existence can be terminated at any time by any foreign predator. This is the lesson Iran has learnt the hard way in the past week and could relearn with a vengeance next week once Trump decides if he wants the USG to keep its rendezvous with destiny at Fordo.
Defense is only the icing on the cake in the exponential demand curve for key strategic metals that emanates from the robotics, data centers and EV industries worldwide. Critical minerals where demand vastly exceeds supply. This means the next generation of potential 5-20X deals exist in the netherworld of the global strategic metal markets, now that access to these critical metals has been weaponized by President Xi in China's Cold War with Washington.
ADVERTISEMENT
It is a sad fact of life that goldmines do not auto-mine bullion like a self-licking ice cream cone but must be nurtured, found, financed and developed by entrepreneurs who live and breathe the yellow metal. This fact is even more true for strategic metals where the world's smartest family offices I know have partnered with minors, whose skill set is invariably more CIA than CFA or God forbid, the poor CPA.
I have often found that the destination is not as important as the journey and the journey is nowhere near as important as the travelling companion. I will cherish to my dying day the lovely memories of a trip across the chateau country of the Loire Valley and the alps maritime regions of France as a 19-year old via a second class ticket on the SNCF with my first French girlfriend. Viv la France pour toujours. My jungle guide in the critical metal jungle? Thus spake Zarathustra via Georgetown, McGill, Columbia SIPA and Mama Parsi School in my birth city by the Arabian sea.
Also published on Medium.
Notice an issue? Arabian Post strives to deliver the most accurate and reliable information to its readers. If you believe you have identified an error or inconsistency in this article, please don't hesitate to contact our editorial team at editor[at]thearabianpost[dot]com. We are committed to promptly addressing any concerns and ensuring the highest level of journalistic integrity.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Gulf Today
2 hours ago
- Gulf Today
The politics of compromise and conviction
Luke Harris, Tribune News Service Scott Turner was a Texas House Representative, now serving in the Trump Administration as the Secretary of US Housing & Urban Development (HUD). In the Texas House, he talked about 'being the best we can,' and espoused high standards for himself and his colleagues; however, in his current position, he has voiced no complaints or objections against the administration or the Republican Party. Perhaps for less cynical reasons than power itself, but to pursue his policies on housing and healthcare. Turner is a brilliant case study for how ambition causes politicians to accept feeble attempts to reason away their beliefs or ethics, always for something greater, something they can achieve with one more step. That 'one more step' toward completely surrendering their integrity, confounding their ethical clarity, and adopting whatever means meet their ends. During a keynote address in 2014, he spoke of the duty to break the status quo, Democrat or Republican, he said, 'We need servant leaders.... People who live by conviction and principle, not by the waves of the sea of what's popular today.' He shared his experience growing up in a poor home, and his father working two jobs. At his confirmation, he talked empathetically about the homelessness crisis and how his family took in his uncle, providing him with the services he needed. Trump has made comments expressing disdain for the homeless; he said these people were hurting the 'prestige' of major cities, and many homeless people might prefer their situation. An NBC affiliate network reported that 1 in 4 low-income households eligible for HUD rental assistance receive benefits. Turner is championing time limits, which means taking away benefits from more low-income households still unable to afford the cost of living. Trump has further plans to remove people from homeless encampments and place them in large camps or tent-cities, where they will be mandated to receive mental health or addiction treatment. Seemingly in conflict with his views on homelessness and background, these policies are consistent with his previous stances representing Texas, for example, restricting welfare, requiring drug testing for unemployment benefits, voting against free-lunch programs in Texas schools, and opposing the Affordable Care Act. He defined his career as a Texas Representative as an uncompromising advocate for transparency, leading extensive investigations into the conduct of his colleagues, and voting on policies to increase accountability. For example, he voted for HB 1690, which authorized rangers to investigate misconduct of an official or public administration and refer cases to the State Attorney General. He has parted ways with these values, perhaps to advocate for his conservative policies on social programs such as welfare and housing subsidies. However, compromising his fight against improper leadership or self-interested governance — accepting the numerous examples of corruption and secrecy — to achieve an agenda or implement a policy, is not leading on principle or conviction. The Epstein scandal is a recent example of something that clearly runs against Turner's previous views on government transparency and accountability. The footage and DOJ reports are inconsistent, and the Administration, DOJ, and FBI have refused to comment. For example, the files obtained by the AP provide a Suicide Timeline; at 6:33 a.m., staff found Epstein unresponsive, and at 6:45 a.m., EMS arrived. The DOJ released raw footage from the hallway camera. According to the FBI, anyone entering the cell would have been visible on that camera, but the footage shows no one entering his cell around the provided timeline. More concerningly, Pam Bondi, Trump's Attorney General, has directly undermined the investigation into the Epstein files, ordering thousands of FBI agents to redact files. Bondi allegedly pressured the FBI to recruit 1,000 personnel to review 100,000 files relating to Jefferey Epstein and 'flag' any that mentioned Donald Trump. It would not be an exaggeration to compare the redaction of the Epstein files to the shredding of papers or deletion of tapes in the Watergate Scandal. Furthermore, his treatment of the press, on the Epstein Scandal and throughout his two terms, displays a hostility not seen since Nixon's 'Enemy List': revoking CNN reporter Jim Acosta's press pass, restricting AP reporters' access to White House events, ending funding for public broadcast stations, suing 60 Minutes, recently launching a $22 billion suit against The Wall Street Journal, and attacking reporters for 'fake news' or calling journalists 'nasty.'
