Iran

the fear of living in 1973 again because of the war in Iran

by

Just enter the tracking platform Marine Traffic to understand the magnitude of the paralysis. Dozens of red dots, representing colossal merchant ships, crowd motionless off the coasts of Oman and the United Arab Emirates. The steel giants do not dare to cross a strip of water that, at its narrowest point, barely measures 33 kilometers. The Strait of Hormuz It is the main energy artery of the planet. A fifth of the world’s oil – some 20.9 million barrels per day – and a vital percentage of global liquefied natural gas (LNG) sail through its waters daily. Today, that step is de facto blocked. Half a century later, an atavistic terror has awakened in Western capitals: the fear of reliving the energy collapse and rampant inflation of 1973. The spark that set the markets on fire jumped after a war escalation unprecedented in the Middle East, triggered by the attacks by the United States and Israel that culminated in the assassination of the Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Tehran’s response has not been long in coming: a rain of drones and missiles on American allies and trade routes that has caused a blockade de facto of the Strait of Hormuz. The crisis broke out after an unprecedented escalation of war in the Middle East. The offensive by the United States and Israel (named “Operation Epic Fury”), which culminated in the assassination of the Iranian supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, sparked a quick response from Tehran: a rain of drones and missiles on American allies and strategic infrastructure in the Gulf. The physical consequences have been immediate. An Iranian drone attack forced to paralyze the Ras Laffan facilities in Qatar, the largest LNG export plant in the world, and forced Saudi Arabia to temporarily close units of its gigantic Ras Tanura refinery. The violence has directly reached the water: the British agency UKMTO reported the attack on an oil tanker near Oman, leaving several injured, and the energy expert Javier Blas warned of the explosion of another ship anchored off the coast of Kuwait, causing an oil spill into the sea. Given this panorama, transport giants such as Maersk or MSC They have ordered their fleets seek refuge. The panic has rewritten logistics rates: the cost of leasing a supertanker (VLCC) has shot up by 600%, hovering around $200,000 a day, while insurers have increased war risk premiums by up to 50%, as Alex Longley warns in Bloomberg. The echoes of the past are terrifying. Saul Kavonic, head of energy research at MST Marquee, warns in Fortune that a prolonged closure of Hormuz could have an impact “three times the scale of the energy crisis we saw in the 1970s.” What could happen if the tanks overflow The problem with ships not sailing is not only that the oil does not reach its destination, it is that it accumulates at the point of origin. The industry is facing a logistical collapse due to lack of physical storage. Iraq has been the first major victim of this logistical collapse. As you have detailed OilPricethe country has had to begin to turn off the tap on gigantic fields such as Rumaila (the largest in the world), withdrawing about 1.5 million barrels a day from the market, a figure that could double if the crisis persists. According to sources from the commercial sector in Financial TimesIf the blockade continues, Kuwait will be the next to give up in a matter of days, followed by the United Arab Emirates. Saudi Arabia, thanks to its immense storage capacity, could last between two and four weeks before being forced to cut its extraction. Financial markets reflect absolute short-term stress. As analyst John Kemp’s charts illustrateBrent crude oil futures have entered a backwardation extreme, with a difference of almost 11 dollars per barrel between short- and long-term contracts, placing it in the 98th-99th percentile in history. This signals an acute and immediate shortage of barrels, especially for refiners in Asia, which have already begun to cut back on operations. If this funnel continues for three months, the unwritten rule of firms like Goldman Sachs suggests that crude oil could become more expensive by an additional $40, turning the barrier of $100 per barrel in the new normal. The differences with 1973 Despite the drama and the fact that a barrel quickly exceeded $80, the macroeconomic scenario is not a carbon copy of the Arab embargo. Global resilience has changed: The new oil sheriff: Today, the US economy depends much less on crude oil to generate wealth (barely 0.4% of GDP compared to 1.5% in 1979). Furthermore, the American country is now the world’s largest producer of oil, which protects it from supply shocks, as pointed out Fortune. The “Myopia of Hormuz”: Mukesh Sahdev, Chief Analyst at XAnalysts, points in Fortune that the market is overreacting. The main objective of the US (neutralizing the Iranian leadership) has already been met, and Donald Trump himself has suggested that the military campaign could be short, which would limit the long-term impact. Alternative routes to rescue: Saudi Arabia has a colossal lifeline. Your pipeline East-Westwhich connects the eastern fields with the Red Sea, has the capacity to pump about 7 million barrels per day, bypassing Hormuz. There are already signs that Riyadh is redirecting flows this way, as Blas explains. For its part, Iraq has managed to resume a modest flow of 50,000 barrels per day to Türkiye after a brief pause, as the analyst collects Bachar El-Halabi. Safety mattresses: Global onshore reserves reach 2 billion barrels, enough to weather the initial storm. For its part, the Trump Administration has tried to calm the markets by promising Navy naval escorts and state insurance of up to $1 billion per ship through the International Development Finance Corporation (DFC). However, this is not a magic solution. As they warn in the sectorcaptains are the ones who decide to set sail, and sailing surrounded by US military destroyers often makes them more attractive … Read more

