Warren Hammond's Personal View: Geopolitical risk surges as April and June warnings unfold
Home » Warren Hammond's Personal View: Geopolitical risk surges as April and June warnings unfold
Acts of Violence – The World Is on Edge This Summer. Image: LinkedIn/warren-hammond
On 2nd June, I published a note entitled 'The Personal View: Acts of Violence – The World Is On Edge This Summer.'
In it, I warned:
'June and July 2025 will shape up to be two of the most geopolitically intense, heated, combustible months in recent memory… not defined by a single headline, but by a drumbeat of destabilising, violent, and politically consequential events.'
This warning is reiterated. All June and all July will see persistent and intense acts of violence, terror, war, and conflict.
Since the warning was issued on 2nd June, we've witnessed:
– Israeli airstrikes on Iran's Natanz nuclear site– Iranian missile retaliation centred on Tel Aviv, Haifa, and Jerusalem– Waves of rocket fire in Gaza and southern Lebanon– A mass shooting in Graz, Austria– Riots in Ballymena, Northern Ireland– India–India-Pakistan tensions reignited with border clashes and terror threats– A firebomb attack in Colorado– Casualties in Kherson, Ukraine, from Russian drone strikes– Rising tensions on the Kyrgyz–Tajik border
– The UN confirming 118+ attacks on schools, hospitals, and civilian infrastructure globally
Back in mid-April, I published 'The Personal View: The Thucydides Trap, War Cometh.'
I stated:
'A rising tide of systemic confrontation is unfolding… This is the Thucydidean Trap, when a rising power threatens an established one, and miscalculation often leads to escalation.'
In both notes, I flagged the geopolitical risk escalation and identified the market implications:
– Exposure to energy security risk and oil-sensitive names
– Tactical positioning away from travel, tourism, shipping, and logistics
These weren't just warnings. They were calls to act. Markets are still mispricing the persistent asymmetric volatility ahead.
Entering March 2025, my note, 'The Personal View: How to Position Your Portfolio for the Market Turmoil Ahead (2025–2028),' explicitly forecasted a wave of market volatility tied to tariff wars, leadership failure, military escalation, oil shocks, and cyber threats, including the unfolding Iran conflict. This was not a reaction; it was anticipation. The note forecast persistent, structural volatility through 2028.
This same framework guided my early February 2020 short call ahead of the COVID crash, and my April 6, 2020, pivot to go long the S&P 500 with a multi-year target of $8,500, a call made amid panic, volatility, and disbelief.
The fuse has been lit. June and July 2025 will continue to see the world on fire..
Share your thoughts in the comments below. How are you preparing for this volatile period?
Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1
Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
4 hours ago
- The South African
BREAKING: Donald Trump hits South Africa with 30% tariffs
South Africa is set to face a significant trade setback as US President Donald Trump has confirmed that 30% tariffs will be imposed on all South African goods starting 1 August 2025. The announcement was made in a letter from Donald Trump to President Cyril Ramaphosa. The tariffs are a result of the Donald Trump administration's stance on global trade imbalances, claiming that South Africa sells more to the US than it buys, a disparity that the US says justifies the imposition of a hefty tariff. This move is part of Donald Trump's broader 'reciprocal tariff' policy, which has sparked debate worldwide. Critics argue that the policy is based on flawed economic reasoning, with concerns over its long-term impact on international trade relations. 'South Africa's trade imbalance with the US has reached a point where it can no longer go unaddressed,' Donald Trump's letter stated. 'These tariffs are necessary to ensure fairer trade practices.' With just three weeks until the tariff implementation, South African exporters are bracing for the economic fallout. Key industries, including mining, agriculture, and manufacturing, are likely to be hit hard by the new tariff regime. Experts warn that the increased cost of doing business with the US could lead to reduced exports, putting pressure on local businesses already struggling with the global economic fallout from the COVID-19 pandemic. South African officials have expressed concern over the sudden move and its potential to harm their economy, urging Trump's administration to reconsider the punitive tariffs. Economic analysts and trade experts have widely criticised the tariffs, arguing that the trade imbalance with South Africa is not due to unfair practices, but rather structural and historical economic factors. They claim that the imposition of tariffs could lead to retaliatory measures from other countries, further exacerbating global trade tensions. 'The reciprocal tariff policy fails to account for the complexities of international trade,' said Dr. Thabo Mbeki, former South African president and economist. 'It's a short-sighted approach that risks worsening trade relations and harming economies on both sides.' With the August 1 deadline looming, South African officials are seeking diplomatic channels to resolve the issue before the tariffs take effect. However, with the Donald Trump administration's firm stance, it remains uncertain whether a last-minute resolution can be reached. The upcoming trade blow is a pivotal moment in South Africa's relationship with the US, and exporters will be watching closely to see how this affects their ability to access the lucrative American market. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
Daily Maverick
4 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
BRICS leaders condemn Ukrainian attacks on Russian infrastructure
