On Edge: The Long Year in Ukraine

Prepare while everyone’s distracted. [Altucher Confidential] February 24, 2023 [WEBSITE]( | [UNSUBSCRIBE]( While Americans are preoccupied with balloons and other stories that are mostly for show, more serious thinkers are preparing. [Hero_Image] On Edge: The Long Year in Ukraine By Jim Rickards URGENT: Your $557 Credit Is Now Available. I am pleased to announce that you've got an immediate $557.00 credit for our research you can take advantage of… [Please click here immediately to learn how to claim this credit.]( **DISCLAIMER: Please note, this offer is limited to the first 1,000 that take advantage today** [Chris Campbell] CHRIS CAMPBELL "If you jump on the Putin train, you’re dumber than dirt,” said US Senator Graham on ABC. “It would be like buying a ticket on the Titanic after you saw the movie." You probably recognize this as Graham’s warning to China about potentially providing lethal aid to Russia. A sordid reminder that we’re now one year -- official today -- into the Ukraine War. And not an inch closer to a conclusion. As proof, Graham also said: “Don’t worry about provoking Putin. Worry about beating him, and I’ve never been more optimistic about winning this war in Ukraine than I am right now. I see solidarity across the aisle in America and across the seas.” As usual, our colleague and geoeconomics expert Jim Rickards has a different take. Today, we invite Jim to help shed some light on the current conflict in Ukraine… And what’s to come of the growing tension with China. Below, he’ll outline why global supply chains are in for more pain… and how to prepare for the worst. First… While Everyone’s Distracted “While Americans are preoccupied with balloons and other stories that are mostly for show,” says Jim, “more serious thinkers are preparing.” They’re thinking about oil, natural gas, gold, the dollar, and technology… And they’re making fast moves to protect their wealth. But time’s running thin. Before the walls close in completely… [Click here to see exactly how to get the BEST entry point on Jim’s most valuable research.]( And read on. Is This 2023’s Scariest Threat? On November 15th, 2022 a Biden-sanctioned experiment with YOUR money went into effect. It involved 9 of the world’s BIGGEST banks – which collectively control nearly $10 TRILLION in assets – and could impact EVERY American citizen. It’s called “Project Cedar”. And in [this urgent new exposé]( one man reveals the shocking truth that Biden and his cabal of banking elites does NOT want you to know. [Click here to watch this urgent presentation while it’s still available.]( The Geoeconomics of Modern Conflict Jim Rickards Geopolitics play a major role in the outlook for global economies. But more importantly, today, we must look at the world through the prism of geoeconomics. What is “geoeconomics”? Obviously, it’s a portmanteau from the words geopolitics and economics. There’s nothing new about considering those disciplines in the same context. Wars are geopolitical and are often won through industrial capacity, which is primarily economic. Economics and global strategy have always been entwined. What is new is the idea that economics are not just an adjunct of geopolitics, but are now the main event. This does not mean that warfare is over or that military prowess no longer matters... It means that the major powers in a globalized age will base their calculations on economic gain and loss, and will use economic weapons not as ancillaries, but as primary weapons. This change was described at the beginning of the new age of globalization by strategic thinker Edward N. Luttwak in a 1990 article titled “From Geopolitics to Geo-Economics: Logic of Conflict, Grammar of Commerce.” Luttwak wrote that the end of the Cold War and the start of globalization meant that armed conflict was too costly and uncertain for great powers. Economic interests would now be the arena for great power conflict. Luttwak wrote, “Everyone, it appears, now agrees that the methods of commerce are displacing military methods – with disposable capital in lieu of firepower, civilian innovation in lieu of military-technical advance and market penetration in lieu of garrisons and bases.” Luttwak concluded, “While the methods of mercantilism could always be dominated by the methods of war, in the new ‘geoeconomic’ era not only the causes but also the instruments of conflict must be economic.” To be clear, Luttwak’s analysis principally applied to great powers including the U.S., China, Russia, Japan, members of the EU and Commonwealth nations including Canada and Australia. Luttwak recognized that middle powers such as Israel, Iran, Iraq, Pakistan, North Korea and some others might still find warfare beneficial. He did not rule out the fact that great powers might intervene in wars involving these middle powers, such as the U.S. interventions in Iraq and Afghanistan and Russia’s involvement in Ukraine. His point was not that war was obsolete, but only that it would not involve direct confrontation between great powers. Interventions and wars involving lesser states would still be on the table. Geoeconomics – great power competition using economics as a goal and a weapon – is an excellent tool for analyzing the two critical hotspots in the world today. These are Russia’s role in Ukraine and China’s threat to Taiwan. The Western narrative that Putin is the bad guy bent on conquering Ukraine is false. Putin had warned the West about not pushing its advantage in Ukraine for over 20 years. While Putin was amenable to NATO expansion, he always drew the line at Lithuania, Ukraine and Georgia. In 2004, NATO crossed Russia’s red line by admitting Lithuania to membership, but there was little Putin could do to stop it. The 2008 nomination of Ukraine to NATO was an unforced error. Putin had been content to leave Ukraine as a neutral buffer state. The West was not and pushed Putin too hard. Now Putin has pushed back. Why is Ukraine so important to Russia? A quick glance at a map shows that Ukraine in NATO or even a pro-Western Ukraine is an existential threat to Moscow. The line from Estonia in the north to Ukraine in the south forms the letter “C” that encircles Moscow from the north, west and south. Parts of Ukraine actually lie east of Moscow, opening that region to attack from the west, something that has not happened since the Mongol Empire of Genghis Khan in the 13th century. If Ukraine will not become neutral, then Putin must control it, at least the eastern half, by force if necessary. This has obviously happened. But conquering Ukraine was not and is not Putin’s main goal. What he wanted the whole time was a Ukraine that would not join NATO, neutrality in the Ukrainian government and full operation of the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline