Brave New World

The Asterisk
George Friedman
The Chinese 90% Model
Who Gets Left Behind
The Long View
Boston and Old Friends

In the summer of 1944, with the war in Europe not yet won, the United States convened 44 nations at a resort hotel in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, and wrote the rules of the postwar world. The dollar would be the world's reserve currency. The International Monetary Fund would manage imbalances. The World Bank would finance reconstruction. And the United States Navy underwrote the safety of global trade. For eighty years, it worked.

Today the promises of Bretton Woods are fracturing on every front simultaneously.

The US Navy cannot guarantee the Strait of Hormuz. US Treasuries, the foundational safe asset of the entire global financial architecture, now come with an asterisk. Whether Washington will honor that guarantee depends, it turns out, on whether it approves of your foreign policy. And the president of the United States, referring to the Strait of Hormuz, recently described America as acting like pirates, no questions asked, and meant it as a compliment.

And China, for generations largely beneath our notice, frankly, has spent fifteen years building an industrial and energy base specifically designed to function without American permission. And as we will see, their “90%” policy endangers not only the US manufacturing base but the world’s.

Our Strategic Investment Conference ended three weeks ago. I called this the Global Restructuring before the conference began, and everything I heard confirmed it.

But your humble analyst is reconsidering the term. The horse and buggy did not restructure into a car. The candlemaker did not restructure into an electrician. I grew up in a print shop setting hand type and still have ink in my blood. I don’t even recognize print shops today.

The restructuring is probably the right frame. But like Treasuries, it comes with an asterisk.

The old world ended. A different one began. That is what our speakers were describing. Not a correction. Something more permanent than that. We are inside one of those moments now.

(I had some readers the past few weeks that took exception to some of the things I wrote. I would point out that nearly all of them were me reporting what the speakers at SIC said, not necessarily that I agreed with them. That will be the case today. I had thought that we could conclude our coverage of the SIC this week, but we still have a lot of work left on the editing table. So, one more week.)