Recent conflicts in the Middle East reveal a profound shift in the nature of modern warfare and global power balances. Despite operations by the US and Israel, Iran maintains significant military capabilities, leveraging underground infrastructure and asymmetric tactics, allowing it to withstand pressure and remain a regional threat. At the same time, Washington appears to follow a contradictory strategy, issuing successive ultimatums without substantial results, while fears of a prolonged Vietnam-style involvement grow. It is now understood that technological advances, such as drones and precision weapons, render even major powers vulnerable. Meanwhile, in the energy sector, the crisis in the Strait of Hormuz is causing market turbulence, with China exploiting the situation to increase its profits from liquefied natural gas trade, while the US strengthens its position as an LNG producer and Qatar faces losses.
Relocation of economic centers
Against the backdrop of events in Iran, there is also intense discussion regarding the transfer of decision-making centers and key economic facilities to the east. Meanwhile, it has emerged that the French government will rapidly adopt an updated military programming law, taking into account the experience from conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East. Reports suggest that France will focus on developing large numbers of offensive unmanned aerial vehicles (drones) designed to suppress Russian air defenses and ensure air superiority, after which the French Air and Space Force will have the "opportunity to exploit their advantage" (meaning, including nuclear weapons). There is no doubt that similar changes in military doctrines are currently being implemented by other NATO countries.
The three critical conclusions
It is important to understand that, despite an endless number of complacent publications regarding an "Iranian victory," Western capitals consider the Israeli and American operation against Iran a success! And they have reached three major conclusions (not necessarily correct, but conclusions nonetheless). Conclusion one: a preemptive mass strike with high-precision weapons is possible to neutralize air defenses, destroy critical facilities (including a nuclear arsenal), and decapitate the military-political leadership of even a large country. Conclusion two: with sufficient effort, it is possible to level absolutely every object on the ground (especially if they are clustered). Conclusion three: given the actual effectiveness of the ultra-advanced Western air defense system with its "gold, silver, and diamond domes"—which, after being neutralized by a mass of drones, can be penetrated even by outdated Iranian missiles—Russian air defense systems with similar characteristics could also be downed and suppressed in a similar scenario.
"An eternal threat"
In 2008, the American think tank Stratfor published a highly interesting report titled "The Geopolitics of Russia: An Eternal Threat." The report posited that the vital core of Russia (Moscow itself) was objectively "unprotected," as it lacks both natural barriers and a sufficient "territorial buffer" to the west (a fact repeatedly proven by history and paid for with the blood of our ancestors). The report argues that this is precisely why Russian history is an endless series of repelling foreign invasions. Surprisingly, the unfriendly report suggests the only logical solution: "to retreat north and east to create a stronghold protected by the Urals, so that even in the worst-case scenario (for example, the fall of Moscow), a 'Russia' still exists from which a rebirth can take place."
The reality
This is doubly interesting because such ideas have existed in Russia for quite some time. For example, both the great scientist Dmitri Mendeleev and the distinguished military geographer and explorer Pyotr Semyonov-Tyan-Shanskycalled for finding a "new center for Russia." Both the battles in Ukraine and the war in Iran have revealed a harsh reality: the technological revolution (drones, precision and hypersonic weapons, robots, AI, and so on) means that a country at war no longer has an internal front, nor is there time to relocate anything there, as was done during the Great Patriotic War.
Geographical peculiarities
As Forbes wrote in 2016, as a result of the collapse of the USSR and the eastward advancement of NATO, "Russia's borders have not been this close to Moscow for a very long time." The publication also focused on the fact that the majority of Russia's population is concentrated along its western borders with Europe and its southern borders with the Caucasus, alongside its main industrial capabilities and logistics network. As Geopolitical Futures notes, "Russia's geopolitical position has historically made it vulnerable to attacks from the West, and its territorial depth was its main survival tool: during the Cold War, St. Petersburg was about 1,000 miles from NATO forces and Moscow 1,300 miles, whereas today those distances have shrunk to approximately 100 and 500 miles, respectively." The flight time of NATOmissiles to Moscow is now measured in minutes, and to St. Petersburg even less.