You’ve probably never heard of urea. The missiles in Iran are destroying their production, and that will affect your food

by

At the beginning of the 20th century, the world feared it would run out of food because crops were not growing enough to feed a growing population. The solution came from chemistry: an industrial process capable of manufacturing artificial nutrients for plants and multiplying crops across the planet. Today, this invisible system supports much of what reaches our plates, but it also depends on a global chain. surprisingly fragile. The invisible substance that feeds us. We already said it in the headline, you may not know urea. However, this chemical compound is one of the silent pillars of modern agriculture. It is nitrogen fertilizer most used in the world and indirectly responsible for approximately half of global food production. Its function is simple but crucial: providing nitrogen to crops so they can grow quickly and produce larger harvests. To give us an idea, approximately half of global food production depends on synthetic fertilizers. nitrogen basedand urea is the most widespread of all. Without it, agricultural yields would fall abruptly, which would directly affect products as basic as wheat, corn or rice. The Gulf and fertilizers. It happens that a large part of this global agricultural system depends on a very specific region of the planet: the Persian Gulf. The Middle East is home to some of the largest plants of fertilizer production in the world and is also a key source of raw materials necessary to manufacture them, such as ammonia or sulfur. Furthermore, the Strait of Hormuz has become an essential artery for this trade. between one quarter and a third of the world’s traffic of raw materials for fertilizers passes through this maritime passage, along with approximately 35% of global urea exports and 45% of sulfur trade. A war that hits the food chain. The military escalation in Iran and the attacks around the Strait of Hormuz are starting to interrupt that delicate system. Maritime traffic through the area has been drastically reduced and several ships have been attacked, while industrial facilities in the Gulf have suffered direct damage. In Qatar, one of the largest fertilizer facilities in the world had to stop your production after a drone attack, while Iran has paralyzed its own ammonia production. Every missile in the Iran war is not only destroying its production, it brings us a little closer to a dystopian future scenario. Urea sample in the form of granules The domino effect of urea. When the supply of fertilizers such as urea is interrupted, the impact soon spreads to the food system. If farmers cannot apply enough fertilizer, the ccrops produce less. Some experts estimate that the lack of fertilizers could reduce harvests by up to 50% in the first affected agricultural cycle. This decline would quickly translate in price increases in basic foods. Bread could become more expensive in a matter of weeks, while derived products such as eggs, chicken or pork would do so months later, as the increase in the cost of animal feed is passed on to the entire food chain. Gas, the hidden ingredient. The manufacture of nitrogen fertilizers also depends on another key factor: natural gas. Between 60% and 80% of the cost of producing fertilizers comes from the gas used in the chemical process that transforms atmospheric nitrogen into compounds usable by plants. With the war driving up energy prices and damaging industrial infrastructure, the cost of production skyrockets even before fertilizers reach the market. In a few days, the international price of urea has risen more than 25%reaching levels close to 625 dollars per ton. Risk of global food crisis. I remembered the financial times that the situation also comes at a particularly delicate moment in the agricultural calendar. In much of the northern hemisphere, farmers are starting the season spring planting, when they buy and apply the fertilizers that will determine the year’s crops. If the Strait of Hormuz disruption lasts more than a few weeks, the impact could extend far beyond energy or maritime trade. Thus, what today seems like a localized geopolitical crisis could transform into something much deeper: a global food shock reminiscent of (or even surpassing) the one that occurred after the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022. In that scenario, the war in Iran would not only be fought with missiles and drones, but also in the fields of crops half the planet. Image | liz west, nara, LHcheM, eutrophication&hypoxia In Xataka | Iran is directing its attacks where it knows it hurts the West: energy and data centers In Xataka | In 2022, the gas crisis skyrocketed the price of electricity in Spain. In 2026 we have a “green shield” but also a serious problem