Khaleej Times
10 hours ago
- Khaleej Times
Opec+ makes another large oil output hike in market share push
Opec+ agreed on Sunday to raise oil production by 547,000 barrels per day for September, the latest in a series of accelerated output hikes to regain market share, as concerns mount over potential supply disruptions linked to Russia. The move marks a full and early reversal of Opec+'s largest tranche of output cuts plus a separate increase in output for the UAE amounting to about 2.5 million bpd, or about 2.4 per cent of world demand. Eight Opec+ members held a brief virtual meeting, amid increasing US pressure on India to halt Russian oil purchases — part of Washington's efforts to bring Moscow to the negotiating table for a peace deal with Ukraine. President Donald Trump said he wants this by August 8. In a statement following the meeting, Opec+ cited a healthy economy and low stocks as reasons behind its decision. Oil prices have remained elevated even as Opec+ has raised output, with Brent crude closing near $70 a barrel on Friday, up from a 2025 low of near $58 in April, supported in part by rising seasonal demand. 'Given fairly strong oil prices at around $70, it does give Opec+ some confidence about market fundamentals,' said Amrita Sen, co-founder of Energy Aspects, adding that the market structure was also indicating tight stocks. The eight countries are scheduled to meet again on September 7, when they may consider reinstating another layer of output cuts totalling around 1.65 million bpd, two Opec+ sources said following Sunday's meeting. Those cuts are currently in place until the end of next year. Opec+ in full includes 10 non-Opec oil producing countries, most notably Russia and Kazakhstan. The group, which pumps about half of the world's oil, had been curtailing production for several years to support oil prices. It reversed course this year in a bid to regain market share, spurred in part by calls from Trump for Opec to ramp up production. The eight began raising output in April with a modest hike of 138,000 bpd, followed by larger-than-planned hikes of 411,000 bpd in May, June and July, 548,000 bpd in August and now 547,000 bpd for September. 'So far the market has been able to absorb very well those additional barrels also due to stockpiliing activity in China,' said Giovanni Staunovo of UBS. 'All eyes will now shift on the Trump decision on Russia this Friday.' As well as the voluntary cut of about 1.65 million bpd from the eight members, Opec+ still has a 2-million-bpd cut across all members, which also expires at the end of 2026. 'Opec+ has passed the first test,' said Jorge Leon of Rystad Energy and a former Opec official, as it has fully reversed its largest cut without crashing prices. 'But the next task will be even harder: deciding if and when to unwind the remaining 1.66 million barrels, all while navigating geopolitical tension and preserving cohesion.'