from Russia to Germany under the Baltic Sea (too bad the U.S. blew it up!). If Putin could have gotten all or most of that through negotiations, there was no reason to invade Ukraine. The threat to do so will have served its purpose. That outcome would have been a perfect illustration of Luttwak’s geoeconomics definition. The goals were commercial (dependence of Western Europe on Russian natural gas), and the tools were commercial (pipelines) even though the players were sovereign states (Russia and the U.S.). The U.S. has imposed severe economic sanctions on Russia for invading Ukraine. But these sanctions have had little impact on Russia, as I predicted before the war. Sanctions were imposed on Russia after the 2014 annexation of Crimea and have had no material impact on Russian behavior. Before the war, Russia already moved over 20% of its reserves into physical gold bullion stored in Moscow. This gold is worth about $140 billion at current market prices. Because the gold is physical, not digital, it cannot be hacked, frozen or seized. Importantly, U.S. sanctions have not affected exports of Russian oil or natural gas. Russia provides about 10% of all the oil produced in the world. It’s simply impossible to sanction Russian oil sales. We still hope that Russia and the U.S. avoid direct armed conflict in Ukraine, although they keep climbing the escalation ladder.. Energy prices will probably go higher, which helps Russia. The losers are Ukraine and global energy users. The second critical hotspot today is the potential for a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Will it happen? The case against such a war is basically in the scenarios described above. Events would likely escalate and spin out of control, resulting in a large-scale conflict. Gains are possible for China, especially if the U.S. does not come to the aid of Taiwan. Still, the risks are too high, and the costs are too great. Instead of an invasion, China could continue its rhetoric and its military readiness, but otherwise bide its time. This is where Luttwak’s definition of geoeconomics casts a new light. In a pre-globalized world, China might well attack. In the post-globalized world, China might refrain militarily while continuing its progress in technology, natural resources and value-added manufacturing. This path requires cooperation, not confrontation, with the U.S. and Western Europe. My estimate is that China will refrain from an invasion consistent with the geoeconomic thesis. At the same time, Xi Jinping will continue threats and economic confrontation with the West. Investors should expect the following from this unstable confrontation: The U.S. and China will continue to decouple economically. Supply chain disruptions will grow worse before they get better. A new supply chain configuration will emerge involving more onshoring and shorter transportation lanes. China’s growth will lag and it will be unable to make the technological leaps it needs to escape the middle-income trap and become a high-income developed economy. Over time, excessive debt and adverse demographics will overtake China’s ambitions and leave it an aging and low-productivity shell. China’s economic problems will sustain its demand for energy and put a floor under energy prices. Manufacturing costs will rise as China’s labor pool evaporates. Investors should not rule out a financial crisis in China that would spread to a global collapse in capital markets, probably worse than those of 2008 and 2020. But geopolitical tensions will disrupt global supply chains, which will result in higher input prices and transportation costs. That’s a receipt for sustained inflation, and higher interest rates. And any form of uncertainty is a plus for the one safe-haven investment that never fails — gold. While Americans are preoccupied with balloons and other stories that are mostly for show, more serious thinkers are applying themselves to oil, natural gas, gold, the dollar, technology and other geoeconomic benchmarks. Regards, Jim Rickards For Altucher Confidential [CHART] Could Inflation Hit 20%+ In 2023? [Click here for more...]( Take a close look at this scary chart pictured here… What you see is the money supply in America… And as you can see, the number of dollars in circulation has exploded in the last few years. In fact, more than 80% of all dollars to ever exist have been printed since just 2020 alone! Which is why some say inflation could soon explode even higher than it is now, to 20% or more. And if you’re at or near retirement age you must take action now to protect yourself… otherwise you risk losing everything. [Simply click here now to see how to survive America’s deadly inflation crisis.]( [Paradigm]( ☰ ⊗ [ARCHIVE]( [ABOUT]( [Contact Us]( © 2023 Paradigm Press, LLC. 808 Saint Paul Street, Baltimore MD 21202. By submitting your email address, you consent to Paradigm Press, LLC. delivering daily email issues and advertisements. To end your Altucher Confidential e-mail subscription and associated external offers sent from Altucher Confidential, feel free to [click here.]( Please note: the mailbox associated with this email address is not monitored, so do not reply to this message. We welcome comments or suggestions at feedback@altucherconfidential.com. This address is for feedback only. For questions about your account or to speak with customer service, [contact us here]( or call (844)-731-0984. Although our employees may answer your general customer service questions, they are not licensed under securities laws to address your particular investment situation. No communication by our employees to you should be deemed as personalized financial advice. We allow the editors of our publications to recommend securities that they own themselves. However, our policy prohibits editors from exiting a personal trade while the recommendation to subscribers is open. In no circumstance may an editor sell a security before subscribers have a fair opportunity to exit. The length of time an editor must wait after subscribers have been advised to exit a play depends on the type of publication. All other employees and agents must wait 24 hours after on-line publication or 72 hours after the mailing of a printed-only publication prior to following an initial recommendation. Any investments recommended in this letter should be made only after consulting with your investment advisor and only after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company. Altucher Confidential is committed to protecting and respecting your privacy. We do not rent or share your email address. Please read our [Privacy Statement.]( If you are having trouble receiving your Altucher Confidential subscription, you can ensure its arrival in your mailbox by [whitelisting Altucher Confidential.](