The Iran war has thrown a rug over Russia

by

In almost every modern war there is an unexpected object that ends up symbolizing the conflict. In the First World War were the trenchesin the Second the tanksand in Ukraine many thought that this role would be filled the drones. However, another much less sophisticated tool has appeared on the front that has become just as essential: a construction machine capable of moving tons of earth in a few hours and completely changing the way of surviving on the battlefield. Also a sign of the emergency situation. The shield that supports Ukraine. Since the start of the full-scale Russian invasion in 2022, Ukraine’s military survival has largely depended on an outer shield: the constant flow of weapons, technology and financing from from the United States and Europe. Patriot anti-aircraft systems, interceptor missiles, advanced drones and Western munitions allowed kyiv to resist to a much larger enemy and regain territory in the early stages of the war. Over time, this cooperation even evolved into a new industrial model in which European companies began manufacturing weapons based on Ukrainian technology, creating a production network that combined battlefield innovation with the industrial capacity of Western allies. Iran threatens the shield. That support system is now beginning to show cracks for an unexpected reason: open war between the United States, Israel and Iran. The new front in the Middle East has forced Washington to concentrate resources military, missiles and strategic attention in another crisis, generating fear in Europe and kyiv that Ukraine will be left in the background. They remembered in the Wall Street Journal that the same interceptors, munitions and systems that Ukraine needs to defend itself against Russian bombing are now being used in operations against Iran, and if the conflict drags on, the United States could be forced to prioritize replacement of their own arsenals rather than continue supplying kyiv. Change of priorities. The risk is not only military, but political. With the White House focused on the Middle East, European diplomats they fear that the momentum to maintain pressure on Russia will be diluted in a conflict that has already entered its fifth year. In fact, Washington had long reducing your involvement directly and pressing to find a negotiated solution, but a prolonged conflict with Iran could absorb even more resourcesattention and industrial capacity. For Ukraine, that scenario would mean confronting Russia with fewer defensive missiles, fewer components for its military industry, and a flow of aid. increasingly uncertain. Ukrainian soldier operating an excavator near the front Objective: dig. On the battlefield, this potential shortage is translating into increasingly rudimentary decisions. Drones dominate modern combat, but their effectiveness depends on something much older: the excavated ground. Defensive positions have become underground networks of trenches, shelters and tunnels designed to survive constant surveillance by drones, artillery and guided bombs. In an open field where any movement can be detected within minutes, survival depends on staying hidden underground and operate from fortified positions that withstand constant attacks. Excavators in front. In this regard, they had in a Forbes report that the arrival of the bulldozers is also the most fearsome signal for Ukraine, because the war in Iran is destroying the shield that prevented the invasion to Russia. In a conflict dominated by advanced technology, the most urgent element in many brigades is not a new weapons system, but construction machinery Able to dig through defenses quickly. Each battalion tries to achieve at least one excavator to build deep trenches, covered shelters and obstacle networks that channel Russian attacks into controlled fire zones. These machines replace weeks of manual work and allow us to build defenses that can save dozens of lives. Modern warfare underground. If you will also, the evolution of combat has turned fortifications into a complex infrastructure that integrates technology, electrical cables, charging stations and shelters for drones and ground robots. However, it all starts with the same basic task: move earth before the next attack comes. On a front where Russia launches hundreds of drones and missiles in a single night and where gliding bombs seek to breach defensive lines, it turns out that the speed of digging can decide whether a position survives or disappears. and that reality sums up the moment that Ukraine is experiencing: a modern war sustained by drones and algorithms, but whose last line of defense depends on what happens in another conflict…and in a yellow machine digging mud in the middle of the front. Image | Tonya Levchuk In Xataka | Shahed drones are spreading terror in the Gulf. Ukraine has offered the solution and the price to pay has a name In Xataka | The Russian military is so desperate for Internet access that Ukraine has used it to spring a death trap.

While everyone looks at Iran, China is building a nuclear “Great Wall”

by

Under the surface of the oceans one of the technological competitions is taking place quieter and more decisive of the planet. The nuclear submarines They can remain submerged for months, travel halfway around the world undetected and launch missiles from thousands of kilometers away. Therefore, each new advance under the sea usually anticipates much bigger changes in the global strategic balance. Washington’s alarm. While much of international attention is focused on the immediate conflicts in the Middle Eastanother much deeper strategic concern is beginning to take shape in Washington. Apparently, the US Navy commanders have warned before Congress that the military balance under the sea is changing rapidly and that China is accelerating a transformation process that could alter the global nuclear deterrent in the coming decades. The underwater race. we have been counting in recent months. China already owns one of the largest submarine fleets in the world and is expanding it at high speed thanks to massive investments in its military shipyards. Production has gone from less than one nuclear submarine a year to significantly higher rateswith forecasts that the fleet will reach around 70 units by the end of this decade and close to 80 by 2035. Although the United States still maintains a technological and operational advantage in submarine warfare, the rapid growth of Chinese industrial capacity is reducing that distance and forcing Washington to rethink the strategic balance in the Pacific. The transition to a nuclear fleet. One of the most important changes is structural. For decades, the Chinese submarine fleet has been based on diesel-electric vessels, which are cheaper, but have less autonomy and must surface frequently. Now Beijing is promoting a strategic shift towards more and more construction focused on nuclear submarinescapable of remaining submerged for long periods and operating at great distances from their bases. This change will allow the Chinese navy to project a presence beyond its immediate environment and complicate US naval operations. in the Pacific and other oceans. The new submarines. The technological leap will come with new generations of submarines that will begin to enter service between the end of this decade and the 1930s. Among them stand out the Type 095 models and, above all, the Type 096designed to transport nuclear ballistic missiles long range. We are talking about equipped boats with JL-4 missilessubmarines that will be able to attack large areas of US territory even operating from waters near China, much more protected by its naval and air defenses. Such a capability would significantly bolster the credibility of China’s nuclear deterrent and reduce the need to patrol more exposed areas of the Pacific. A network to protect the nuclear deterrent. Plus: the Chinese project is not limited to building more submarines. American commanders said that Beijing is developing an extensive sensor network on the seabed, surveillance cables, satellite-connected buoys and unmanned underwater vehicles capable of detecting movements in nearby oceans. This system, described by many analysts as an “underwater Great Wall,” would allow China monitor strategic routestrack foreign submarines, and protect its own nuclear fleet while patrolling in relatively safe waters. The strategic horizon of 2025 and 2040. The result of this transformation should be seen clearly in the next decade. As the number of nuclear submarines grows and this undersea sensor network is deployed, China could greatly expand its underwater presence. beyond the first chain of western Pacific islands. US forecasts suggest that, around 2040Chinese submarines could operate more frequently in the Indian Ocean, the Arctic and even the Atlantic. If this evolution is confirmed, the global naval balance could enter a new phase marked by a fearsome underwater competition between the two greatest powers on the planet. Image | Google Earth, SteKrueBe In Xataka | The US has always been the largest nuclear power on the planet. China has already surpassed it in something: submarines In Xataka | The new fear of Western fleets is not nuclear. They are conventional submarines armed with surprise and a flag: China