The declaration made no mention of Russia's constant missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities, which have intensified in recent weeks and caused greater death and destruction The leaders of BRICS — including President Cyril Ramaphosa — have strongly condemned Ukraine for recent attacks on Russian railway infrastructure, but remained silent on Russia's constant bombardment of Ukraine, which has killed many civilians. The BRICS nations, meeting in Rio de Janeiro for their annual summit on Sunday and Monday, 6 and 7 July, issued a 126-point declaration covering a wide range of political, economic and security issues. It included the following: 'We condemn in the strongest possible terms the attacks on bridges and railway infrastructure deliberately targeting civilians in the Bryansk, Kursk and Voronezh regions of the Russian Federation on May 31, and June 1 and 5, 2025, which resulted in the deaths of several civilians, including children.' The declaration made no mention of Russia's constant missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities, which have intensified in recent weeks and caused greater death and destruction, in part because of US President Donald Trump's reduction of US military support, leaving Ukraine without sufficient anti-missile defences. Ukraine has occasionally struck back at military targets inside Russia, though its attacks have been far fewer than Russia's attacks on Ukraine. The Bryansk, Kursk and Voronezh provinces which were mentioned in the BRICS declaration 'are all located near Ukraine's northeastern border and have played a central role in Russia's war effort, serving as key logistical hubs and launch sites for missile and drone attacks on Ukrainian cities — often targeting civilian infrastructure and causing casualties', according to the Kyiv Independent. The BRICS declaration otherwise mentioned Ukraine only briefly and did not present a united position on the war, probably because of the different positions of member countries. Instead, the declaration allowed members to maintain their varying positions by stating: 'We recall our national positions concerning the conflict in Ukraine as expressed in the appropriate fora, including the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly. 'We note with appreciation relevant proposals of mediation and good offices, including the creation of the African Peace Initiative and the Group of Friends for Peace, aimed at peaceful resolution of the conflict through dialogue and diplomacy. We expect that current efforts will lead to a sustainable peace settlement.' Russia is one of the original BRICS members, along with Brazil, India and China. South Africa was admitted in 2010, and since then, Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia and the United Arab Emirates have also been admitted, as well as 10 partner countries that enjoy partial membership benefits. Russian President Vladimir Putin did not attend the summit in person, presumably because of the International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant for his arrest, which Brazil would have felt obliged to execute as it is an ICC member. Putin participated by video link and sent his foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, to represent him in person. Chinese President Xi Jinping did not attend either, apparently because of a clash of schedules. Strikes on Iran The presence of Iran — which has supplied drones to Russia to attack Ukraine — was felt in a condemnation of the recent US and Israeli strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities. 'We condemn the military strikes against the Islamic Republic of Iran since 13 June 2025, which constitute a violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations, and express grave concern over the subsequent escalation of the security situation in the Middle East. 'We further express serious concern over deliberate attacks on civilian infrastructure and peaceful nuclear facilities under full safeguards of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), in violation of international law and relevant resolutions of the IAEA. 'Nuclear safeguards, safety, and security must always be upheld, including in armed conflicts, to protect people and the environment from harm. In this context, we reiterate our support for diplomatic initiatives aimed at addressing regional challenges. We call upon the United Nations Security Council to be seized of this matter.' Though the declaration characterised Iran's nuclear facilities as 'peaceful', they have not been unequivocally confirmed as such by the IAEA. Gustavo de Carvalho, a BRICS expert at the SA Institute of International Affairs in Johannesburg, said the Rio de Janeiro declaration was more or less what he had expected. As a consensus-based body, it was difficult for BRICS to engage with divisive language. He welcomed what he said was the first endorsement by China and Russia — the two BRICS permanent members of the UN Security Council — of the aspirations to permanent Security Council membership of Brazil, India and two African countries (still to be identified by Africa). He noted that the summit had advanced the ongoing process of strengthening links between the BRICS members on issues such as artificial intelligence, health and education. He saw progress in the BRICS initiative to increase trade among member countries in their own currencies, rather than the US dollar and interbank payments. He said that every year there was an expectation that BRICS would take a strong anti-Western position in its summit declarations. 'But we never really see it, partially because most of its members don't consider themselves to be anti-Western, but rather as non-Western, with different layers of interaction and integration with Western countries.' De Carvalho said that while the BRICS countries acknowledged the threats to multilateralism posed by the Trump administration, they had chosen to take a positive, longer-term stance by emphasising the roles they could play in strengthening international bodies like the UN, the World Trade Organization and the World Health Organization — 'rather than just pointing a finger at the US, which would create a much stronger war of words but not really resolve the issues'. DM
IOL News
4 hours ago
- IOL News
Iran president says Israel attempted to assassinate him
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said in an interview released on July 7 that Israel, which last month fought a 12-day war with Iran, had attempted to assassinate him. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said in an interview released on Monday that Israel, which last month fought a 12-day war with Iran, had attempted to assassinate him. The remarks came less than a month after Israel launched its unprecedented June 13 bombing campaign against Iran, killing top military commanders and nuclear scientists. The Israeli attacks took place two days before Tehran and Washington were set to meet for a new round of nuclear talks, stalling negotiations that were aimed at reaching a deal over Iran's atomic programme. "They did try, yes. They acted accordingly, but they failed," Pezeshkian told US media figure Tucker Carlson in response to a question on whether he believed Israel had tried to kill him. "It was not the United States that was behind the attempt on my life. It was Israel. I was in a meeting... they tried to bombard the area in which we were holding that meeting," he said according to a translation of his remarks from Persian, in apparent reference to an alleged assassination attempt during the recent war. At least 1,060 people were killed in Iran during the conflict, according to Iran's Foundation of Martyrs and Veterans Affairs. The Israeli attacks drew waves of retaliatory drone and missile fire, killing 28 people in Israel, according to authorities.