The National
10 hours ago
- The National
With Gaza in the global spotlight, expect Israel to turn the heat on Hezbollah
Israel finds itself in need of diverting global attention away from its atrocities in Gaza. Enter Hezbollah. The Israeli government appears to see renewed war with the Lebanese group as a chance to further its interests, pretexting the latter's refusal to surrender its weapons to the Lebanese state as it previously pledged. The timing is driven by several factors. The administration of US President Donald Trump has grown weary of waiting for Beirut to fulfil its promise of exclusive state control over arms, and it might be ready to endorse any Israeli decision, regardless of its severity. Another factor is Iran's unwillingness to enter a direct war with Israel on Hezbollah's behalf. Indeed, Tehran is both preoccupied with the fallout from the recent US and Israeli strikes and worried about another wave of attacks in the near future. Still, it refuses to abandon its strategy of using armed regional proxies as bargaining chips in potential negotiations with Washington. Tensions between the US and Iran are thus escalating – manifested through American sanctions, Iranian threats and Israeli war preparations. Iran's proxies in Lebanon and Yemen are on high alert, and the wider Iranian 'Axis of Resistance' is watching events closely, from Iraq to Gaza. Israel has zero tolerance regarding Hezbollah's arsenal. It has convinced the Trump administration that if the Lebanese government fails to implement its disarmament pledge, Israel has no choice but to press ahead with its war on the group. Meanwhile, the international conference on the two-state solution – co-chaired by Saudi Arabia and France at the UN – might have angered Iran. The Islamic Republic's ideology rejects the two-state solution, with its doctrine calling for Israel's destruction. Moreover, the conference's show of global support for the Palestinian Authority as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people was also a collective cry against Hamas, a key player in Iran's axis. Just as Israel is indifferent to the civilian toll in Gaza, Iran appears unbothered by Palestinian suffering, particularly as long as Hamas remains faithful to the axis. Mr Trump was recently forced to acknowledge the human-made famine in Gaza, having previously denied this reality. While he didn't initially act against Israel, which is enacting a policy of starvation in the enclave, he spoke about it after parts of his Maga political base pressed him to intervene to end the humanitarian catastrophe. This was accompanied by a different kind of global political pressure as Mr Trump was challenged by European and non-European allies who participated in the two-state solution conference and endorsed its final communique charting a path towards a Palestinian state alongside Israel. There are concerns over possible vindictive responses from Mr Trump, particularly if he feels isolated on the international stage. There is unease over his administration sanctioning the PA's leadership, which the latter says is a form of punishment for seeking the establishment of a Palestinian state. It shouldn't surprise anyone if Israel seeks to crush everything that emerged from the UN conference. It views the PA as an obstacle to its ambitions of annexing the West Bank. It opposes the near-unanimous international view that Hamas should be dismantled, only because its policy is to fracture Palestinian unity and undermine the PA. The dilemma facing the US President over the current Israeli government's extremist policies is his growing global isolation on the Palestine issue. He may still choose to ignore increasing international momentum in favour of a Palestinian state, but it could come at a cost. Indeed, it was no small development for Saudi Arabia to insist to the international community that it won't normalise relations with Israel unless a Palestinian state is established. Riyadh's support for Palestinian statehood gained greater significance when it co-chaired the conference with France. The event brought surprising developments, including the UK's readiness to recognise the state of Palestine at next month's UN General Assembly unless Israel changes course from its current approach in Gaza. Yet a Palestinian state cannot come into being without American backing and Israeli compliance. The UN Security Council has already enshrined the two-state solution in resolutions 1397 and 1515, both supported by Washington. But the roadmap they laid out for Palestinian statehood by 2005 was never implemented and the Trump administration walked back American commitments to those resolutions. The events in New York could push Mr Trump further into the arms of Israeli extremism and its rejection of the two-state solution. Or he might find himself cornered and unable to punish the broad coalition of states that have challenged him. If so, his policy could shift under pressure. This would require a deft diplomatic effort to present Mr Trump with ways to align with the emerging consensus without feeling provoked. Countries have bilateral interests and won't risk undermining relations with Washington solely for the sake of the two-state solution. Having been increasingly scrutinised by the international community, Israel appears intent on shifting global focus away from Gaza. This is precisely because it intends to continue its policies there. And as long as European states fail to impose tangible punitive measures on Israel, and as long as Mr Trump supports its project of 'voluntary displacement', Israel will continue with its agenda. Israel's posture towards Lebanon and Iran, however, is another matter. There is little international sympathy for Iran's insistence that Hezbollah retain its arms in defiance of Lebanese sovereignty. Nor is there sympathy for Tehran's reckless endangerment of the Lebanese people's safety, security and agency. There is, likewise, little global sympathy for the Islamic Republic's stubborn adherence to its triad of strategic doctrines – nuclear capability, ballistic missiles and proxy warfare – without modifications. Thus, should it once again face US or Israeli military strikes, it is unlikely to find many sympathisers. Tehran is now trapped by American sanctions and the threat of more air strikes. Hezbollah, too, will find no one rushing to its rescue if it falls prey to Israel's attempts to shift global attention away from Gaza. Both entities will have only themselves to blame.