The war in Iran is going to repeat a suicidal scenario from 1980. But with drones and kamikaze boats in the most fearsome point on the planet

by

At first glance it is just a strip of water between Iran and the Arabian Peninsula, but its importance it’s huge. The Strait of Hormuz is one of the few places on the planet where global trade it literally depends of a maritime corridor just a few kilometers wide. Every day dozens of supertankers and monster container ships pass through it, connecting the Middle East. with the rest of the planeta constant choreography that moves energy, raw materials and essential products on a global scale. Therefore, when something happens there, the effect is greatly felt. beyond the Gulf. The most dangerous bottleneck on the planet. As we said, the Strait of Hormuz is one of the most critical geographical points of the world economic system and also one of the most vulnerable. At its narrowest point it barely reaches 33 kilometers wide and thousands of ships pass through it every month connecting the Persian Gulf with the rest of the planet. Through this maritime strip it circulates around a fifth of oil that is traded in the world, large volumes of liquefied natural gas and an essential part of the industrial raw materials that sustain the global economy. But its importance goes beyond energy: it is also a key artery for trade in fertilizers and chemicals that end up directly influencing food production. When this route is interrupted, not only are the energy markets altered, the entire chain that connects agricultural fields, the chemical industry and supermarkets is shaken. War stops traffic. The military escalation between the United States, Israel and Iran has brought that critical point to the brink of a historic crisis. Attacks on oil tankers and commercial vessels, along with direct warnings from Tehran to shipping companies, have caused traffic through the strait to reduce. almost to zero in matter of days. Several vessels have been hit by projectiles or dronessome energy facilities in Gulf countries have been attacked and oil prices have reacted immediately with strong rises. Shipping companies and insurers have begun to cancel policies or dramatically raise war insurance costs, as some ships attempt to cross the zone with their location systems turned off to reduce the probability of being identified as a target. Washington’s response and the convoys. Faced with the risk that the global energy flow will be blocked, the United States has raised an extraordinary measure: escort oil tankers and commercial vessels with the US Navy and also offer financial guarantees and political insurance to reassure shipping companies. The idea seeks to avoid a global energy shock, but it implies send warships directly to the most dangerous area of ​​the Gulf. Organizing maritime convoys is a complex operation that requires destroyers, aircraft and military resources that could not be used in other missions. Furthermore, even with an escort, experts remember that ships would continue to navigate within an extremely hostile space, where reaction times to attacks can be reduced to minutes. The ghost of the eighties. I was counting this morning the financial times that the situation inevitably reminds one of the most tense episodes of the Cold War in the Middle East: the so-called “tanker war” which developed during the conflict between Iran and Iraq in the 1980s. So both countries They systematically attacked maritime traffic in the Gulf with missiles, naval mines and air strikes. A kamikaze battle involving more than four hundred commercial ships were damaged or sunk and the United States deployed dozens of ships to escort convoys and protect oil tankers. Still, the risk it was huge: American frigates were severely damaged by mines and missiles and dozens of sailors were killed. That crisis demonstrated the extent to which a regional conflict could put global trade in check. The difference: drones and kamikaze boats. The war in Iran is about to end repeat the scenario suicide bombing of 1980, but with a difference: now there are drones and kamikaze boats at the most fearsome point for the planet. From then until now the Iranian arsenal has evolved radically and today it combines long-range anti-ship missiles, thousands of cruise shellsarmed drones, diesel submarines, modern naval mines and fast vessels capable of swarming attacks. Added to this are unmanned surface vehicles, small ships loaded with explosives that hit the hulls of ships at the waterline, causing flooding in the engine room and rapid sinking. In a strait “so narrow” and close to the Iranian coast, these systems offer Tehran a obvious tactical advantage. An economic weapon to paralyze everything. Even without completely blocking the passage, the simple risk of attacks can paralyze maritime traffic. Recent history of the red seawhere attacks by militias allied with Iran diverted trade routes for months, shows that it only takes a few incidents to skyrocket shipping costs and force shipping companies to look for much longer alternative routes. In Hormuz the effect would be much greater because it is of the natural exit of the energy production of the entire Gulf. Tanker freight rates have already skyrocketed and any sign of mines or new attacks could double shipping prices again. A global pulse with unpredictable consequences. Close Hormuz also has a cost for Iranwhose economy depends largely on exporting its own oil, especially to China. However, the strategic logic of the conflict could push Tehran to use the strait as an economic lever to pressure Washington and its allies. In any case, the longer the war continues, the greater the temptation on both sides to use energy as a weapon. In that scenario, the world could face a perfect storm: skyrocketing oil, scarce fertilizers and more expensive food. All concentrated in a strait just a few kilometers wide that once again becomes the most fragile point in the global economic system. Image | eutrophication&hypoxiaNZ Defense Force, National Museum of the US Navy In Xataka | Shahed drones are spreading terror in the Gulf. Ukraine has offered the solution, and the price to pay has a name In Xataka | Spain has … Read more