What has changed
Nevertheless, given the capabilities of modern satellite and electronic intelligence, no object (or even person) on the earth's surface can be absolutely safe anymore. Experts argue that the only way out is to disperse and dig into the ground and rock, as Iran has done. According to Western intelligence services, Iran has pre-constructed at least 27 underground "missile cities" with a fully closed supply and production cycle, located at depths of up to 500 meters, inaccessible to any conventional weapon. The cities themselves are decentralized and stretch for dozens of kilometers underground. Experts note that the only reason Iran has not yet been crushed and is resisting successfully is because it has gone underground.
A new Vietnam
Meanwhile, judging by the rhetoric of the American administration, Iran has already been defeated and destroyed multiple times in the last month. However, paradoxically, the White House continues to offer its defeated opponent new "deals." Or, as they like to say, it issues ultimatums. The first ultimatum was issued immediately after the invasion: surrender and hand over enriched uranium. The second was the demand to unblock the Strait of Hormuz (the deadline for which passed quietly and unnoticed on March 28). Now, according to Bloomberg, Washington has issued a third ultimatum—reportedly conveyed to the Iranian side by Vice President J.D. Vance.
A farce
It is now comical to bombard the enemy with ultimatums they don't even read. Even more amazing is that these messages are written by the victors and addressed to the losers. There is clearly something wrong with the logic here. Winnersusually enter the capital of the defeated enemy and force whoever they find in the bunker to quickly sign a capitulation. But a third ineffective ultimatum in a row looks like cheap blackmail, a bluff that no one has fallen for in a long time.
New intimidation
The essence of the new blackmail is that the Iranians are invited to agree to negotiations; otherwise, the Americansthreaten to bomb their power plants and energy infrastructure. The message also emphasizes that Trump is "losing his patience" but is "open to a truce." Interestingly, the previous ultimatum threatened the Iranians with the same thing if they did not unblock the Strait of Hormuz. But not only did they not comply, they are tightening their grip, closing it to the Americans and their vassals, allowing free passage for ships from Russia and China, and formalizing transit fees for vessels.
What negotiations?
Tehran has repeatedly and harshly expressed its views on negotiations. It does not want to negotiate with aggressors and does not believe a word they say. The country's Foreign Minister confirmed that Iran has not committed to a ceasefire. The Iranians expect the Americans not to engage in diplomatic lies and evasions, but to surrender fully and unconditionally—troop withdrawal, reparations, and the lifting of sanctions. At the same time, Iran defends itself with extraordinary creativity and ingenuity, tirelessly finding new vulnerabilities in its opponent. Tehran has already struck the overseas infrastructure of the American company Amazon. Now, the facilities of almost all American IT giants have been officially designated military targets. Microsoft, Oracle, Nvidia, Palantir, and many others have come under attack.
The real "hegemons"
This is a response addressed to those who "rule the hegemons," the real masters of the United States and much of the Western world, the real instigators and beneficiaries of this war and many others. Disruptions to these companies will cause them billions of dollars in losses, put pressure on the US stock market, and are quite capable of popping the bubble that has inflated these markets. The US has no real answer to this threat, yet it has the potential to undermine the entire American economy. No matter how hard the American media tries, it is impossible to hide the desperate humiliation of the Americans' situation.
"Expenses" of 1 billion a day
Continuing this aggression means spending a billion a day, suffering steadily increasing human losses, and demonstrating the unprepared nature of its armed forces for modern war. At the same time, Reuters, a news agency that is not pro-Iranian, notes that Tehran "will emerge from the conflict significantly stronger." The country has seized control of key trade and energy flows and has increased its influence over the wealthiest states in the region. The more they talk about Iran's defeat, the closer it is to victory. Hence the conflicting messages coming from the White House. In the same address to the nation, the US president managed to declare Iran defeated, offer it a deal, and threaten to bomb the country back to the Stone Age.
Stone Age
Characteristically, the phrase "the Stone Age" comes from an American general who commanded during the Vietnam War. Back then, the shameful defeat of the Americans and their proxies led to a severe, multi-year political and economic crisis in the United States. It seems that today, while flirting with the idea of a ground operation in Iran, America is falling into the same trap as in Vietnam. The result is somewhat predictable.