The US is launching a missile capable of burying the Tomahawk on Iran. And the big question is where are you doing it from?

by

The image of an American precision strike has been linked to silhouettes taking off from the sea or from the air. However, in recent years the Army has invested billions in recovering a capability that seemed secondary: hitting very, very far… from the mainland. In that bet may lie one of the greatest transformations of modern military power. A debut that changes theater. USA has premiered in combat the so-called Precision Strike Missileits new tactical ballistic missile, within the operation against Iran. It is not a minor evolution of the former ATACMSit is rather a leap in scope and concept. With more than 500 kilometers radius (and room to grow towards 650 and even 1,000) practically doubles the depth of ground fire available until now. As in many other “premieres”, it is not symbolic, it is doctrinal. A missile to bury the Tomahawk. The PrSM flies at speeds greater than Mach 3 in the terminal phase, allowing it to arrive earlier and better penetrate hardened targets. Forehead to Tomahawkslower and subsonic, the new system greatly reduces the enemy’s reaction time and complicates interception. Additionally, two missiles fit in a single HIMARS launcher pod, meaning that double the punch per vehicle. Of course, it does not replace the Tomahawk in strategic range, but in regional scenarios it can be left in the background due to speed, survivability and response capacity against time-sensitive targets. A PrSM capsule seen in front of a US Army M142 during an exercise in Australia. The M142 carries a 227 mm rocket with six projectiles. The Persian Gulf as a platform. At this point, geography explains a good part of the movement. The Gulf has a medium width of just 250 kilometerswith American allies aligned on the western bank and Iran occupying the eastern one. With a range of 500 kilometers, a land battery located anywhere on the Arab side can cover wide swathes from Iranian territory without the need to penetrate its airspace. That makes the missile a perfect tool to support an air campaign without exposing fighters or depending exclusively on ships. A test launch of a PrSM The key question: from where? The most decisive fact remains unknown. No has been confirmed Which Gulf country has authorized the use of its soil to launch these missiles. This mystery is not technical, it is rather political. The reason? Allowing a US land battery to fire on Iran automatically makes that territory in possible objective of retaliation. Many States in the region have historically preferred discreetly support to Washington while avoiding public exposure. Put another way, the exact location of the launch determines what capital takes on the direct risk. Hunting sensitive targets. Short-range ballistic missiles are especially effective against radars, mobile launchers and air defense nodes. Plus: they can be maintained on permanent alert and strike within minutes when a target arises. In a conflict where neutralizing anti-aircraft systems is key to sustaining air superiority, the PrSM provides a ground suppression capability which until now relied heavily on aviation and naval missiles. Beyond Iran. If you also want the premiere of the PrSM send a signal to other scenarios, especially the Pacific. Its planned evolution includes anti-ship versions capable of attacking moving targets and variants with greater range that will touch the threshold of medium-range missiles. It we have counted before. The US Army wants regain prominence in long-range warfare, traditionally dominated by the Air Force and Navy. Iran, in that sense, has been the first real test bed. Cost, volume and future. It is the “but” of any ballistic missile. Each projectile can exceed a million and a half dollars, although the price has been dropping as production increases. The goal is to reach up to 400 units annuallywhich will expand the available inventory and facilitate its sustained use. With future versions that could exceed the 1,000 kilometers rangethe PrSM does not seem just a substitute for the ATACMS. It is the first stone of a terrestrial architecture that seeks to project deep power from solid ground. What is really at stake. In short, the real twist is not that the United States has launched a new missile in a war, but that it has from the ground and against Iran. If he Tomahawk has symbolized precision warfare from the sea, the PrSM aims to represent the return of the tactical ballistic missile as a flexible instrument of regional pressure. And while it is not known with certainty from what ground ally is taking off, the political dimension of that launch will continue to be as relevant as the technical one. Image | CENTCOM, Australian Army, US Army In Xataka | If the question is how much of Europe is within range of Iran’s missiles, the answer is simple: a fairly large In Xataka | The arrival of the B-2s to Iran can only mean one thing: the search for the greatest threat to the United States has begun

Iran is not only resisting, it can mess things up

by

In just four days of fighting, they have launched hundreds of missiles and drones over several Gulf countries, the Strait of Hormuz has seen paralyzed the transit of a fifth of the world’s oil and gas prices in Europe they have been shot about 50% in a matter of hours. What began as an offensive aimed to quickly neutralize A concrete threat has become a crisis that already affects markets, embassies and military bases throughout the region. It had to be “surgical”. The joint offensive of the United States and Israel was born with an “official” goal: Neutralize the Iranian missile program and dismantle its response capability before it could reorganize. It was assumed that the initial attacks, directed against hardened installations and command centers, would leave Tehran disoriented and with little room to react. However, four days later, the reality is another. Iran has not only continued launching ballistic missiles, but has shown that its military structure I was prepared to absorb decapitations and continue operating. The war has not ended in an initial phase of incontestable air supremacy. The mystery of the arsenal. Washington recognizes that completely eliminating Iranian ballistic missiles is extremely complex. Part of the production is undergroundfortified, and the systems can be disassembled, transported and reassembled. Israel claims to have destroyed hundreds of shuttles, but the shooting continues. The question is no longer where they are, but how many are left. The historical precedent of hunting of Scud in 1991which barely achieved verifiable results despite a massive air campaign, weighs as a warning. Because damage assessment from the air rarely offers absolute certainty. The decentralization that avoided the collapse. I was counting this morning the Financial Times that, after the death of the supreme leader and senior commanders in the first bombings, the Iranian response did not stop, accelerated. Command was previously decentralized to prevent the elimination of key figures from paralyzing the operational chain. The middle I remembered that the units now act with general guidelines already established. This explains the speed with which the attacks began against US bases, energy infrastructure and targets in the Gulf. It does not seem like improvisation, but execution of a designed plan for a long war. Iran’s key naval base in Strait of Hormuz set on fire in attacks Saturation, wear and western cost. American and allied defenses are being tested in an unprecedented scale. Low-cost drones, ballistic missiles short and medium range and electronic warfare capabilities are forcing Patriot and THAAD systems to be deployed on multiple fronts simultaneously. We talk about the embassy protectionbases and energy assets that encompass an immense space. Even when interceptors work, the economic cost is disproportionate: because shooting down a drone can cost several times more than manufacturing it. In addition, the chaos in the sky has caused fire incidents friend and low. In short, the feeling of absolute control, if there was one at any time before the attack, has been eroded. The Gulf as a field of economic pressure. Because Iran has gone beyond direct confrontation with Israel and the United States. It has hit energy facilities in Qatar and Saudi Arabiahas tense traffic until it closes a few hours ago through the Strait of Hormuz and has sent gas and oil prices skyrocketing. The Eurozone, in fact, already fears a severe inflationary spike if the conflict continues. The message in this scenario is clear: war is not limited to the exchange of projectiles, it is also fought in the markets. Global economic stability is part of the battlefield. Displacing the neighbors. The Gulf States, which had attempted to maintain cautious neutrality, now find themselves under direct fire. Hundreds of missiles and drones have been detected and intercepted over the Emirates and other countries, which are preparing to counterattack. The scale and speed of the attacks have surprised even those who expected retaliation. The regional outrage growsbut also the bewilderment at the unexpected magnitude of the Iranian response. Tehran, in short, is demonstrating the ability to strike broadly and sustainably. The idea that no one contemplated. So, four days after the start of the offensive, an uncomfortable realization is imposed in Washington and Jerusalem: Iran is not collapsing, far from it. Has not exhausted its launch capacity nor his will to climband your bet combines volume, dispersion and structural resistance. Hence the unknown about the actual size of its arsenal remains open, and as long as that question does not have a definitive answer, each missile intercepted is not a strategic victory, but rather a most uncertain extension. The campaign that was to quickly neutralize the threat thus faces a scenario that did not appear in the initial calculations: Iran not only resists, has margin to expand the conflict and turn it into something much more unstable and explosive than anyone had anticipated. Image | ESA, Hossein Velayati, Planet Labs In Xataka | Europe has opened its doors to the US to attack Iran. Except Spain, which had an ace up its sleeve: a Cold War signature In Xataka | The arrival of the B-2s to Iran can only mean one thing: the search for the greatest threat to the United States has begun

The US Government stopped using Claude because it was a “woke AI”. Right after he bombed Iran using Claude, according to WSJ