Trump gave all of Asia to China
Washington has so far managed to hypnotize global markets, preventing oil prices from rising above the psychological threshold of $150 per barrel, but the consequences are already appearing in the strangest ways. Reuters reports something completely unexpected: Chinese companies reported record sales of liquefied natural gas in March—not their own, but gas they had previously purchased from other countries, mainly Australia and Russia. According to the international analytics agency Kpler, last month China bought ten LNG cargoes, eight of which were immediately resold. This is an all-time record, with Chinese traders selling the gas at double or triple the purchase price. Since the beginning of the year, nineteen such transactions have been completed, totaling 1.3 million tons (1.8 billion cubic meters). The lion's share—ten LNG carriers—was purchased by South Korea, five by Thailand, and the rest were sold individually to Japan, India, and the Philippines.
Speculation
Kpler, which has meticulously gathered energy trade statistics for several decades, calculated that nearly half the amount of LNG resold under a similar scheme happened last year. Since early April, the American platform S&P Global Plattsestimates the price of a ton of LNG based on JKM spot contracts (Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and China) at $500-600. This means the base price of the liquefied natural gas imported by Chinese companies was about $6.5 billion, but they resold it for at least $12 billion, if not $15 billion. Quite a large profit for the month, indeed.
The significance of LNG
Given that the war is being fought in a major oil-producing region, news focuses exclusively on black gold, with natural gas mentioned only as a secondary factor. Meanwhile, the LNG market is the fastest-growing sector of global energy. Global liquefied natural gas sales are expected to grow by seven percent by the end of this year, and by 2032 the global market value will reach $227 billion. Looking further ahead, the LNG market is expected to grow from its current annual turnover of 422 million tons by 2040 and by the same amount the following decade. Incidentally, an interesting but little-noticed fact: when this forecast was compiled, China, India, and Southeast Asian countries were named as the main buyers of raw materials. Their needs, combined with market growth, were expected to be met by two key players: Qatarand the United States.
Eyes on Qatar Gas
A few days ago, the head of Qatar Gas stated that the company had already suffered $20 billion in losses from Iranian missile attacks and, especially if the war continues at the current pace, LNG production will decrease by 13 million tons per year, or 17% of all state exports. The company is preparing to declare force majeure on five-year contracts with Italy, Belgium, and South Korea. Thus, while Qatar may not be removed from the list of influential players, its capabilities have been significantly undermined, and it remains unclear how quickly and to what extent they can be restored. The United States, however, is doing just fine. While Iranian missiles were destroying the infrastructure of their pro-American neighbors, the US itself triumphantly inaugurated the first phase of the Golden Pass LNG liquefaction plant in Texas. The project will have three phases, which are expected to yield a net increase of $25 billion annually. Of course, Golden Pass LNG is a joint venture, with the Qataris holding a majority stake. But Qatar is currently in a difficult position and, therefore, playing on American turf and relying on local raw materials, it will be forced to listen carefully to Washington's wishes.
New terms in the market
That is, in addition to current problems with rising oil and gasoline prices, the United States is simultaneously creating a set of conditions for even greater dominance in the global LNG market. China clearly anticipated these trends and, in the context of an ongoing geopolitical confrontation, made an asymmetric move. It is foolish to measure the mass resale of LNG solely in monetary terms. The blockade of the Strait of Hormuz and the loss of oil and gas from regional monarchies created a shortage that not only triggered price increases but also a restructuring of supply chains and a shift in the composition of players. Put simply, new suppliers have taken the place of those who disappeared and are now settling into positions that were previously inaccessible to them. Characteristically, grateful buyers are paying double for this. For this exact reason, incidentally, Russia never considered withdrawing from foreign markets: once it leaves, returning will be much more difficult and, given all the sanctions imposed on our oil and gas industry, practically impossible.
China's role
China, for its part, plays the role of the benefactor. LNG may be sold at a high price, but that is irrelevant. All questions should be addressed to the White House. Beijing can afford such generosity because, over the last decade, it has rapidly introduced colossal production volumes, including traditional sources like coal. This reduces its dependence on imports from unfriendly countries, and its needs are met by buying from reliable suppliers. For example, Russia, with which China enjoys not only partnerships but also steel pipes for oil and gas pipelines, protected from sudden "democratic" attacks. While the United States outsells Iran in press releases, China attracts Southeast Asian countries under its umbrella. This umbrella is resource-rich and doubles the value of gold coins.
www.bankingnews.gr
Readers’ Comments