by

This February 28, Israel and the United States They bombed Iran. It is something that occurs in parallel to a ‘war’ that is taking place on American soil: that of what AI should the country’s military arm use. Because yes, AI has become an essential tool for Intelligence operations, to the point that there are reports that suggest that Claude was key in the massive bombings on Saturday. But there is a problem. Hours before the attack, Trump ordered that Claude and any Anthropic artificial intelligence tools not be used in military operations. And the fact that the Pentagon has disobeyed only responds to one thing: Claude is too deep inside the United States military systems. The Anthropic Mess. This topic is complex, so let’s go with some context before getting into it. When the United States was looking for an AI to support its defense systems and will integrate with PalantirAnthropic offered theirs for the modest price of one dollar. That it was worth it a 200 million contract and both Anthropic and the Pentagon got to work integrating the company’s models into all kinds of systems. Claude’s support is so important to the Pentagon in massive scale data analysis that it is estimated that he was used for the capture of Nicolás Maduro a few months ago. The “problem” is that Anthropic programmed its AI not to violate two red lines: It will not be used to massively spy on American citizens. It will not be used for the development or control of autonomous weapons and attack systems. “The Woke AI”. The War Department and Donald Trump They didn’t agree with this. and last week they released a ultimatum: Either Anthropic gave up its ‘unleashed’ AI, or there would be consequences. What consequences? Play the card Defense Production Act of 1950 to take over the force of Anthropic’s creation. The company had until 5:01 p.m. last Friday to respond, and boy did it do so. In a long statement signed by Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, it was stated that the company was on the side of the country’s defense interests, but not at any price. Their moral standard was very clear and they were not going to give in to the blackmail of a United States that hours before threatened to “make them a Huawei” by putting Anthropic on a blacklist. Amodei’s response infuriated Trump and Pete Hegseth. The Secretary of Defense called Claude an “AI Woke,” a line that Trump himself followed. On his social network Truth Social, Trump pointed out that Anthropic is a “radical left-wing AI company run by people who have no idea how the real world goes.” Striking, to say the least, and with another response: the United States ended its collaboration with Anthropic and prohibited the use of its AI. The problem is that it’s… fake. “I am ordering ALL US federal agencies to IMMEDIATELY CEASE all use of Anthropic’s technology. We don’t need it, we don’t want it, and we will not do business with them again! – Donald Trump Claude to attack Iran. As soon reported The Wall Street Journalthe air attack against Iran was carried out with the help of those same radical left tools. The media noted that commands around the world, including the United States Central Command in the Middle East, used Claude’s tools to assess the situation, identify targets and simulate battle scenarios. Dependence. And this just paints a scenario, one in which the Pentagon is going to have a very difficult time removing those Anthropic tools from its system. It happened in Venezuela and it seems that it has happened again in Iran. Claude is too deep inside the Pentagon’s systems, maintaining an almost symbiotic relationship with the Palantir software, and breaking that from one day to the next seems complicated. HE esteem that it will take six months to eliminate Claude’s trace from the Pentagon software, but despite the prohibition of use and his inclusion on the blacklist by Hegseth, another decision seems to prevail: if we already have this, we will use it until we find a successor. OpenAI goes out for the crumbs (millionaires). And it didn’t take them even half a second to find that new AI provider. OpenAI -ChatGPT- issued a release in which he noted that “the United States needs AI models to support its mission, especially in the face of growing threats from potential adversaries that are increasingly integrating artificial intelligence technologies into their systems.” Interestingly, they have the same red lines that Anthropic imposed (no use for mass domestic surveillance, no direct autonomous weapons systems, no AI making high-risk decisions automatically). But there is a difference: if Anthropic refused to give full powers to the Pentagon, OpenAI points out that, despite maintaining the same moral principles, the use of its AI is tied to the legal use that the Department of Defense wants to make. This is ambiguous because if a certain use is considered legal, it does not conflict with that “morality.” We will see if it is a mere exchange of chips resulting from anger because someone opposed a government order or if the change from Anthropic to OpenAI translates into what the US needs for its security. In Xataka | The war between Anthropic and the Pentagon points to something terrifying: a new “Oppenheimer Moment”

Iran has put the price of oil at stake by attacking it with drones

by

The world stage is Monday, a Monday marked by Iran bombing by the United States and Israel last Saturday. Iran has not sat idly byresponding with something it has already used in the past: suicide drones to attack bases of the allies of the aggressor countries. They have attacked Dubaibut also Saudi Arabia, causing the closure of one of the key refineries globally: Ras Tanura. And the result is -another- earthquake in the world market. In short. A few hours ago, Saudi Arabia and Aramco (the oil company) made the decision to stop production at the refinery Ras Tanura. The decision came when Saudi defenses intercepted several remains of Iranian drones. They did not impact, but their remains have caused some fires within the storage facilities of the power plant. Ras Tanura. We are talking about some of the largest refineries in the world, with an estimated capacity of about 550,000 barrels per day. Its closure implies that the export operations associated with the complex stop, which is addition to the closure of other energy infrastructures in the region, such as gas infrastructure in Israel and Kurdistan. As pointed out Bloombergthe problem is that Ras Tanura is one of the key refineries in the transportation fuel segment, specifically diesel, and not only have operations stopped, but very close is one of Aramco’s largest export terminals for refined products. This is the Strait of Hormuz, with dozens of ships waiting Hormuz. Uncertainty and military operations are once again causing the Strait of Hormuz to become abuzz. Hormuz is, after Malacca, the second largest oil corridor in the worldand a disturbance in normal functioning causes the entire chain to wobble. Uncertainty is causing a monumental bottleneck with ships stopped on both sides of the strait, waits that do not know when they will end, rescheduling, diversions to other ports and, ultimately, chaos in oil transportation. Impact. And you can already guess how the market is responding. Crude oil is one of the economic thermometers today, and the initial reaction has been as expected: a strong rise in prices. The barrel has risen around 10% in some markets after learning of the closure of the refinery, but it is already estimated that they could rise more than 20% if the situation continues and the strait closes. How much? Well, it is currently around $80, more than $100, according to some analysts, and it depends on how long the situation lasts that we begin to see how this price increase affects the fuel market. Vital. It is not the first time that refineries in the area have been attacked. They have become essential enclaves in the country’s economy, but also in global geopolitics. As pointed out Reuterssuch an attack is not just another military action, “it marks a significant escalation in violence.” It implies that Iran has the Gulf’s energy infrastructure in its sights because it knows its importance to the economy of the entire globe. And, evidently, an attack on its plants could cause Saudi Arabia and its Gulf neighbors to join the US and Israeli military operations against Iran. Now, Iran has also been ‘touched’ by that basic infrastructure for its economy. The country is the third largest producer in OPEC and on February 28, explosions were reported on the island of Kharg, where process 90% of Iran’s crude oil exports. In the end, it is one more example of the domino effect and the fragile nature of the supply chain for a basic good. It’s just a part of a perfect storm whose consequences are far from reaching their ceiling. Images | MarineTrafficUS Army, VALGO In xataka | Europe believed it had won the gas war against Russia. Now it faces a much more uncomfortable reality: its dependence on the United States.

Iran has just attacked a base in Europe. The paradox of Spain is that it condemns the war, but the US does not need to ask to use its bases

by

In 1953, in the middle of the Cold War and at a time of international isolation, Spain signed with the United States the so-called Madrid Pactsan agreement that opened the door to the installation of North American military bases on Spanish soil in exchange for economic and military aid. That decision, taken in a completely different geopolitical context, ended up becoming one of the longer lasting pillars of the bilateral relationship and a structural element of Western defensive architecture in southern Europe. Rota, Morón and a return. The operation American and Israeli against Iran has returned to place the Rota and Morón bases in the center of the strategic board. Destroyers permanently deployed in Cádiz They sailed to the Mediterranean Eastern, strategic transport planes and tankers took off towards the area and the Aegis system embarked on ships of the Arleigh Burke class It once again acted as an anti-missile shield. Rota is not just another base: it is part of the naval component of the NATO missile shield and, in practice, it has served on several occasions as a direct reinforcement of the defense of Israel in the face of Iranian salvos. Far from being reduced, the American presence has expanded in recent years, with five destroyers already stationed and a sixth on the wayconsolidating the Cádiz base as a structural piece of Washington’s military projection in the Middle East. Europe closes ranks with Washington. France, the United Kingdom and Germany have declared your disposition to take proportionate defensive actions against Iran and have coordinated your posture with the United States. London has explicitly authorized the use of British bases to neutralize missiles at source, while Paris and Berlin have supported the defense of European interests in the region. This position of the so-called E3 represents a political and operational support to the US strategy and confirms that, on a military level, Western Europe has not distanced itself from the offensive. Beyond diplomatic nuances, the message is clear: the main European powers are willing to provide infrastructure and resources if escalation demands it. First attack on Europe. Hours after Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced his decision to authorize the United States to use bases in the United Kingdom to launch attacks on Iranian missile depots, a drone has impacted against the RAF military installations at Akrotiri, on the island of Cyprus. In this way, a more than relevant event occurs on the continent: Iran has attacked a European base. The Spanish paradox. For its part, Spain has condemned publicly the intervention and has appealed for de-escalation and respect for international law. However, the paradox is evident: while the Government criticizes the operation, US ships and media stationed in Rota have participated in the military device. The key is in the current legal framework. The US forces are not in Spain by specific authorization of the Executive in power, but by virtue of that bilateral agreement that regulates their presence and use of facilities. Because the United States does not need ask permission on a case-by-case basis for each ordinary operational movement within the agreed framework. In essence, Spain may express political rejection, but infrastructure is already part of the US strategic architecture in Europe and the Mediterranean, and its activation does not depend on an improvised consultation in the middle of a crisis. What Spain can do legally. The bases of Rota and Morón are governed by the Convention of Defense Cooperation between Spain and the United States, which is periodically renewed and establishes the conditions of use. Spain could in theorydenounce the agreement, not renew it or demand substantial modifications, which would open a complex diplomatic process that would require formal deadlines and prior notifications. It could also try to limit certain activities if it considers that they exceed what was agreed or violate international law. However, the real chances of that scenario materializing are rather few. The bases are part of NATO’s defensive framework, generate employment and investment, and are integrated into broader strategic commitments. Abruptly breaking or restricting the agreement would imply a political, military and diplomatic cost of great magnitude, both in the bilateral relationship with Washington and within the Atlantic Alliance. Between sovereignty and interdependence. If you also want, the current situation reveals the structural tension that exists between formal sovereignty and strategic commitments. Spain retains ultimate legal power over its territory, but has voluntarily linked part of its military infrastructure to a collective defense system. In this way, when a crisis breaks out like Iranthat interdependence becomes visible: the decisions made in Washington, London or Paris are immediately reflected in Spanish ports and runways. The political condemnation can modulate the discourse, but strategic reality shows that Rota and Morón are nodes integrated in a network that transcends the current debate and that places Spain, want it or notwithin the operational perimeter of the US strategy in the Middle East. Image | US Naval Forces Central Command/US Fifth Fleet, Navy In Xataka | The US threatened to take the Rota base to Morocco. Spain has buried it with an unbeatable offer: more territory In Xataka | A disturbing idea for the US is beginning to gain strength: if the war with Iran lasts more than five days it will not win it

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.